Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21297670›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Microbiology2011

Are bloodstream leukocytes Trojan Horses for the metastasis of Staphylococcus aureus?

Guy E Thwaites, Vanya Gant

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 175 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
175citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

175 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 333 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Synthetic Polymers for Drug, Gene, and Vaccine Delivery.Polymer science & technology (Washington, D.C.) · 2025
    Review

115 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 1 country.

Guy E ThwaitesCentre for Molecular Microbiology and Infection, Imperial College, Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London SW7 2AZ, UK. guy.thwaites@btinternet.com
Vanya Gant
Imperial College London · GBUniversity College Hospital · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia remains very difficult to treat, and a large proportion of cases result in potentially lethal metastatic infection. Unpredictable and persistent bacteraemia in the face of highly active, usually bactericidal antibiotics is the strongest predictor of death or disseminated disease. Although S. aureus has conventionally been considered an extracellular pathogen, much evidence demonstrates that it can survive intracellularly. In this Opinion article, we propose that phagocytes, and specifically neutrophils, represent a privileged site for S. aureus in the bloodstream, offering protection from most antibiotics and providing a mechanism by which the bacterium can travel to and infect distant sites. Furthermore, we suggest how this can be experimentally confirmed and how it may prompt a change in the current paradigm of S. aureus bacteraemia and identify better treatment options for improved clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Staphylococcus aureusAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteremiaBacterial ProteinsHumansLeukocytesPhagocytesStaphylococcal InfectionsVirulenceVirulence FactorsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial ProteinsVirulence Factors

Identifiers

PMID21297670
OpenAlexW1973891716

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.