ArticleVaccine2008
The relative immunogenicity of DNA vaccines delivered by the intramuscular needle injection, electroporation and gene gun methods.
Article in Vaccine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers.
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
66 citing papers in PubMed, 118 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Plasmid DNA Delivery into Mice by Intradermal Injections Alone and Facilitated by Sonoporation or Electroporation.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Novel enzymatic DNA produced from a text file achieves comparable immune responses as plasmid vaccine.NPJ vaccines · 2025Article
- Review
- Improved efficacy of therapeutic HPV DNA vaccine using intramuscular injection with electroporation compared to conventional needle and needle-free jet injector methods.Cell & bioscience · 2024Article
- Advancements and challenges in mRNA and ribonucleoprotein-based therapies: From delivery systems to clinical applications.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2024Review
- Enhancing Immune Responses against SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Aged Mice with INDUK: A Chimeric DNA Vaccine Encoding the Spike S1-TM Subunits.ACS omega · 2024Article
- Advancements in monkeypox vaccines development: a critical review of emerging technologies.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- The Integrated Consideration of Vaccine Platforms, Adjuvants, and Delivery Routes for Successful Vaccine Development.Vaccines · 2023Review
- Third-Generation Vaccines: Features of Nucleic Acid Vaccines and Strategies to Improve Their Efficiency.Genes · 2022Review
- Development of therapeutic antibodies for the treatment of diseases.Molecular biomedicine · 2022Review
- Current view on novel vaccine technologies to combat human infectious diseases.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Invasive and non-invasive electrodes for successful drug and gene delivery in electroporation-based treatments.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- DNA priming immunization is more effective than recombinant protein vaccine in eliciting antigen-specific B cell responses.Emerging microbes & infections · 2021Article
- Development of synthetic antigen vaccines for COVID-19.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Review
- A Needle-Free Jet Injection System for Controlled Release and Repeated Biopharmaceutical Delivery.Pharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Review
- Immunogenicity of Protein Pharmaceuticals.Journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2019Review
- Article
- Article
- Article
6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Immunogenicity of DNA vaccines varies significantly due to many factors including the inherent immunogenicity of the protein antigen encoded in the DNA vaccine, the optimal immune responses that can be achieved in different animal models and in humans with different genetic backgrounds and, to a great degree, the delivery methods used to administer the DNA vaccines. Based on published results, only the gene gun-mediated delivery approach has been able to elicit protective levels of immune responses in healthy, adult volunteers by DNA immunization alone without the use of another vaccine modality as a boost. Recent results from animal studies suggest that electroporation is also effective in eliciting high level immune responses. However, there have been no reports to identify the similarities and differences between these two leading physical delivery methods for DNA vaccines against infectious disease targets. In the current study, we compared the relative immunogenicity of a DNA vaccine expressing a hemagglutinin (HA) antigen from an H5N1 influenza virus in two animal models (rabbit and mouse) when delivered by either intramuscular needle immunization (IM), gene gun (GG) or electroporation (EP). HA-specific antibody, T cell and B cell responses were analyzed. Our results indicate that, overall, both the GG and EP methods are more immunogenic than the IM method. However, EP and IM stimulated a Th-1 type antibody response and the antibody response to GG was Th-2 dominated. These findings provide important information for the further selection and optimization of DNA vaccine delivery methods for human applications.
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.