Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21128007›Full record

ReviewImmunologic research2011

AID: a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

Dana C Upton, Briana L Gregory, Rahul Arya, Shyam Unniraman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Immunologic research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. AiScience · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dana C UptonDepartment of Immunology, Duke University, 312 Edwin L. Jones Bldg., Campus Box # 3010, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Briana L Gregory
Rahul Arya
Shyam Unniraman
Duke University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To combat the ever-changing pool of pathogens we face, B cells generate highly optimized antibodies in two distinct steps. A large variety of antibodies are first generated randomly by V(D)J recombination, and then, upon encountering an antigen, antibodies are fine-tuned by somatic hypermutation and class switch recombination--both of which are initiated by the same protein, activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID). All three processes are highly mutagenic, and mistargeting of each of these has been shown to contribute to tumorigenesis. We study these processes because they provide an excellent model to understand how highly mutagenic reactions are channeled into productive use by cells and the consequent risk this carries. In this review, we will discuss many of the outstanding questions in the field that we grapple with while developing a consistent model for AID action. We will also discuss the complexity added to these models by the recent finding that AID might be part of a demethylase complex.

Indexed as

AICDA (Activation-Induced Cytidine Deaminase)AnimalsAntibody DiversityB-LymphocytesCytidine DeaminaseGene RearrangementHumansImmunoglobulin Class SwitchingSomatic Hypermutation, ImmunoglobulinAICDA (Activation-Induced Cytidine Deaminase)Cytidine Deaminase

Identifiers

PMID21128007
OpenAlexW2089390327

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.