Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24782851›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2014

Counteraction of the multifunctional restriction factor tetherin.

Daniel Sauter

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel SauterInstitute of Molecular Virology, Ulm University Medical Center Ulm, Germany.
Universität Ulm · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The interferon-inducible restriction factor tetherin (also known as CD317, BST-2 or HM1.24) has emerged as a key component of the antiviral immune response. Initially, tetherin was shown to restrict replication of various enveloped viruses by inhibiting the release of budding virions from infected cells. More recently, it has become clear that tetherin also acts as a pattern recognition receptor inducing NF-κB-dependent proinflammatory gene expression in virus infected cells. Whereas the ability to restrict virion release is highly conserved among mammalian tetherin orthologs and thus probably an ancient function of this protein, innate sensing seems to be an evolutionarily recent activity. The potent and broad antiviral activity of tetherin is reflected by the fact that many viruses evolved means to counteract this restriction factor. A continuous arms race with viruses has apparently driven the evolution of different isoforms of tetherin with different functional properties. Interestingly, tetherin has also been implicated in cellular processes that are unrelated to immunity, such as the organization of the apical actin network and membrane microdomains or stabilization of the Golgi apparatus. In this review, I summarize our current knowledge of the different functions of tetherin and describe the molecular strategies that viruses have evolved to antagonize or evade this multifunctional host restriction factor.

Indexed as

BST-2HIVISGmoonlighting proteinsNefrestriction factortetherinVpu

Identifiers

PMID24782851
PMCPMC3989765
OpenAlexW2026237846

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.