Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31708781›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2019

Targeting Macrophages: Friends or Foes in Disease?

Juan A Ardura, Gorjana Rackov, Elena Izquierdo, Veronica Alonso, Arancha R Gortazar, Maria M Escribese

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. TET3-overexpressing macrophages promote endometriosis.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2024
    Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Juan A ArduraDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, San Pablo CEU University, Madrid, Spain.
Gorjana RackovIMDEA Nanoscience Institute, Madrid, Spain.
Elena IzquierdoDepartment I for Internal Medicine and CECAD, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Veronica AlonsoDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, San Pablo CEU University, Madrid, Spain.
Arancha R GortazarDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, San Pablo CEU University, Madrid, Spain.
Maria M EscribeseDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, San Pablo CEU University, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Macrophages occupy a prominent position during immune responses. They are considered the final effectors of any given immune response since they can be activated by a wide range of surface ligands and cytokines to acquire a continuum of functional states. Macrophages are involved in tissue homeostasis and in the promotion or resolution of inflammatory responses, causing tissue damage or helping in tissue repair. Knowledge in macrophage polarization has significantly increased in the last decade. Biomarkers, functions, and metabolic states associated with macrophage polarization status have been defined both in murine and human models. Moreover, a large body of evidence demonstrated that macrophage status is a dynamic process that can be modified. Macrophages orchestrate virtually all major diseases-sepsis, infection, chronic inflammatory diseases (rheumatoid arthritis), neurodegenerative disease, and cancer-and thus they represent attractive therapeutic targets. In fact, the possibility to "reprogram" macrophage status is considered as a promising strategy for designing novel therapies. Here, we will review the role of different tissue macrophage populations in the instauration and progression of inflammatory and non-inflammatory pathologies, as exemplified by rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, glioblastoma, and tumor metastasis. We will analyze: 1) the potential as therapeutic targets of recently described macrophage populations, such as osteomacs, reported to play an important role in bone formation and homeostasis or metastasis-associated macrophages (MAMs), key players in the generation of premetastatic niche; 2) the current and potential future approaches to target monocytes/macrophages and their inflammation-causing products in rheumatoid arthritis; and 3) the development of novel intervention strategies using oncolytic viruses, immunomodulatory agents, and checkpoint inhibitors aiming to boost M1-associated anti-tumor immunity. In this review, we will focus on the potential of macrophages as therapeutic targets and discuss their involvement in state-of-the-art strategies to modulate prevalent pathologies of aging societies.

Indexed as

arthritis (including rheumatoid arthritis)glioblastomamacrophagesmetastasisosteomacs

Identifiers

PMID31708781
PMCPMC6819424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.