ArticleGenes2019
Digital Immune Gene Expression Profiling Discriminates Allergic Rhinitis Responders from Non-Responders to Probiotic Supplementation.
Article in Genes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Priming mucosal pathogen-agnostic innate immunity with an intranasal TLR2/6 agonist in an aged population.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Evaluation of intranasal TLR2/6 agonist INNA-051: safety, tolerability and proof of pharmacology.ERJ open research · 2024Article
- T and B Lymphocyte Transcriptional States Differentiate between Sensitized and Unsensitized Individuals in Alpha-Gal Syndrome.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Patient-Derived Xenograft Models for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma and Their Application in Guiding Personalized Medicine.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Probiotic supplementation for eight weeks with a multi-strain probiotic by individuals with allergic rhinitis (AR) reduced overall symptom severity, the frequency of medication use and improved quality of life. The purported mechanism of action is modulation of the immune system. This analysis examined changes in systemic and mucosal immune gene expression in a subgroup of individuals, classified as either responders or non-responders based on improvement of AR symptoms in response to the probiotic supplement. Based on established criteria of a beneficial change in the mini-rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (mRQLQ), individuals with AR were classified as either responders or non-responders. Systemic and mucosal immune gene expression was assessed using nCounter PanCancer Immune Profiling (Nanostring Technologies, Seattle, WA, USA) kit on blood samples and a nasal lysate. There were 414 immune genes in the blood and 312 immune genes in the mucosal samples expressed above the background threshold. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering of immune genes separated responders from non-responders in blood and mucosal samples at baseline and after supplementation, with key T-cell immune genes differentially expressed between the groups. Striking differences in biological processes and pathways were evident in nasal mucosa but not blood in responders compared to non-responders. These findings support the use of network approaches to understand probiotic-induced changes to the immune system.
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.