ArticleJournal of nanobiotechnology2006
Phagocytic response to fully controlled plural stimulation of antigens on macrophage using on-chip microcultivation system.
Article in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microneedle-Based Analysis Reveals Polarity-Dependent Spatial Regulation of Macrophage Phagocytosis.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Quantitative modeling of rod outer segment phagocytosis and recycling.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Oncoimmunology Meets Organs-on-Chip.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2021Review
- The role of CD38 in Fcγ receptor (FcγR)-mediated phagocytosis in murine macrophages.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To understand the control mechanism of innate immune response in macrophages, a series of phagocytic responses to plural stimulation of antigens on identical cells was observed. Two zymosan particles, which were used as antigens, were put on different surfaces of a macrophage using optical tweezers in an on-chip single-cell cultivation system, which maintains isolated conditions of each macrophage during their cultivation. When the two zymosan particles were attached to the macrophage simultaneously, the macrophage responded and phagocytosed both of the antigens simultaneously. In contrast, when the second antigen was attached to the surface after the first phagocytosis had started, the macrophage did not respond to the second stimulation during the first phagocytosis; the second phagocytosis started only after the first process had finished. These results indicate that (i) phagocytosis in a macrophage is not an independent process when there are plural stimulations; (ii) the response of the macrophage to the second stimulation is related to the time" delay from the first stimulation. Stimulations that occur at short time intervals resulted in simultaneous phagocytosis, while a second stimulation that is delayed long enough might be neglected until the completion of the first phagocytic process.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.