ArticleJournal of virology1993
Differentiated liver cell specificity of the second enhancer of hepatitis B virus.
Article in Journal of virology, 1993. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Temporal acquisition of sequential mutations in the enhancer II and basal core promoter of HBV in individuals at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma.Carcinogenesis · 2011Article
- Identification of multiple transcription factors, HLF, FTF, and E4BP4, controlling hepatitis B virus enhancer II.Journal of virology · 2000Article
- In vivo regulation of hepatitis B virus replication by peroxisome proliferators.Journal of virology · 1999Article
- Transcriptional repression of human hepatitis B virus genes by a bZIP family member, E4BP4.Journal of virology · 1999Article
- In vivo effects of mutations in woodchuck hepatitis virus enhancer II.Journal of virology · 1998Article
- Woodchuck hepatitis virus contains a tripartite posttranscriptional regulatory element.Journal of virology · 1998Article
- Type, prevalence, and significance of core promoter/enhancer II mutations in hepatitis B viruses from immunosuppressed patients with severe liver disease.Journal of virology · 1996Article
- Cellular factors controlling the activity of woodchuck hepatitis virus enhancer II.Journal of virology · 1996Article
- In vivo activity of the hepatitis B virus core promoter: tissue specificity and temporal regulation.Journal of virology · 1995Article
- Selective reovirus infection of murine hepatocarcinoma cells during cell division. A model of viral liver infection.The Journal of clinical investigation · 1994Article
- Repression of enhancer II activity by a negative regulatory element in the hepatitis B virus genome.Journal of virology · 1994Article
- Functional interaction of nuclear factors EF-C, HNF-4, and RXR alpha with hepatitis B virus enhancer I.Journal of virology · 1993Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hepatitis B virus is a hepatotropic virus. Its replication and gene expression are mainly restricted to hepatocytes in the infective process. The viral gene expression thus provides a unique system with which to study the control of tissue-specific gene expression. We have previously reported the identification and characterization of the second enhancer (enhancer II) of hepatitis B virus. In this report, we further demonstrate that the minimal functional constituents of the second enhancer, box alpha and box beta, display liver cell and differentiation state specificity. Moreover, box alpha exhibits the same liver cell and differentiation state specificity when functioning as an upstream regulator for the basal core promoter. Gel shift experiments reveal a unique box alpha-binding protein, protein a, which is present only in differentiated liver cells, where enhancer II is functional. The converse is true for another box alpha-binding protein, protein f, which is present only in poorly differentiated liver cells and nonliver cells. The simplest hypothesis that explains these results is that protein a activates and/or protein f suppresses the enhancer and upstream regulator functions. Although C/EBP is a candidate for a transcription factor that interacts with box alpha or box beta, none of the binding factors identified in the gel shift assays, including protein a and protein f, is likely to be C/EBP because they differ from C/EBP in heat lability and sequence preference.
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.