Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24875388›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Human CD4+ T cell responses to the dog major allergen Can f 1 and its human homologue tear lipocalin resemble each other.

Aino L K Liukko, Tuure T Kinnunen, Marja A Rytkönen-Nissinen, Anssi H T Kailaanmäki, Jukka T Randell, Bernard Maillère, Tuomas I Virtanen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. F1000Research · 2019
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Aino L K LiukkoDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine and Biocenter Kuopio, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Tuure T KinnunenDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine and Biocenter Kuopio, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Marja A Rytkönen-NissinenDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine and Biocenter Kuopio, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland; Institute of Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Anssi H T KailaanmäkiDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine and Biocenter Kuopio, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Jukka T RandellDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland.
Bernard MaillèreCommissariat à l'Energie Atomique, Institut de Biologie et de Technologies, Service d'Ingénierie Moléculaire des Protéines, Gif Sur Yvette, France.
Tuomas I VirtanenDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine and Biocenter Kuopio, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
University of Eastern Finland · FICommissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives · FRKuopio University Hospital · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lipocalin allergens form a notable group of proteins, as they contain most of the significant respiratory allergens from mammals. The basis for the allergenic capacity of allergens in the lipocalin family, that is, the development of T-helper type 2 immunity against them, is still unresolved. As immunogenicity has been proposed to be a decisive feature of allergens, the purpose of this work was to examine human CD4+ T cell responses to the major dog allergen Can f 1 and to compare them with those to its human homologue, tear lipocalin (TL). For this, specific T cell lines were induced in vitro from the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of Can f 1-allergic and healthy dog dust-exposed subjects with peptides containing the immunodominant T cell epitopes of Can f 1 and the corresponding TL peptides. We found that the frequency of Can f 1 and TL-specific T cells in both subject groups was low and close to each other, the difference being about two-fold. Importantly, we found that the proliferative responses of both Can f 1 and TL-specific T cell lines from allergic subjects were stronger than those from healthy subjects, but that the strength of the responses within the subject groups did not differ between these two antigens. Moreover, the phenotype of the Can f 1 and TL-specific T cell lines, determined by cytokine production and expression of cell surface markers, resembled each other. The HLA system appeared to have a minimal role in explaining the allergenicity of Can f 1, as the allergic and healthy subjects' HLA background did not differ, and HLA binding was very similar between Can f 1 and TL peptides. Along with existing data on lipocalin allergens, we conclude that strong antigenicity is not decisive for the allergenicity of Can f 1.

Indexed as

AllergensAnimalsCase-Control StudiesCD4-Positive T-LymphocytesCell LineCytokinesDogsEpitopes, T-LymphocyteHistocompatibility Antigens Class IIHumansHypersensitivityLipocalin 1Lymphocyte ActivationPeptidesPhenotypeProtein Bindingallergen Can f IAllergensCytokinesEpitopes, T-LymphocyteHistocompatibility Antigens Class IILCN1 protein, humanLipocalin 1Peptides

Identifiers

PMID24875388
PMCPMC4038554
OpenAlexW1982086987

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.