ArticleImmunology2017
Development of an epitope panel for consistent identification of antigen-specific T-cells in humans.
Article in Immunology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in Proteomic Techniques for Cytokine Analysis: Focus on Melanoma Research.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to establish a panel of MHC-peptide multimers suitable as a positive control in the detection of HLA A*0201 restricted antigen specific T cells (ASTC) by flow cytometry. MHC Dextramers were loaded with HLA A*0201 binding peptides from viral antigens and melanoma targets identified from a literature search and in silico prediction. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from healthy donors were analysed with the MHC Dextramers using flow cytometry. The best performing epitopes were tested on PBMC from patients undergoing testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection to assess the coverage of this epitope panel. Of 21 candidate epitopes, ASTC could be detected against 12 (57·1%) in at least one of 18 healthy blood donors. Reactivity to two or more epitopes was seen in 17 of the 18 donors (94·4%). We selected the six best-performing epitopes and demonstrated a positive response in 42 (97·7%) of 43 patient samples (healthy, latent and active M. tuberculosis infection). The selected panel of six antigenic epitopes sufficed as a positive control in the detection of ASTC in HLA A*0201. Performance was robust in different stages of latent and active M. tuberculosis infection, indicating reliability also during infection.
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.