Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18640056›Full record

ReviewSeminars in immunology2008

NK gene complex dynamics and selection for NK cell receptors.

Michael G Brown, Anthony A Scalzo

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in immunology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Tuning the Orchestra: HCMV vs. Innate Immunity.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020
    Review
  4. Memory and Memory-Like NK Cell Responses to Microbial Pathogens.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Genetic dissection of NK cell responses.Frontiers in immunology · 2012
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael G BrownCenter for Immunity, Inflammation and Regenerative Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22908, United States.
Anthony A Scalzo
University of Virginia · USUniversity of Western Australia · AU

Funding

Molecular study of mouse viral resistance mechanisms.R01AI050072 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE · PI BROWN, MICHAEL G · 2001 to 2021
$7.1M
NIAID NIH HHS AI50072NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI050072
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural killer (NK) cells play important roles in innate defense against infectious agents particularly viruses and also tumors. They mediate their effects through direct cytolysis, release of cytokines and regulation of subsequent adaptive immune responses. NK cells are equipped with sophisticated arrays of inhibitory and activation receptors that regulate their function. In this review we illustrate some of the major evolutionary relationships between NK cell receptors among different animal species and what some of the major mechanisms are that give rise to this diversity in receptor families, including the potential roles of pathogens such as viruses in driving receptor evolution.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularSelection, GeneticAnimalsHaplotypesKiller Cells, NaturalModels, GeneticNK Cell Lectin-Like Receptor Subfamily AReceptors, Natural Killer CellReceptors, NK Cell Lectin-LikeVirus DiseasesNK Cell Lectin-Like Receptor Subfamily AReceptors, Natural Killer CellReceptors, NK Cell Lectin-Like

Identifiers

PMID18640056
PMCPMC2646111
OpenAlexW1987184178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.