ReviewImmunological reviews2026
Entering the Age of Specificity in T Cell Immunity.
Review in Immunological reviews, 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The discovery of MHC restriction, the resolution of peptide-MHC structure, and the identification of the T cell receptor gene quickly centered epitope-level specificity as a core concern of T cell biology. Epitope mapping culminated in functional peptide-based stimulation assays and tetramer staining, which together provide exquisite resolution of individual responses. Despite these tools, quantitative assessment of epitope-resolved responses in complex human infections and tumors has rarely been applied at scale. As a result, no epitope-aware correlates of protection or risk have been established for major infections, and most human T cell profiling still occurs at the level of representative epitopes or bulk assays. In this review, I propose that variation in specificity, defined as distinct epitope-level responses across individuals, represents a largely untested critical element in our assessment of anti-pathogen and antitumor immunity. Advances in TCR repertoire profiling and reverse epitope discovery now make formal tests of this hypothesis tractable, and I discuss approaches to determine the extent to which epitope variation underlies the noise and variation of human immune phenotypes.
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.