ArticleClinical and experimental immunology2011
Suppressive role of hepatic dendritic cells in concanavalin A-induced hepatitis.
Article in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Concanavalin A-induced autoimmune hepatitis model in mice: Mechanisms and future outlook.Open life sciences · 2022Review
- Mononuclear phagocyte system in hepatitis C virus infection.World journal of gastroenterology · 2018Review
- Vitamin C Up-regulates Expression of CD80, CD86 and MHC Class II on Dendritic Cell Line, DC-1 Via the Activation of p38 MAPK.Immune network · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Concanavalin A (Con A)-induced hepatitis is a mouse model of acute autoimmune hepatitis. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of hepatic dendritic cells (DC) in the immune modulation of tissue damage. Almost all hepatic DC were plasmacytoid DC (CD11c+ I-A(low) B220+); however, conventional DC were CD11c+ I-A(high) B220(-). At an early stage (3-6 h) after Con A administration, the number of DC in both the liver and spleen decreased, increasing thereafter (12-24 h) in parallel with hepatic failure. The hepatic CD11c+ DC population contained many CD11b(-) cells, while the majority of splenic CD11c+ DC were CD11b+. After Con A administration, the proportion of I-A+ and CD11b+ cells within the CD11c+ DC population tended to increase in the liver, but not in the spleen. Similarly, expression of the activation markers CD80, CD86 and CD40 by CD11c+ DC increased in the liver, but not in the spleen. Next, adoptive transfer of DC isolated from the liver and spleen was performed 3 h after Con A administration to examine the immunomodulatory function of DC. Only hepatic DC had the ability to suppress hepatic failure. Analysis of cytokine production and subsequent identification of the effector cells showed that hepatic DC achieved this by suppressing the production of interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-2, rather than modulating effector cell function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.