Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33805575›Full record

ReviewMicroorganisms2021

Effectors Targeting the Unfolded Protein Response during Intracellular Bacterial Infection.

Manal H Alshareef, Elizabeth L Hartland, Kathleen McCaffrey

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microorganisms, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Modulation of NK Cell Properties by ESKAPE Group Bacteria.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. EnterohemorrhagicPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Eat or Be Eaten: Strategies Used byInfection and immunity · 2023
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Deciphering the Link Between ERFrontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Manal H AlshareefCentre for Innate Immunity and Infectious Diseases, Hudson Institute of Medical Research, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia.
Elizabeth L HartlandCentre for Innate Immunity and Infectious Diseases, Hudson Institute of Medical Research, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4254-2863
Kathleen McCaffreyCentre for Innate Immunity and Infectious Diseases, Hudson Institute of Medical Research, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1175976
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The unfolded protein response (UPR) is a homeostatic response to endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress within eukaryotic cells. The UPR initiates transcriptional and post-transcriptional programs to resolve ER stress; or, if ER stress is severe or prolonged, initiates apoptosis. ER stress is a common feature of bacterial infection although the role of the UPR in host defense is only beginning to be understood. While the UPR is important for host defense against pore-forming toxins produced by some bacteria, other bacterial effector proteins hijack the UPR through the activity of translocated effector proteins that facilitate intracellular survival and proliferation. UPR-mediated apoptosis can limit bacterial replication but also often contributes to tissue damage and disease. Here, we discuss the dual nature of the UPR during infection and the implications of UPR activation or inhibition for inflammation and immunity as illustrated by different bacterial pathogens.

Indexed as

bacteriaeffector proteinsER stressinfectionsecretion systemsUPR

Identifiers

PMID33805575
PMCPMC8065698

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.