Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35286356›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Effect of stimulation time on the expression of human macrophage polarization markers.

Duygu Unuvar Purcu, Asli Korkmaz, Sinem Gunalp, Derya Goksu Helvaci, Yonca Erdal, Yavuz Dogan, Asli Suner, Gerhard Wingender, Duygu Sag

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing 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

70 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. iNOS in Macrophage Polarization: Pharmacological and Regulatory Insights.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

Duygu Unuvar PurcuIzmir Biomedicine and Genome Center, Izmir, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-6139-2042
Asli KorkmazIzmir Biomedicine and Genome Center, Izmir, Turkey.
Sinem GunalpIzmir Biomedicine and Genome Center, Izmir, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-1908-254X
Derya Goksu HelvaciFaculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-4940-6621
Yonca ErdalIzmir Biomedicine and Genome Center, Izmir, Turkey.
Yavuz DoganDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Asli SunerDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-6872-9901
Gerhard WingenderIzmir Biomedicine and Genome Center, Izmir, Turkey.
Duygu SagIzmir Biomedicine and Genome Center, Izmir, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-1690-6846

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Macrophages are highly plastic cells that can polarize into functionally distinct subsets in vivo and in vitro in response to environmental signals. The development of protocols to model macrophage polarization in vitro greatly contributes to our understanding of macrophage biology. Macrophages are divided into two main groups: Pro-inflammatory M1 macrophages (classically activated) and anti-inflammatory M2 macrophages (alternatively activated), based on several key surface markers and the production of inflammatory mediators. However, the expression of these common macrophage polarization markers is greatly affected by the stimulation time used. Unfortunately, there is no consensus yet regarding the optimal stimulation times for particular macrophage polarization markers in in vitro experiments. This situation is problematic, (i) as analysing a particular marker at a suboptimal time point can lead to false-negative results, and (ii) as it clearly impedes the comparison of different studies. Using human monocyte-derived macrophages (MDMs) in vitro, we analysed how the expression of the main polarization markers for M1 (CD64, CD86, CXCL9, CXCL10, HLA-DR, IDO1, IL1β, IL12, TNF), M2a (CD200R, CD206, CCL17, CCL22, IL-10, TGM2), and M2c (CD163, IL-10, TGFβ) macrophages changes over time at mRNA and protein levels. Our data establish the most appropriate stimulation time for the analysis of the expression of human macrophage polarization markers in vitro. Providing such a reference guide will likely facilitate the investigation of macrophage polarization and its reproducibility.

Indexed as

Interleukin-10Macrophage ActivationBiomarkersHumansMacrophagesReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkersInterleukin-10

Identifiers

PMID35286356
PMCPMC8920204

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.