ReviewImmunogenetics2018
On being the right size: antibody repertoire formation in the mouse and human.
Review in Immunogenetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Immunoglobulins with Non-Canonical Functions in Inflammatory and Autoimmune Disease States.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- Profiling adaptive immunity: A quantitative framework for immune repertoire dynamics and clinical diagnostics.Fundamental research · 2026Article
- AI-Driven BCR Modeling for Precision Immunology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Decoding epitope immunodominance in HIV Env using cryoEM and machine learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Antibody Polyreactivity: A Challenger of Immune Paradigms.Immunology · 2025Review
- Article
- New insights into antibody structure with implications for specificity, variable region restriction and isotype choice.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2025Review
- Conserved heavy/light contacts and germline preferences revealed by a large-scale analysis of natively paired human antibody sequences and structural data.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Human naïve B cells recognize prepandemic influenza virus hemagglutinins.Science immunology · 2025Article
- A new mechanism of antibody diversity: formation of the natural antibodies containing LAIR1 and LILRB1 extracellular domains.Antibody therapeutics · 2024Review
- Engaging an HIV vaccine target through the acquisition of low B cell affinity.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Germline-encoded specificities and the predictability of the B cell response.PLoS pathogens · 2023Article
- Editorial: Mechanisms and strategies of unconventional antibody diversification for greater immune adaptability.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Massively-multiplexed epitope mapping techniques for viral antigen discovery.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- Monoclonal antibodies targeting two immunodominant epitopes on the Spike protein neutralize emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.EBioMedicine · 2022Article
- A BALB/c IGHV Reference Set, Defined by Haplotype Analysis of Long-Read VDJ-C Sequences From F1 (BALB/c x C57BL/6) Mice.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Review
- Defining best practices for tissue procurement in immuno-oncology clinical trials: consensus statement from the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Surgery Committee.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2020Review
- How repertoire data are changing antibody science.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The immune systems of all mammals include populations of B cells producing antibodies with incredibly diverse specificities. Repertoire diversity has been described as the "miracle of immunology," and it was long thought to be the result of essentially stochastic processes. Recently, however, analysis of high throughput gene sequencing data has shown that hard-wired biases in these processes result in antibody repertoires that are broadly predictable. The repertoires of mice and humans are both predictable, but they are strikingly different. In this review, features of the naïve antibody repertoires of the two species are contrasted. We show that the mouse repertoire includes a conspicuous population of public clonotypes that are shared by different individuals of an inbred strain. These clonotypes are the result of gene rearrangements that involve little gene processing. By skewing repertoire formation toward such sequences, which probably target commonly encountered pathogens, it may be that the relatively small mouse repertoire is appropriate and effective despite its size. Species like the mouse face challenges that are a direct consequence of their small body sizes and the limitations this places on the antibody arsenal-particularly early in ontogeny. We propose that it is the differences in the naïve repertoires of mice and humans, and the differences in the ways these repertoires are used, which ensure that the very different biological needs of the two species are met. The processes that contribute to repertoire formation may appear to be stochastic, but in both species, evolution has left little to chance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29260260What 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.