Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32788608›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Artificially induced MAIT cells inhibit M. bovis BCG but not M. tuberculosis during in vivo pulmonary infection.

Huifeng Yu, Amy Yang, Steven Derrick, Jeffrey Y W Mak, Ligong Liu, David P Fairlie, Siobhan Cowley

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Route of BCG administration determines success.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Avoidance of MAIT cells is an essential determinant ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. MR1- and HLA-E-Dependent Antigen Presentation ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Huifeng YuLaboratory of Mucosal Pathogens and Cellular Immunology, Division of Bacterial Parasitic and Allergenic Products, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Amy YangLaboratory of Mucosal Pathogens and Cellular Immunology, Division of Bacterial Parasitic and Allergenic Products, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Steven DerrickLaboratory of Mucosal Pathogens and Cellular Immunology, Division of Bacterial Parasitic and Allergenic Products, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Jeffrey Y W MakInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Ligong LiuInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
David P FairlieInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Siobhan CowleyLaboratory of Mucosal Pathogens and Cellular Immunology, Division of Bacterial Parasitic and Allergenic Products, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA. Siobhan.Cowley@fda.hhs.gov.
Australian Research Council · AUCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research · USUnited States Food and Drug Administration · USUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

Australian Research Council for a Centre of Excellence in Advanced Molecular Imaging CE140100011National Health and Medical Research Council 1117017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is significant interest in targeting MAIT cells with immunostimulatory agents to enhance immune responses. Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tb.) is a pervasive respiratory disease that could benefit from treatments that augment immunity. Here we investigate the role of MAIT cells in M. tb. infection and the potential for MAIT cell-targeted immunotherapy to control bacterial burdens. We find that MAIT cells fail to substantially accumulate in the lungs during murine pulmonary M. bovis BCG and M. tb. infections but this defect is overcome by intranasal installation of a TLR2/6 agonist and a MAIT cell antigen. Although artificially induced MAIT cells produce important cytokines in both infections, they control BCG but not M. tb. growth in the lungs. Correspondingly, M. tb.-infected mouse macrophages are relatively resistant to MAIT cell antimicrobial activities in vitro. Thus, MAIT cell antigen-mediated immunotherapy for M. tb. presents a complex challenge.

Indexed as

AnimalsBCG VaccineCytokinesFemaleLungMaleMice, Inbred C57BLMucosal-Associated Invariant T CellsMycobacterium bovisMycobacterium tuberculosisTuberculosisTuberculosis, PulmonaryBCG VaccineCytokines

Identifiers

PMID32788608
PMCPMC7423888
OpenAlexW3048373723

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.