Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21366417›Full record

ReviewFuture microbiology2011

Development of new vaccines and drugs for TB: limitations and potential strategic errors.

Ian M Orme

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Future microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Heliyon · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Evolution of Drug-ResistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Tuberculosis vaccine types and timings.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2015
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A new unifying theory of the pathogenesis of tuberculosis.Tuberculosis (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2014
    Article
  19. Review
  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

1 author.

Ian M OrmeDepartment of Microbiology, Immunology & Pathology, Colorado State University, Colorado, CO 80523, USA. ian.orme@colostate.edu

Funding

Response Therapies for MDR-TBU01AI070456 · NIAID · COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ORME, IAN M · 2006 to 2010
$6.4M
NIAID NIH HHS U01 AI070456
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concomitant HIV and TB epidemics pose an enormous threat to humanity. After invading the host Mycobacterium tuberculosis initially behaves as an intracellular pathogen, which elicits the emergence of acquired specific resistance in the form of a T-helper-1 T-cell response, and involves the secretion of a myriad of cytokines and chemokines to drive protective immunity and granuloma formation. However, after that, a second phase of the disease process involves survival of bacilli in an extracellular state that is still poorly understood. This article briefly reviews the various strategies currently being used to improve both vaccination and drug therapy of TB, and attempts to make the argument that current viewpoints that dominate [both the field and the current literature] may be seriously flawed. This includes both the choice of new vaccine and drug candidates, and also the ways these are being tested in animal models, which in the opinion of the author run the risk of driving the field backwards rather than forward.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntitubercular AgentsDisease Models, AnimalDrug DiscoveryHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMycobacterium tuberculosisTuberculosisTuberculosis VaccinesAntitubercular AgentsTuberculosis Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID21366417
PMCPMC3122326

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.