Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18596203›Full record

ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2008

Cross-reactivity between immune responses to Helicobacter bilis and Helicobacter pylori in a population in Thailand at high risk of developing cholangiocarcinoma.

Paola Pisani, Mark T Whary, Ingrid Nilsson, Supannee Sriamporn, Torkel Wadström, James G Fox, Asa Ljungh, David Forman

Open access · diamondAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Infection withPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.

Paola PisaniDescriptive Epidemiology Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 Cours Albert-Thomas, 69372 Lyon Cedex 03, France. paola.pisani@ceu.ox.ac.uk
Mark T Whary
Ingrid Nilsson
Supannee Sriamporn
Torkel Wadström
James G Fox
Asa Ljungh
David Forman
Centre International de Recherche sur le Cancer · FRLund University · SEKhon Kaen University · THMassachusetts Institute of Technology · US

Funding

TOXICOLOGY CORE UNITP30ES002109 · NIEHS · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI NILES, JACQUIN C · 1985 to 2020
$25.6M
HELIOBACTER INDUCED HEPATITIS AND TUMORIGENESISR01CA067529 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI FOX, JAMES G · 1995 to 2009
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA067529NCI NIH HHS R01-CA067529NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES002109NIEHS NIH HHS P30-ES02109
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Helicobacter bilis DNA has been detected in human tissue and is a candidate for etiologic investigations on the causes of hepatic and biliary tract diseases, but reliable serologic tests need to be developed in order to pursue such investigations. The scope of this study was to assess the specificity of two assays for H. bilis immune response allowing for H. pylori, and their cross-reactivity in a population in Thailand at high risk for cholangiocarcinoma. Plasma samples from 92 Thai volunteers were independently tested in two laboratories (Massachusetts Institute of Technology [MIT] and Lund). MIT performed three analyses of H. pylori and H. bilis based either on (i) outer membrane protein (OMP) with no preabsorption or on antigens derived from whole-cell sonicate before (ii) or after (iii) preabsorption with H. pylori sonicate protein. Lund used cell surface proteins from H. pylori and H. bilis as antigens. Testing for H. bilis was preabsorbed with a whole-cell lysate of H. pylori. More than 80% of the samples were positive for H. pylori in both laboratories. As tested by MIT, 58.7% (95% confidence interval, 47.9 to 68.9%) were positive for H. bilis by OMP and 44.5% (34.1 to 55.3%) were positive for H. bilis sonicate protein, but only 15.2% (8.6 to 24.2%) remained positive after preabsorption with H. pylori sonicate protein. Lund found 34.5% of the samples positive for H. bilis (22.0 to 41.0%), which was statistically compatible with all three MIT results. Serologic responses to OMPs of the two bacteria coincided in 66 and 45% of the samples in the MIT and Lund assays, respectively. We found high cross-reactivity between the immune responses to H. pylori and H. bilis antigens. More-specific H. bilis antigens need to be isolated to develop serologic tests suitable for epidemiological studies.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntibodies, BacterialAntigens, BacterialBacterial Outer Membrane ProteinsCholangiocarcinomaCross ReactionsFemaleHelicobacterHumansMaleMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityThailandAntibodies, BacterialAntigens, BacterialBacterial Outer Membrane Proteins

Identifiers

PMID18596203
PMCPMC2546680
OpenAlexW2159128719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.