ArticlePloS one2016
Effect of IVIG Formulation on IgG Binding to Self- and Exo- Antigens In Vitro and In Vivo.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tau-Reactive Endogenous Antibodies: Origin, Functionality, and Implications for the Pathophysiology of Alzheimer's Disease.Journal of immunology research · 2019Review
- 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In relation to the recent trials of Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIG) in Alzheimer's Disease (AD) it was demonstrated that different IgG preparations contain varying amounts of natural anti-amyloid β (Aβ) antibodies as measured by ELISA. We therefore investigated the relevance of ELISA data for measuring low-affinity antibodies, such as anti-Aβ. We analysed the binding of different commercial Immunoglobulin G (IgG) preparations to Aβ, actin and tetanus toxoid in different binding assays to further investigate the possible cause for observed differences in binding to Aβ and actin between different IgG preparations. We show that the differences of commercial IgG preparations in binding to Aβ and actin in ELISA assays are artefactual and only evident in in vitro binding assays. In functional assays and in vivo animal studies the different IVIG preparations exhibited very similar potency. ELISA data alone are not appropriate to analyse and rank the binding capacity of low-affinity antibodies to Aβ or other endogenous self-antigens contained in IgG preparations. Additional analytical methods should be adopted to complement ELISA data.
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.