Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25138639›Full record

ReviewCellular and molecular neurobiology2014

The retrovirus/superantigen hypothesis of multiple sclerosis.

Alexander Emmer, Martin S Staege, Malte E Kornhuber

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cellular and molecular neurobiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Pathogen infection and autoimmune disease.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexander EmmerDepartment of Neurology, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany, alexander.emmer@uk-halle.de.
Martin S Staege
Malte E Kornhuber
Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is as yet unknown. Commonly, MS is assumed to be due to an autoimmune inflammation of the central nervous system (CNS). Neurodegeneration is regarded to be a secondary reaction. This concept is increasingly being challenged. Human endogenous retroviruses (HERV) that could be locally activated in the CNS have been proposed as an alternative concept. HERV-encoded envelope proteins (env) can act as strong immune stimulators (superantigens). Thus, slow disease progression following neurodegeneration might be induced by re-activation of HERV expression directly, while relapses in parallel to inflammation might be secondary to the expression of HERV-encoded superantigens. It has been shown previously that T-cell superantigens are capable to induce a cellular inflammatory reaction in the CNS of experimental animals similar to that in MS. Furthermore, B-cell superantigens have been shown to activate blood leucocytes in vitro to produce immunoglobulin in an oligoclonal manner. It remains to be established, whether the outlined hypothesis accords with all known features of MS. Furthermore, anti-HERV agents may be taken into consideration to enrich and improve MS therapy.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntigen PresentationDisease ProgressionEndogenous RetrovirusesHumansImmunotherapyMultiple SclerosisSuperantigensSuperantigens

Identifiers

PMID25138639
PMCPMC11488904
OpenAlexW1966947309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.