Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18251694›Full record

ReviewExpert review of vaccines2008

Analysis of epitope information related to Bacillus anthracis and Clostridium botulinum.

Laura M Zarebski, Kerrie Vaughan, John Sidney, Bjoern Peters, Howard Grey, Kim D Janda, Arturo Casadevall, Alessandro Sette

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Expert review of vaccines, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

8 authors.

Laura M ZarebskiImmune Epitope Database and Analysis Resource, La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology, 9420 Athena Circle, La Jolla, CA 9203,7 USA. laura@liai.org
Kerrie Vaughan
John Sidney
Bjoern Peters
Howard Grey
Kim D Janda
Arturo Casadevall
Alessandro Sette

Funding

Viral Pathogenesis and TherapeuticsU54AI057158 · NIAID · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI LIPKIN, W. IAN · 2003 to 2014
$100.8M
NIAID NIH HHS 5U54AI057158-05NIAID NIH HHS HHSH266200400006CNIAID NIH HHS U54 AI057158PHS HHS HHSN26620040006C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We have reviewed the information about epitopes of immunological interest from Clostridium botulinum and Bacillus anthracis, by mining the Immune Epitope Database and Analysis Resource. For both pathogens, the vast majority of epitopes reported to date are derived from a single protein: the protective antigen of B. anthracis and the neurotoxin type A of C. botulinum. A detailed analysis of the data was performed to characterize the function, localization and conservancy of epitopes identified as neutralizing and/or protective. In order to broaden the scope of this analysis, we have also included data describing immune responses against defined fragments (over 50 amino acids long) of the relevant antigens. The scarce information on T-cell determinants and on epitopes from other antigens besides the toxins, highlights a gap in our knowledge and identifies areas for future research. Despite this, several distinct structures at the epitope and fragment level are described herein, which could be potential additions to future vaccines or targets of novel immunotherapeutics and diagnostic reagents.

Indexed as

Antigens, BacterialBacillus anthracisClostridium botulinumEpitopesNeutralization TestsAntigens, BacterialEpitopes

Identifiers

PMID18251694
PMCPMC3319117

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.