Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33353206›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

The Impact of Nanoparticles on Innate Immune Activation by Live Bacteria.

Benjamin J Swartzwelter, Alexandra C Fux, Litty Johnson, Elmer Swart, Sabine Hofer, Norbert Hofstätter, Mark Geppert, Paola Italiani, Diana Boraschi, Albert Duschl and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. 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
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Assessment ofOpen veterinary journal · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Effects of Graphene Oxide and Reduced Graphene Oxide Nanostructures on CD4International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  8. Interactions between Nanoparticles and Intestine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Benjamin J SwartzwelterDepartment of Biosciences, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-6283-5199
Alexandra C FuxDepartment of Biosciences, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-8745-829X
Litty JohnsonDepartment of Biosciences, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-1462-4167
Elmer SwartUK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (UKCEH), Wallingford OX10 8BB, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8269-1700
Sabine HoferDepartment of Biosciences, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-4986-3539
Norbert HofstätterDepartment of Biosciences, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-0207-0654
Mark GeppertDepartment of Biosciences, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6684-2508
Paola ItalianiInstitute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, National Research Council, 80131 Napoli, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9830-2733
Diana BoraschiInstitute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, National Research Council, 80131 Napoli, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3953-4056
Albert DuschlDepartment of Biosciences, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-7034-9860
Martin HimlyDepartment of Biosciences, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5416-085X
University of Salzburg · ATStazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn · ITUK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology · GB

Funding

Austrian Science Fund (FWF) W01213EU H2020 NanoCommons 731032EU H2020 Nanorigo 814530EU MSCA Endonano 812661EU MSCA Pandora 671881PRIN 20173ZECCM
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The innate immune system evolved to detect and react against potential dangers such as bacteria, viruses, and environmental particles. The advent of modern technology has exposed innate immune cells, such as monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells, to a relatively novel type of particulate matter, i.e., engineered nanoparticles. Nanoparticles are not inherently pathogenic, and yet cases have been described in which specific nanoparticle types can either induce innate/inflammatory responses or modulate the activity of activated innate cells. Many of these studies rely upon activation by agonists of toll-like receptors, such as lipopolysaccharide or peptidoglycan, instead of the more realistic stimulation by whole live organisms. In this review we examine and discuss the effects of nanoparticles on innate immune cells activated by live bacteria. We focus in particular on how nanoparticles may interfere with bacterial processes in the context of innate activation, and confine our scope to the effects due to particles themselves, rather than to molecules adsorbed on the particle surface. Finally, we examine the long-lasting consequences of coexposure to nanoparticles and bacteria, in terms of potential microbiome alterations and innate immune memory, and address nanoparticle-based vaccine strategies against bacterial infection.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacteriaHumansImmunity, InnateNanoparticlesadjuvantsbiocoronaengineered nanoparticlesinflammationinnate immune memoryinnate immunitylipopolysaccharidemicrobiotananovaccinespathogen-associated molecular patternstoll-like receptors

Identifiers

PMID33353206
PMCPMC7766945
OpenAlexW3113077138

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.