↓ Skip to main content

Toll-Like Receptor 8 Agonist Strengthens the Protective Efficacy of ESAT-6 Immunization to Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Toll-Like Receptor 8 Agonist Strengthens the Protective Efficacy of ESAT-6 Immunization to Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01972
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Tang, Mengmeng Sun, Guiying Shi, Yanfeng Xu, Yunlin Han, Xiang Li, Wei Dong, Lingjun Zhan, Chuan Qin

Abstract

Accumulating evidence suggests important functions for human Toll-like receptor 8 in vivo in tuberculosis and autoimmune diseases. However, these studies are limited by the lack of specific agonists and by the fact that the homology of TLR8 in human and mice is not sufficient to rely on mouse models. In this study, we examined the role of human TLR8 in the disease progression of experimental Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) infection, as well as the benefits provided by a TLR8 agonist against Mtb challenge in a human TLR8 transgenic mouse. We found that the expression of human TLR8 in C57BL/6 mice permits higher bacilli load in tissues. A vaccine formulated with ESAT-6, aluminum hydroxide, and TLR8 agonist provided protection against Mtb challenge, with a high percentage of CD44hiCD62Lhi TCM. Using ovalbumin as a model antigen, we demonstrated that the activation of TLR8 enhanced the innate and adaptive immune response, and provided a sustained TCM formation and Th1 type humoral response, which were mainly mediated by type I IFN signaling. Further research is required to optimize the vaccine formulation and seek optimal combinations of different TLR agonists, such as TLR4, for better adjuvanticity in this animal model.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 21 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 6 14%
Chemistry 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 22 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 March 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#22,585
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#325,959
of 450,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#501
of 650 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,340 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 650 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.