Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24790593›Full record

ArticleCurrent immunology reviews2013

Early Decision: Effector and Effector Memory T Cell Differentiation in Chronic Infection.

Michael M Opata, Robin Stephens

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current immunology reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Human T-cell activation withLife science alliance · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael M OpataUniversity of Texas Medical Branch, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Disease, 300 University Avenue, Galveston, TX 77555-0435, USA.
Robin StephensUniversity of Texas Medical Branch, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Disease, 300 University Avenue, Galveston, TX 77555-0435, USA.
The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston · US

Funding

Maintenance vs Programming in Th1 Memory Cell Development in P. Chabaudi MalariaR01AI089953 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MED BR GALVESTON · PI STEPHENS, ROBIN · 2011 to 2015
$1.8M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI089953
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As effector memory T cells (Tem) are the predominant population elicited by chronic parasitic infections, increasing our knowledge of their function, survival and derivation, as phenotypically and functionally distinct from central memory and effector T cells will be critical to vaccine development for these diseases. In some infections, memory T cells maintain increased effector functions, however; this may require the presence of continued antigen, which can also lead to T cell exhaustion. Alternatively, in the absence of antigen, only the increase in the number of memory cells remains, without enhanced functionality as central memory. In order to understand the requirement for antigen and the potential for longevity or protection, the derivation of each type of memory must be understood. A thorough review of the data establishes the existence of both memory (Tmem) precursors and effector T cells (Teff) from the first hours of an immune response. This suggests a new paradigm of Tmem differentiation distinct from the proposition that Tmem only appear after the contraction of Teff. Several signals have been shown to be important in the generation of memory T cells, such as the integrated strength of "signals 1-3" of antigen presentation (antigen receptor, co-stimulation, cytokines) as perceived by each T cell clone. Given that these signals integrated at antigen presentation cells have been shown to determine the outcome of Teff and Tmem phenotypes and numbers, this decision must be made at a very early stage. It would appear that the overwhelming expansion of effector T cells and the inability to phenotypically distinguish memory T cells at early time points has masked this important decision point. This does not rule out an effect of repeated stimulation or chronic inflammatory milieu on populations generated in these early stages. Recent studies suggest that Tmem are derived from early Teff, and we suggest that this includes Tem as well as Tcm. Therefore, we propose a testable model for the pathway of differentiation from naïve to memory that suggests that Tem are not fully differentiated effector cells, but derived from central memory T cells as originally suggested by Sallusto et al. in 1999, but much debated since.

Indexed as

CD4CD8human immune memoryinfectious diseasemalariamouseT cells.

Identifiers

PMID24790593
PMCPMC4000274
OpenAlexW1978721704

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.