Sequence-Specific Sensing of Nucleic Acids
Open accessAbstract
Innate immune cells are endowed with many nucleic acid receptors, but the role of sequence in the detection of foreign organisms remains unclear. Can sequence patterns influence recognition? In addition, how can we infer those patterns from sequence data? Here, we detail recent computational and experimental evidence associated with sequence-specific sensing. We review the mechanisms underlying the detection and discrimination of foreign sequences from self. We also describe quantitative approaches used to infer the stimulatory capacity of a given pathogen nucleic acid species, and the influence of sequence-specific sensing on host-pathogen coevolution, including endogenous sequences of foreign origin. Finally, we speculate how further studies of sequence-specific sensing will be useful to improve vaccine design, gene therapy and cancer treatment.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Although GTCGTT has been proposed as an optimal human TLR9 activating sequence, other sequences of CpG ODN are also activating and questions remain regarding the potency of activation through sequence context, TLR secondary structure, and cell type.
“Although GTCGTT has been proposed as an optimal human TLR9 activating sequence, other sequences of CpG ODN are also activating and questions remain regarding the potency of activation through sequence context, TLR secondary structure, and cell type [96][97][98].”
From Risk mitigation of immunogenicity: a key to personalized retinal gene therapy (2021) · cites this paper as [98]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 95 · Cited by 45
- Authors
- Vabret, N., Bhardwaj, N., & Greenbaum, B. D.
- Affiliations
- Tisch Cancer Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Vabret, Nicolas
- Greenbaum, Benjamin D.
- Venue
- Trends in Immunology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-01
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 53-65
- ISSN
- 1471-4906 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5205569
- OpenAlex
- W2553460399
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 95
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5
- FWCI
- 0.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Trends in Immunology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (P01CA087497, R01CA180913, P30CA196521)
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01AI081848)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immune Response and Inflammation
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › interferon and immune responses
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
- Keywords
- innate immunity, pattern recognition receptors, host-pathogen coevolution, vaccine design, gene therapy, cancer immunotherapy
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Autoantigens, Base Sequence, Biological Evolution, Humans, Immunity, Innate, Nucleic Acids, Computational Biology, Receptors, Pattern Recognition, Host-Pathogen Interactions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
