ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2007
Serologic evidence for reactivation of cryptococcosis in solid-organ transplant recipients.
Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
62 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 132 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical practice guidelines for the management of cryptococcal disease: 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of america.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2010Guideline
- Proportionate and disproportionate reporting of different infectious complications of disease modifying therapy in multiple sclerosis.Neurological research and practice · 2026Article
- Dormant yet dangerous: the role of cell rest in perseverance.Future microbiology · 2025Review
- Cryptococcosis in Pediatric Renal Transplant Recipients: Comparative Insights from Adult Cases.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Immunometabolic reprogramming in macrophages infected with active and dormantInfection and immunity · 2025Article
- Fungal Infections in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Article
- State of the Field: Cytotoxic Immune Cell Responses inJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Cryptococcosis Associated With Biologic Therapy: A Narrative Review.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Review
- Cryptococcosis in kidney transplant recipients: Current understanding and practices.World journal of nephrology · 2023Review
- Kicking sleepers out of bed: Macrophages promote reactivation of dormant Cryptococcus neoformans by extracellular vesicle release and non-lytic exocytosis.PLoS pathogens · 2023Article
- Fungal mechanisms of intracellular survival: what can we learn from bacterial pathogens?Infection and immunity · 2023Review
- Mouse Model of Latent Cryptococcal Infection and Reactivation.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Cryptococcus spp. and Cryptococcosis: focusing on the infection in Brazil.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2022Review
- Article
- Review
- Vaccine protection by Cryptococcus neoformans Δsgl1 is mediated by γδ T cells via TLR2 signaling.Mucosal immunology · 2022Article
- Three Models of Vaccination Strategies Against Cryptococcosis in Immunocompromised Hosts Using Heat-KilledFrontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Epidemiological Characterization of Clinical Fungal Isolates from Pauls Stradinš Clinical University Hospital, Latvia: A 4-Year Surveillance Report.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Striking Back against Fungal Infections: The Utilization of Nanosystems for Antifungal Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Cryptococcosis is a significant infection with a high mortality in solid-organ transplant recipients. Nonetheless, the pathogenesis of this disease is poorly understood. It has been hypothesized that cryptococcosis may result from either primary infection or reactivation of a latent infection. Sera were obtained from transplant recipients prior to transplantation and at the time they developed cryptococcosis. Control sera were obtained before and after transplant from patients who did not develop cryptococcosis. Sera were tested for antibodies against Cryptococcus neoformans by using an immunoblot assay. Antibody responses were also compared with those observed in sera from rats with experimental pulmonary cryptococcosis. In all, 52% of the transplant recipients who developed cryptococcosis exhibited serologic evidence of cryptococcal infection before transplantation. These patients developed cryptococcosis significantly earlier after transplant than patients without preexisting reactivity did (5.6 +/- 3.4 months compared to 40.6 +/- 63.8 months, respectively [P = 0.0011]). The results from our study suggest that a substantial proportion of transplant-associated cryptococcosis cases result from the reactivation of a latent infection. These findings also highlight the potential utility of serologic studies in identifying patients at risk for the development of cryptococcosis after transplantation.
Indexed as
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.