Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17473845›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2007

More than one reason to rethink the use of peptides in vaccine design.

Anthony W Purcell, James McCluskey, Jamie Rossjohn

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 365 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
365citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

365 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Computational design of HLA class I superbinders for broad T cell immunogenicity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

305 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Anthony W PurcellThe Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia.
James McCluskey
Jamie Rossjohn

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of peptides as therapeutics is experiencing renewed enthusiasm owing to advances in delivery, stability and design. Moreover, there is a growing emphasis on the use of peptides in vaccine design as insights into tissue-specific processing of the immunogenic epitopes of proteins and the discovery of unusually long cytotoxic T-lymphocyte epitopes broaden the range of targets and give clues to enhancing peptide immunogenicity. Peptides can also be synthesized with known post-translational modifications and/or deliberately introduced protease-resistant peptide bonds to regulate their processing independent of tissue-specific proteolysis and to stabilize these compounds in vivo. We discuss the potential of peptide-based vaccines for the treatment of chronic viral diseases and cancer, and review recent developments in the field of peptide-based vaccines.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibody SpecificityDrug DesignHumansProtein EngineeringT-LymphocytesVaccines, SubunitVaccines, SyntheticVaccines, SubunitVaccines, Synthetic

Identifiers

PMID17473845

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.