ArticleAnnals of transplantation2018
Impact of Regulatory T Cells on Innate Immune Cells in a Pre-Sensitized Heart Transplant Model.
Article in Annals of transplantation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimal Immunosuppression Strategy in the Sensitized Kidney Transplant Recipient.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although our previous studies revealed the role of Tregs (regulatory T cells) and MDSCs (myeloid-derived suppressor cells) in a pre-sensitized cardiac transplant model, interplay between Tregs and NK cells, neutrophils, and macrophages remain undefined. MATERIAL AND METHODS Mice heart transplantation with skin pre-sensitization was performed, in which prolonged-cold ischemia time (PCI) was used for donor treatment. Syngeneic heterotopic heart transplant recipients with PCI were treated with PC61 (monoclonal anti-CD25 antibodies), adoptive cell transfer with Tregs, and rapamycin. RESULTS We unveiled that both rapamycin treatment and adoptive transfer of Tregs could lead to a remarkable decrease of frequency of splenic Gr1+ cells (P=0.058 and P=0.016, respectively). Although administration of PC61 did not affect frequency of splenic Gr1+ cells, it dramatically increased frequency of splenic F4/80+ macrophages (P=0.052). Intriguingly, use of both exogenous PC61 and rapamycin induced a dramatic augmentation of frequency of Gr-1+ neutrophils in the grafts (PC61: P=0.00029; rapamycin: P=0.0096). Noticeably, all different regimens including PC61, rapamycin, and adoptive transfer of Tregs, consistently resulted in a remarked augmentation of frequency of F4/80+ macrophages within grafts (PC61, P=0.0013; rapamycin, P=0.015; Tregs transfer, P=0.013). Although rapamycin and adoptive transfer of Tregs did not affect frequency of NK1.1+ cells, administration of PC61 dramatically increased frequency of NK1.1+ cells within grafts (P=0.033). CONCLUSIONS Tregs depletion or Tregs induced by rapamycin or exogenous cell transfer could affect frequencies of both splenic and intragraft neutrophils, macrophages, and NK cells, but not splenic NK cells. Our data might shed light on understanding sensitized transplant biology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29650945PMC6248278W2798190049What 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.