ArticlePloS one2019
Differential immunomodulation of T-cells by immunoglobulin replacement therapy in primary and secondary antibody deficiency.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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
Abstract
Patients with primary or secondary antibody deficiency (PAD or SAD) are at increased risk of recurrent infections that can be alleviated by immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IRT). In addition to replenishing antibody levels, IRT has been suggested to modulate immune response in patients with antibody deficiency. Although both commonly treated with IRT, the underlying causes of PAD and SAD vary greatly, suggesting differential modulation of T-cell function that may lead to different responses to IRT. To explore this, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were sampled from 17 PAD and 14 SAD patients before and 2-10 months after initiation of IRT, and analyzed for changes in T-cell phenotype and function. Proportions of CD4, CD8, Treg, or memory T-cells did not significantly change post-IRT compared to pre-IRT. However, we report distinct modulation in T-cell function between PAD and SAD patients post-IRT. Upon α-CD3/CD28 stimulation, proportion of IFN-γ+ CD4 and CD8 T-cells increased in SAD (p = 0.005) but not PAD patients post-IRT compared to baseline. Interestingly, total T-cell proliferation was reduced post-IRT in both PAD and SAD patients, although the reduction in proliferation was primarily due to reduced CD4 T-cell proliferation in PAD (p = 0.025) in contrast to CD8 T-cells in SAD (p = 0.042). In summary, even though IRT provides patients with passive humoral immunity-mediated protection in PAD and SAD, our findings suggest that IRT immunomodulation of T-cells is different in T-cell subsets depending on underlying immunodeficiency.
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.