The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intrinsic Differences in the Proliferation of Naive and Memory Human B Cells as a Mechanism for Enhanced Secondary Immune Responses
Abstract
Humoral immune responses elicited after secondary exposure to immunizing Ag are characterized by robust and elevated reactivity of memory B cells that exceed those of naive B cells during the primary response. The mechanism underlying this difference in responsiveness of naive vs memory B cells remains unclear. We have quantitated the response of naive and memory human B cells after in vitro stimulation with T cell-derived stimuli. In response to stimulation with CD40 ligand alone or with IL-10, both IgM-expressing and Ig isotype-switched memory B cells entered their first division 20–30 h earlier than did naive B cells. In contrast, the time spent traversing subsequent divisions was similar. Consistent with previous studies, only memory cells differentiated to CD38+ blasts in a manner that increased with consecutive division number. These differentiated CD38+ B cells divided faster than did CD38− memory B cell blasts. Proliferation of CD40 ligand-stimulated naive B cells as well as both CD38+ and CD38− cells present in cultures of memory B cells was increased by IL-10. In contrast, IL-2 enhanced proliferation of CD38− and CD38+ memory B cell blasts, but not naive cells. Thus, memory B cells possess an intrinsic advantage over naive B cells in both the time to initiate a response and in the division-based rate of effector cell development. These differences help explain the accelerated Ab response exhibited by memory B cells after secondary challenge by an invading pathogen, a hallmark of immunological memory.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Immunological memory and protective immunity: understanding their relation
Ahmed, R., & Gray, D. (1996) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.272.5258.54 · Cited by 1,775 · cited 1×
“response after re-exposure to the original immunizing Ag (5), such”
BackgroundArrested differentiation, the self-renewing memory lymphocyte, and vaccination
Fearon, D. T., Manders, P., & Wagner, S. D. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1062589 · Cited by 265
Cited by
Sanz, I., Wei, C., Jenks, S. A., Cashman, K. S., Tipton, C., Woodruff, M. C., Hom, J., & Lee, F. E.-H. (2019) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2019.02458 · Cited by 569
Sasaki, S., Sullivan, M., Narvaez, C. F., Holmes, T. H., Furman, D., Zheng, N.-Y., Nishtala, M., Wrammert, J., Smith, K., James, J. A., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci57834 · Cited by 300
Targeting B cells and plasma cells in autoimmune diseases
Hofmann, K., Clauder, A.-K., & Manz, R. A. (2018) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.00835 · Cited by 294
Loss of memory B cells impairs maintenance of long-term serologic memory during HIV-1 infection
Titanji, K. (2006) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2005-11-013383 · Cited by 293
Memory B and memory plasma cells
Yoshida, T., Mei, H., Dörner, T., Hiepe, F., Radbruch, A., Fillatreau, S., & Hoyer, B. F. (2010) · Immunological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1600-065x.2010.00938.x · Cited by 289
Metadata
- Authors
- Tangye, S. G., Avery, D. T., Deenick, E. K., & Hodgkin, P. D.
- Venue
- The Journal of Immunology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 170
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 686-694
- ISSN
- 0022-1767 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-6606
- OpenAlex
- W1895800559
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Intrinsic Differences in the Proliferation of Naive and Memory Human B Cells as a Mechanism for Enhanced Secondary Immune Responses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4049/jimmunol.170.2.686
- The paper
- Tangye, S. G., Avery, D. T., Deenick, E. K., & Hodgkin, P. D. (2003). Intrinsic Differences in the Proliferation of Naive and Memory Human B Cells as a Mechanism for Enhanced Secondary Immune Responses. The Journal of Immunology. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.170.2.686
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.