Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32862748›Full record

ArticleInnate immunity2021

Differential induction of innate memory in porcine monocytes by

Kristen A Byrne, Christopher K Tuggle, Crystal L Loving

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Innate immunity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Trained immunity in farm animals.Veterinary research · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. InactivatedFrontiers in immunology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kristen A ByrneFood Safety Enteric Pathogen Research, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4910-732X
Christopher K TuggleDepartment of Animal Science, Iowa State University, United States of America.
Crystal L LovingFood Safety Enteric Pathogen Research, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, United States of America.
Agricultural Research Service · USIowa State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Innate immunomodulation via induction of innate memory is one mechanism to alter the host's innate immune response to reduce or prevent disease. Microbial products modulate innate responses with immediate and lasting effects. Innate memory is characterized by enhanced (training) or depressed (tolerance) innate immune responses, including pro-inflammatory cytokine production, to secondary exposure following a priming event. To investigate the ability of β-glucans and bacillus Calmette-Guerin to induce innate training or tolerance in pig cells, porcine monocytes were cultured with priming agonist (β-glucans or bacillus Calmette-Guerin) then re-stimulated 5 d later with a heterologous microbial agonist to determine induction of innate memory. Priming with β-glucan from

Indexed as

Animalsbeta-GlucansCells, CulturedImmune ToleranceImmunity, InnateImmunologic MemoryImmunomodulationInflammationInterleukin-1betaLipopolysaccharidesMonocytesMycobacterium bovisSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSwineTumor Necrosis Factor-alphabeta-GlucansInterleukin-1betaLipopolysaccharidesTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaBCGinnate memoryinnate trainingmonocyteporcineβ-glucan

Identifiers

PMID32862748
PMCPMC8504267
OpenAlexW3081550829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.