Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18325628›Full record

ReviewAdvanced drug delivery reviews2008

Nanotechnology in vaccine delivery.

Laura J Peek, C Russell Middaugh, Cory Berkland

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced drug delivery reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 170 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
170citing papers in PubMed
13.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

170 citing papers in PubMed, 554 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Synthetic Polymers for Drug, Gene, and Vaccine Delivery.Polymer science & technology (Washington, D.C.) · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Additive manufacturing in nano drug delivery systems.Pharmaceutical science advances · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

110 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laura J PeekDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66047 USA.
C Russell Middaugh
Cory Berkland
University of Kansas · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With very few adjuvants currently being used in marketed human vaccines, a critical need exists for novel immunopotentiators and delivery vehicles capable of eliciting humoral, cellular and mucosal immunity. Such crucial vaccine components could facilitate the development of novel vaccines for viral and parasitic infections, such as hepatitis, HIV, malaria, cancer, etc. In this review, we discuss clinical trial results for various vaccine adjuvants and delivery vehicles being developed that are approximately nanoscale (<1000 nm) in size. Humoral immune responses have been observed for most adjuvants and delivery platforms while only viral vectors, ISCOMs and Montanide ISA 51 and 720 have shown cytotoxic T cell responses in the clinic. MF59 and MPL have elicited Th1 responses, and virus-like particles, non-degradable nanoparticles and liposomes have also generated cellular immunity. Such vaccine components have also been evaluated for alternative routes of administration with clinical successes reported for intranasal delivery of viral vectors and proteosomes and oral delivery of a VLP vaccine.

Indexed as

NanoparticlesNanotechnologyAdjuvants, ImmunologicClinical Trials as TopicHumansImmunizationVaccinesAdjuvants, ImmunologicVaccines

Identifiers

PMID18325628
PMCPMC7103321
OpenAlexW2001863331

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.