Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15497674›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutical research2004

Novel approaches to vaccine delivery.

Derek T O'Hagan, Rino Rappuoli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutical research, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. RBD decorated PLA nanoparticle admixture with aluminum hydroxide elicit robust and long lasting immune response against SARS-CoV-2.European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Non-invasive administration of biodegradable nano-carrier vaccines.American journal of translational research · 2017
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Immunologic treatments for precancerous lesions and uterine cervical cancer.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2014
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Derek T O'HaganChiron Vaccines, Emeryville, California 94608, USA. Derek_O'Hagan@chiron.com
Rino Rappuoli

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the currently available vaccines represent an outstanding success story in modern medicine and have had a dramatic effect on morbidity and mortality worldwide, it is clear that improvements are required in the current vaccine delivery technologies. Improvements are required to enable the successful development of vaccines against infectious diseases that have so far proven difficult to control with conventional approaches. Improvements may include the addition of novel injectable adjuvants or the use of novel routes of delivery, including mucosal immunization. Mucosal delivery may be required to provide protection against pathogens that infect at mucosal sites, including sexually transmitted diseases. Alternatively, novel approaches to delivery, including mucosal administration, may be used to improve compliance for existing vaccines. Of particular interest for safer mass immunization campaigns are needle-free delivery devices, which would avoid problems due to needle re-use in many parts of the world and would avoid needle-stick injuries.

Indexed as

Adjuvants, ImmunologicAdministration, TopicalAnimalsDrug Delivery SystemsHumansInjections, JetVaccinesAdjuvants, ImmunologicVaccines

Identifiers

PMID15497674
PMCPMC7088827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.