ReviewSpringer seminars in immunopathology2006
Building collaborative networks for HIV/AIDS vaccine development: the AVIP experience.
Review in Springer seminars in immunopathology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rationale and methods for site selection for a trial using a novel intervention to treat stimulant abuse.Contemporary clinical trials · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need for an effective HIV/AIDS vaccine is imperative to halt a pandemic that involves more than 40 million individuals worldwide as of 2005 and is causing enormous socio-economic losses, especially in developing countries (DC). The overall failure of more than two decades of HIV vaccine research justifies the demands for a concerted effort for the rapid development of new and efficacious vaccines against HIV/AIDS. In this context, building international collaborative networks is a must for speeding up scientific research and optimizing the use of funding in a synergistic fashion, as resources for HIV/AIDS are limited and do not involve most of the biggest Pharmas that are more interested in drug discovery. The AIDS Vaccine Integrated Project (AVIP) consortium is an example of synergistic partnership of international European Union and DC experts with a common research goal. AVIP is a European Commission-funded (FP-6), consortium-based, 5-year program directed to the fast development of new HIV/AIDS vaccine candidates to be tested in phase I clinical trials in Europe for future advancement to phase II/III testing in DC. To ensure their rapid development, AVIP novel combined vaccines include both regulatory and structural HIV antigens, which have already been tested, as single components, in phase I clinical trials. In particular, such combination vaccines may be superior to earlier vaccine candidates, the vast majority of which are based only on either structural or regulatory HIV products. In fact, the generation of immune responses to both types of viral antigens expressed either early (regulatory products) or late (structural products) during the viral life cycle can maximize immune targeting of both primary or chronic viral infection. Further, the rational design of combined vaccines allows exploitation of immunomodulatory functions of HIV regulatory proteins, which can improve immunity against structural vaccine components. The building of the AVIP consortium and its scientific strategy will be reviewed in this paper as an example of the establishment of a consortium regulated by a specific intellectual property agreement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.