ArticleFrontiers in immunology2018
Bacterial and
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances and applications of genome-edited animal models for severe combined immunodeficiency.Zoological research · 2025Review
- Evolving spectrum of Pneumocystis host specificity, genetic diversity, and evolution.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2025Review
- Article
- Modeling HPV-Associated Disease and Cancer Using the Cottontail Rabbit Papillomavirus.Viruses · 2022Review
- Research-Relevant Conditions and Pathology of Laboratory Mice, Rats, Gerbils, Guinea Pigs, Hamsters, Naked Mole Rats, and Rabbits.ILAR journal · 2021Review
- Human iPSC-derived macrophages for efficient Staphylococcus aureus clearance in a murine pulmonary infection model.Blood advances · 2021Article
- Evaluation of animal models of Crohn's disease with anal fistula (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021Review
- Integration of Transformative Platforms for the Discovery of Causative Genes in Cardiovascular Diseases.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2021Review
- Comparison of Genetically Engineered Immunodeficient Animal Models for Nonclinical Testing of Stem Cell Therapies.Pharmaceutics · 2021Review
- Genetically Modified Rabbits for Cardiovascular Research.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Review
- A Review of Murine Cytomegalovirus as a Model for Human Cytomegalovirus Disease-Do Mice Lie?International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Generation of knockout rabbits with X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency (X-SCID) using CRISPR/Cas9.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Genome engineering technologies in rabbits.Journal of biomedical research · 2020Article
- Diversity and Complexity of the Large Surface Protein Family in the Compacted Genomes of MultiplemBio · 2020Article
- CRISPR/Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein-mediated Precise Gene Editing by Tube Electroporation.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Using the CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing technology, we recently produced a number of rabbits with mutations in immune function genes, including FOXN1, PRKDC, RAG1, RAG2, and IL2RG. Seven founder knockout rabbits (F0) and three male IL2RG null (-/y) F1 animals demonstrated severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), characterized by absence or pronounced hypoplasia of the thymus and splenic white pulp, and absence of immature and mature T and B-lymphocytes in peripheral blood. Complete blood count analysis showed severe leukopenia and lymphocytopenia accompanied by severe neutrophilia. Without prophylactic antibiotics, the SCID rabbits universally succumbed to lung infections following weaning. Pathology examination revealed severe heterophilic bronchopneumonia caused by
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.