ArticleBMC infectious diseases2013
Identification of mimotopes of Mycobacterium leprae as potential diagnostic reagents.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- HSP60 mimetic peptides from Mycobacterium leprae as new antigens for immunodiagnosis of Leprosy.AMB Express · 2023Article
- Disposable electrochemical platform based on solid-binding peptides and carbon nanomaterials: an alternative device for leishmaniasis detection.Mikrochimica acta · 2023Article
- ITEM-THREE analysis of a monoclonal anti-malaria antibody reveals its assembled epitope on theThe Journal of biological chemistry · 2020Article
- Biological evaluation of mimetic peptides as active molecules for a new and simple skin test in an animal model.Parasitology research · 2019Article
- Synthetic Peptides as Potential Antigens for Cutaneous Leishmaniosis Diagnosis.Journal of immunology research · 2017Article
- Mapping polyclonal antibody responses to bacterial infection using next generation phage display.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Phage display and synthetic peptides as promising biotechnological tools for the serological diagnosis of leprosy.PloS one · 2014Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn early diagnostic test for detecting infection in leprosy is fundamental for reducing patients' sequelae. The currently used lepromin is not adequate for disease diagnosis and, so far, no antigen to be used in intradermoreaction has proved to be sensitive and specific for that purpose. Aiming at identifying new reagents to be used in skin tests, candidate antigens were investigated.
methodsRandom peptide phage display libraries were screened by using antibodies from leprosy patients in order to identify peptides as diagnostic reagents.
resultsSeven different phage clones were identified using purified antibodies pooled from sera of leprosy patients. When the clones were tested with serum samples by ELISA, three of them, 5A, 6A and 1B, allowed detecting a larger number of leprosy patients when compared to controls. The corresponding peptides expressed by selected phage clones were chemically synthesized. A pilot study was undertaken to assess the use of peptides in skin tests. The intradermal challenge with peptides in animals previously sensitized with Mycobacterium leprae induced a delayed-type hypersensitivity with peptide 5A (2/5) and peptide 1B (1/5). In positive controls, there was a 3/5 reactivity for lepromin and a 4/5 reactivity of the sensitized animals with soluble extract of M. leprae.
conclusionsThe preliminary data suggest that may be possible to develop reagents with diagnostic potential based on peptide mimotopes selected by phage display using polyclonal human antibodies.
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.