ArticleFrontiers in immunology2024
Antiviral immune response against HTLV-1 invalidates T-SPOT.TB
Article in Frontiers in 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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: T-SPOT.TB Method: Among all of the HTLV-1-positive RD patients who visited our department between August 2012 and December 2022, 44 patients who were screened using T-SPOT.TB® were included in the analysis. QFT testing was performed in 33 of the 44 patients, and the results were compared with that of T-SPOT.TB®. Furthermore, we performed a culture experiment mimicking T-SPOT.TB® using peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) obtained from HTLV-1-positive patients with RD. Additionally, T-cell subsets with autonomous product IFN-γ were analyzed using a flow cytometer. Results: Of the included patients, 13 (29.5%) were invalid for T-SPOT.TB® because of the increased number of negative control spots. The median HTLV-1 proviral load in the invalid group was higher than that in the valid group (2.45 vs. 0.49 copies/100 PBMCs, respectively, Conclusion: T-SPOT.TB® may be invalidated by the interaction between Tax-expressing CD4+ T-cells and cytotoxic CD8+ T-cells. Moreover, HTLV-1-associated immune reactions due to contact between these cells may be unlikely to occur in QFT using whole blood. Therefore, our results reveal the superiority of QFT over T-SPOT.TB® as a screening test for LTBI in HTLV-1-positive patients with RD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.