Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28901417›Full record

ArticleMolecular medicine reports2017

Discrimination of the heterogeneity of bone marrow‑derived dendritic cells.

Jing Wang, Xiaomin Dai, Chiaching Hsu, Changsheng Ming, Ying He, Ji Zhang, Lai Wei, Ping Zhou, Cong-Yi Wang, Jun Yang and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular medicine reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Potential ofOncoimmunology · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jing WangInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Xiaomin DaiInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Chiaching HsuPediatric Department, Kuang Tien General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan 433, R.O.C.
Changsheng MingInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Ying HeInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Ji ZhangInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Lai WeiInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Ping ZhouInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Cong-Yi WangInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Jun YangInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Nianqiao GongInstitute of Organ Transplantation, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Health, Key Laboratory of The Ministry of Education, Wuhan, Hubei 430030, P.R. China.
Huazhong University of Science and Technology · CNTongji Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study aimed to discriminate different subsets of cultured dendritic cells (DCs) to evaluate their immunological characteristics. DCs offer an important foundation for immunological studies, and mouse bone marrow (BM) cells cultured with granulocyte‑macrophage colony‑stimulating factor (GM‑CSF) have been used extensively to generate CD11c+/major histocompatibility complex II+ BM‑derived DCs (BMDCs). Immature DCs are considered to have strong migration and phagocytic antigen‑capturing abilities, whereas mature DCs are thought to activate naive T cells and express high levels of costimulatory cytokines and adhesion molecules. In most culture systems, non‑adherent cells are collected as mature and qualified DCs, and the remaining adherent cells are discarded. The output from GM‑CSF cultures comprises mostly adherent cells, and only a small portion of them is non‑adherent. This situation has resulted in ambiguities in the attempts to understand results from the use of cultured DCs. In the present study, DCs were divided into three subsets: i) Non‑adherent cells; ii) adherent cells and iii) mixed cells. The heterogeneous features of cultured DCs were identified by evaluating the maturation status, cytokine secretion and the ability to activate allogeneic T cells according to different subsets. Results from the study demonstrated that BMDC culture systems were a heterogeneous group of cells comprising non‑adherent cells, adherent cells, mixed cells and firmly adherent cells. Non‑adherent cells may be used in future studies that require relatively mature DCs such as anticancer immunity. Adherent cells may be used to induce tolerance DCs, whereas mixed cells may potentiate either tolerogenicity or pro‑tumorigenic responses. Firmly adherent cells were considered to have macrophage‑like properties. The findings may aid in immunological studies that use cultured DCs and may lead to more precise DC research.

Indexed as

AnimalsBone Marrow CellsCD11c AntigenCell Adhesion MoleculesCell DifferentiationCells, CulturedCytokinesDendritic CellsGranulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorLipopolysaccharidesMaleMiceMice, Inbred BALB CMice, Inbred C57BLPhagocytosisT-LymphocytesCD11c AntigenCell Adhesion MoleculesCytokinesGranulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorLipopolysaccharides

Identifiers

PMID28901417
PMCPMC5865836
OpenAlexW2753912433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.