ArticleCell & bioscience2015
Natural cutaneous anthrax infection, but not vaccination, induces a CD4(+) T cell response involving diverse cytokines.
Article in Cell & bioscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gram-Positive Bacteria Cell Wall Peptidoglycan Polymers Activate Human Dendritic Cells to Produce IL-23 and IL-1β and Promote TMicroorganisms · 2023Article
- Impact of HLA Polymorphism on the Immune Response to Bacillus Anthracis Protective Antigen in Vaccination versus Natural Infection.Vaccines · 2022Article
- Article
- Unexpected human cases of cutaneous anthrax in Latium region, Italy, August 2017: integrated human-animal investigation of epidemiological, clinical, microbiological and ecological factors.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2019Article
- Development of Protective Immunity in New Zealand White Rabbits Challenged with Bacillus anthracis Spores and Treated with Antibiotics and Obiltoxaximab, a Monoclonal Antibody against Protective Antigen.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhilst there have been a number of insights into the subsets of CD4(+) T cells induced by pathogenic Bacillus anthracis infections in animal models, how these findings relate to responses generated in naturally infected and vaccinated humans has yet to be fully established. We describe the cytokine profile produced in response to T cell stimulation with a previously defined immunodominant antigen of anthrax, lethal factor (LF), domain IV, in cohorts of individuals with a history of cutaneous anthrax, compared with vaccinees receiving the U.K. licenced Anthrax Vaccine Precipitated (AVP) vaccine.
findingsWe found that immunity following natural cutaneous infection was significantly different from that seen after vaccination. AVP vaccination was found to result in a polarized IFNγ CD4+ T cell response, while the individuals exposed to B. anthracis by natural infection mounted a broader cytokine response encompassing IFNγ, IL-5, -9, -10, -13, -17, and -22.
conclusionsVaccines seeking to incorporate the robust, long-lasting, CD4 T cell immune responses observed in naturally acquired cutaneous anthrax cases may need to elicit a similarly broad spectrum cellular immune response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.