Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25071779›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2014

The Role of Non-Cognate T Cell Stimulation during Intracellular Bacterial Infection.

Stephen J McSorley

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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.

Stephen J McSorleyDepartment of Anatomy, Physiology and Cell Biology, Center for Comparative Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California Davis , Davis, CA , USA.
University of California, Davis · US

Funding

Sustained adaptive immunity in the mucosaP01AI056172 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT · PI VELLA, ANTHONY T · 2003 to 2017
$22.3M
CD4 T Cell Response to SalmonellaR01AI055743 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI MCSORLEY, STEPHEN J · 2004 to 2013
$3.5M
Innate immune response to bacterial flagellinsR01AI076278 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI MCSORLEY, STEPHEN J · 2009 to 2015
$2.3M
NIAID NIH HHS P01 AI056172NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI055743NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI076278
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intra-macrophage bacterial infections cause significant morbidity and mortality in both the developed and developing world. Protective host immune responses to these infections initially requires the activation and expansion of pathogen-specific CD4 Th1 cells within lymphoid tissues and subsequent relocation of these effector cells to sites of infection. After entering infected tissues, the elicitation of Th1 bactericidal activity can be triggered by cognate or non-cognate signals that are delivered by locally infected antigen-presenting cells and innate cells. However, the contribution of non-cognate stimulation to the resolution of bacterial infection remains poorly understood, especially in the context of a Th1 response. Here, we review the current data on Th1 cell activation and expansion in mouse models of Salmonella and Chlamydia infection and discuss the potential role of non-cognate Th1 cell stimulation in these disease models. Greater understanding of this pathway of T cell activation may lead to the design of therapeutics or vaccines to combat intra-macrophage pathogens.

Indexed as

bacterial infectionsIFN-gammaprotective immunitySalmonellaT cell

Identifiers

PMID25071779
PMCPMC4089505
OpenAlexW2133841584

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.