ArticleThe Journal of infectious diseases2015
From Immunity and Vaccines to Mammalian Regeneration.
Article in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Our current understanding of major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-mediated antigen presentation in self and nonself immune recognition was derived from immunological studies of autoimmunity and virus-host interactions, respectively. The trimolecular complex of the MHC molecule, antigen, and T-cell receptor accounts for the phenomena of immunodominance and MHC degeneracy in both types of responses and constrains vaccine development. Out of such considerations, we developed a simple peptide vaccine construct that obviates immunodominance, resulting in a broadly protective T-cell response in the absence of antibody. In the course of autoimmunity studies, we identified the MRL mouse strain as a mammalian model of amphibian-like regeneration. A significant level of DNA damage in the cells from this mouse pointed to the role of the cell cycle checkpoint gene CDKN1a, or p21(cip1/waf1). The MRL mouse has highly reduced levels of this molecule, and a genetic knockout of this single gene in otherwise nonregenerating strains led to an MRL-type regenerative response, indicating that the ability to regenerate has not been lost during evolution.
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.