ArticleThe Journal of clinical investigation2016
How mast cells make decisions.
Article in The Journal of clinical investigation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mast Cells in the Developing Brain.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Review
- Review
- Identification of Gain and Loss of Function Missense Variants in MRGPRX2's Transmembrane and Intracellular Domains for Mast Cell Activation by Substance P.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
- Naturally Occurring Missense MRGPRX2 Variants Display Loss of Function Phenotype for Mast Cell Degranulation in Response to Substance P, Hemokinin-1, Human β-Defensin-3, and Icatibant.Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2018Article
- Mast Cell: A Mysterious Character in Skin Cancer.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mast cells (MCs) are present in various tissues and are responsible for initiating many of the early inflammatory responses to extrinsic challenges. Recent studies have demonstrated that MCs can tailor their responses, depending on the stimulus encountered and the tissue in which they are stimulated. In this issue of the JCI, Gaudenzio and colleagues examine the mechanistic differences between MC responses observed after engagement of Fcε receptor I and those seen after MC stimulation via the recently identified G protein-coupled receptor MRGPRX2. By showing that discrete cellular activation patterns affect the phenotype of the MC response in vivo and in vitro, the authors provide important information about how MCs differentially process various stimuli into distinct degranulation programs.
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.