ArticleJournal of virology2008
Dendritic cell internalization of foot-and-mouth disease virus: influence of heparan sulfate binding on virus uptake and induction of the immune response.
Article in Journal of virology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cmss1 limits FMDV infection by enhancing antigen presentation and CD8Journal of virology · 2025Article
- Extracellular vesicles derived from antigen-presenting cells pulsed with foot and mouth virus vaccine-antigens act as carriers of viral proteins and stimulate B cell response.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine Development and Challenges in Inducing Long-Lasting Immunity: Trends and Current Perspectives.Veterinary medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Review
- The Different Tactics of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus to Evade Innate Immunity.Frontiers in microbiology · 2018Review
- Laboratory animal models to study foot-and-mouth disease: a review with emphasis on natural and vaccine-induced immunity.The Journal of general virology · 2014Review
- Article
- Cell mediated innate responses of cattle and swine are diverse during foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) infection: a unique landscape of innate immunity.Immunology letters · 2013Review
- Enterovirus 71 uses cell surface heparan sulfate glycosaminoglycan as an attachment receptor.Journal of virology · 2013Article
- Interplay of foot-and-mouth disease virus, antibodies and plasmacytoid dendritic cells: virus opsonization under non-neutralizing conditions results in enhanced interferon-alpha responses.Veterinary research · 2012Article
- ACBD3-mediated recruitment of PI4KB to picornavirus RNA replication sites.The EMBO journal · 2012Article
- Foot-and-mouth disease virus exhibits an altered tropism in the presence of specific immunoglobulins, enabling productive infection and killing of dendritic cells.Journal of virology · 2011Article
- A comparison between isolated blood dendritic cells and monocyte-derived dendritic cells in pigs.Immunology · 2010Article
- Immunosuppression during acute infection with foot-and-mouth disease virus in swine is mediated by IL-10.PloS one · 2009Article
- The porcine dendritic cell family.Developmental and comparative immunology · 2009Review
- Targeting the porcine immune system--particulate vaccines in the 21st century.Developmental and comparative immunology · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dendritic cells (DC), which are essential for inducing and regulating immune defenses and responses, represent the critical target for vaccines against pathogens such as foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV). Although it is clear that FMDV enters epithelial cells via integrins, little is known about FMDV interaction with DC. Accordingly, DC internalization of FMDV antigen was analyzed by comparing vaccine virus dominated by heparan sulfate (HS)-binding variants with FMDV lacking HS-binding capacity. The internalization was most efficient with the HS-binding virus, employing diverse endocytic pathways. Moreover, internalization relied primarily on HS binding. Uptake of non-HS-binding virus by DC was considerably less efficient, so much so that it was often difficult to detect virus interacting with the DC. The HS-binding FMDV replicated in DC, albeit transiently, which was demonstrable by its sensitivity to cycloheximide treatment and the short duration of infectious virus production. There was no evidence that the non-HS-binding virus replicated in the DC. These observations on virus replication may be explained by the activities of viral RNA in the DC. When DC were transfected with infectious RNA, only 1% of the translated viral proteins were detected. Nevertheless, the transfected cells, and DC which had internalized live virus, did present antigen to lymphocytes, inducing an FMDV-specific immunoglobulin G response. These results demonstrate that DC internalization of FMDV is most efficient for vaccine virus with HS-binding capacity, but HS binding is not an exclusive requirement. Both non-HS-binding virus and infectious RNA interacting with DC induce specific immune responses, albeit less efficiently than HS-binding virus.
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.