ArticleClinical and experimental medicine2025
Predicting SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4
Article in Clinical and experimental medicine, 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.
- Development of a unified mass cytometry assay integrating activation-induced markers (AIMs) and cytokine profiling for high-throughput assessment of antigen-specific T cell responses.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Review
- Interplay between viral infections and gut microbiota dysbiosis: Mechanisms and therapeutic potential.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ongoing evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants highlights the importance of monitoring immune responses to guide vaccination strategies. Although neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) have garnered increasing attention, T-cells are crucial for conferring long-lasting immunity, especially their resilience against viral mutations. However, assessing T-cell responses clinically has been hindered by cost and complexity. In this study, we recruited a cohort of 134 healthy adults, who had been immunized with three doses of the SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine. Cellular immunity elicited by a comprehensive array of overlapping peptides covering the entire sequence of the virus's structural proteins was assessed by intracellular cytokine staining (ICS). Additionally, a dataset including demographic information, routine blood indices, and immune cell indicators comprising 32 variables was collected. Multivariate analysis revealed age and days post-vaccination as key factors influencing the strength of the T-cell response. Importantly, random forest (RF) and classification and regression tree (CART) algorithms were employed, along with 8 easily accessible indicators to formulate predictive models for the SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4
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.