Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32766971›Full record

ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2020

Mast Cell and Basophil Cell Lines: A Compendium.

Egle Passante

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

1 author.

Egle PassanteSanofi Genzyme, Berkshire, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mast cells and basophils play a crucial role during type I hypersensitivity reactions. However, despite efforts to elucidate their role in the pathogenesis of allergy and inflammation, our understanding of MC and basophil biology is still relatively scarce. The practical difficulty in obtaining a sufficient number of purified primary cells from biological samples has slowed down the process of reaching a full understanding of the physiological role of these functionally similar cell types. The establishment of several immortalized cell lines has been a useful tool to establish and perform sophisticated laboratory protocols that are impractical using primary cells. Continuous cell lines have been extensively used to investigate allergen/IgE-mediated cell activation, to elucidate the degranulation dynamics, to investigate structural and functional properties of the high-affinity receptor (FcεRI), and to test cell-stabilizing compounds. In this chapter, we review the most widely used and better-characterized MC and basophil cell lines, highlighting their advantages and drawbacks. It must be pointed out, however, that while cell lines represent a useful in vitro tool due to their easy manipulability and reduced culture costs, they often show aberrant characteristics which are not fully representative of primary cell physiology; results obtained with such cells therefore must be interpreted with due care.

Indexed as

Cell DegranulationAnimalsBasophilsCell Culture TechniquesCell LineHumansMast CellsBasophilsCell linesHMC-1Humanized rat basophilic leukemia cellsIgE receptors (FcεRI)KU812LAD-2LUVAMast cellsRBLROSA

Identifiers

PMID32766971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.