Observational studyBMC immunology2024
Whole blood stimulation provides preliminary evidence of altered immune function following SRC.
Observational study in BMC immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo implement an approach combining whole blood immune stimulation and causal modelling to estimate the impact of sport-related concussion (SRC) on immune function.
methodsA prospective, observational cohort study was conducted on athletes participating across 13 university sports at a single academic institute; blood was drawn from 52 athletes, comprised of 22 athletes (n = 11 male, n = 11 female) within seven days of a physician-diagnosed SRC, and 30 healthy athletes (n = 18 female, n = 12 male) at the beginning of their competitive season. Blood samples were stimulated for 24 h under two conditions: (1) lipopolysaccharide (lps, 100ng/mL) or (2) resiquimod (R848, 1uM) using the TruCulture® system. The concentration of 45 cytokines and chemokines were quantitated in stimulated samples by immunoassay using the highly sensitive targeted Proximity Extension Assays (PEA) on the Olink® biomarker platform. A directed acyclic graph (DAG) was used as a heuristic model to make explicit scientific assumptions regarding the effect of SRC on immune function. A latent factor analysis was used to derive two latent cytokine variables representing immune function in response to LPS and R848 stimulation, respectively. The latent variables were then modelled using student-t regressions to estimate the total causal effect of SRC on immune function.
resultsThere was an effect of SRC on immune function in males following SRC, and it varied according to prior concussion history. In males with no history of concussion, those with an acute SRC had lower LPS reactivity compared to healthy athletes with 93% posterior probability (pprob), and lower R848 reactivity with 77% pprob. Conversely, in males with a history of SRC, those with an acute SRC had higher LPS reactivity compared to healthy athletes with 85% pprob and higher R848 reactivity with 82%. In females, irrespective of concussion history, SRC had no effect on LPS reactivity. However, in females with no concussion history, those with an acute SRC had higher R848 reactivity compared to healthy athletes with 86% pprob.
conclusionWhole blood stimulation can be used within a causal framework to estimate the effect of SRC on immune function. Preliminary evidence suggests that SRC affects LPS and R848 immunoreactivity, that the effect is stronger in male athletes, and differs based on concussion history. Replication of this study in a larger cohort with a more sophisticated causal model is necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.