Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18345021›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Microbiology2008

Mucosal delivery of therapeutic and prophylactic molecules using lactic acid bacteria.

Jerry M Wells, Annick Mercenier

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Microbiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 240 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
240citing papers in PubMed
57.5field-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

240 citing papers in PubMed, 538 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Harnessing flagellin ofApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. A Nasal Vaccine Displaying Anthrax Antigen on the Surface ofJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

180 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jerry M WellsHost-Microbe Interactomics, University of Wageningen, Animal Sciences Department, P.O. BOX 338, 6700 AH, Wageningen, The Netherlands. jerry.wells@wur.nl
Annick Mercenier
Business School Lausanne · CHWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) as delivery vehicles have focused mainly on the development of mucosal vaccines, with much effort being devoted to the generation of genetic tools for antigen expression in different bacterial locations. Subsequently, interleukins have been co-expressed with antigens in LAB to enhance the immune response that is raised against the antigen. LAB have also been used as a delivery system for a range of molecules that have different applications, including anti-infectives, therapies for allergic diseases and therapies for gastrointestinal diseases. Now that the first human trial with a Lactococcus strain that expresses recombinant interleukin-10 has been completed, we discuss what we have learnt, what we do not yet understand and what the future holds for therapy and prophylaxis with LAB.

Indexed as

AnimalsDrug Delivery SystemsHumansImmunity, MucosalLactic AcidLactobacillusMiceMucous MembraneRecombinant ProteinsStreptococcaceaeVaccines, DNALactic AcidRecombinant ProteinsVaccines, DNA

Identifiers

PMID18345021
PMCPMC7096801
OpenAlexW2113645094

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.