ArticleFrontiers in immunology2025
Screening and preclinical assessment of novel
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety, tolerability, and concordance with interferon-γ release assays of a recombinant ESAT6-MPT64 skin test: a phase 1 randomized clinical trial.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Trial
- Recent Characterization of Key Proteins to Combat Tuberculosis.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Immunological testing and machine learning in detecting latent tuberculosis among high-risk groups (nature review).Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: A new class of Methods: We constructed Results: Out of 24 tested recombinant MTB antigens, only three (E-M, E-C-M, and E-7.7-C) met the criteria for skin test reaction interpretation for preclinical trials. Among these, the mean values of skin reaction from E-M were found to be comparable to EC (P>0.05), with no cross-reaction with BCG. Additionally, E-M exhibited a strong safety preclinical profile with no significant abnormalities in physiological, biochemical, or histopathological assessments, supporting its suitability for clinical evaluation. It also displayed high specificity by differentiating MTB infection from BCG vaccination and NTM infection, with no cross-reactivity observed in sensitized guinea pigs. Discussion: Our results indicate that the E-M recombinant antigen possesses promising characteristics for the detection of tuberculosis infection, demonstrating good safety and efficacy at the preclinical level. Further clinical trials are required to assess its clinical safety, efficacy, and feasibility.
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.