ReviewSeminars in immunopathology2026
Time to rethink prevention of neonatal group B streptococcal disease.
Review in Seminars in immunopathology, 2026. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Group B Streptococci (GBS) are both natural colonizers and important invasive pathogens in newborns. The introduction of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis has led to a significant decrease in the incidence of early onset sepsis. In contrast, late onset sepsis, which accounts for up to 50% of cases, has not declined. IAP impacts microbiome development during infancy, specifically it reduces the abundance of Bifidobacterium and Bacteroides spp., which might be associated with long-term health outcomes such as asthma development and obesity. This review highlights the challenges and risks associated with GBS colonization in neonates, including the role of virulence factors and specific contribution of host immunity. Bacterial pathogenicity factors involved in adhesion and colonization, e.g. GBS pilus islands, barrier disruption, e.g. pore-forming toxin ß-hemolysin, or evasion of neonatal immune defense mediated by GBS capsular polysaccharide and membrane glycolipids are important targets to suppress the translocation of GBS and progression to invasive disease. In line with this, metabolic programming of neonatal immune cells, e.g. glycolytic capacity, is GBS strain-specific which also argues for a more tailored strategy of prevention. Given the benefits and risks of IAP, it is important to rethink strategies of preventing GBS disease including alternative strategies such as vaccination and probiotic supplementation. Further studies need to focus on modulating the developing immune-microbiome interplay including the metabolic milieu to the advantage of the vulnerable newborn.
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.