Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20047040›Full record

ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2009

Virus-like particles as a vaccine delivery system: myths and facts.

Polly Roy, Rob Noad

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Systems biology from virus to humans.Journal of analytical science and technology
    Review
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.

Polly RoyDepartment of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St., London, WC1E 7HT, UK. polly.roy@lshtm.ac.uk
Rob Noad

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccines against viral disease have traditionally relied on attenuated virus strains or inactivation of infectious virus. Subunit vaccines based on viral proteins expressed in heterologous systems have been effective for some pathogens, but have often suffered from poor immunogenicity due to incorrect protein folding or modification. In this chapter we focus on a specific class of viral subunit vaccine that mimics the overall structure of virus particles and thus preserves the native antigenic conformation of the immunogenic proteins. These virus-like particles (VLPs) have been produced for a wide range of taxonomically and structurally distinct viruses, and have unique advantages in terms of safety and immunogenicity over previous approaches. With new VLP vaccines for papillomavirus beginning to reach the market place we argue that this technology has now 'come-of-age' and must be considered a viable vaccine strategy.

Indexed as

Drug Delivery SystemsAnimalsAntigensGene Transfer TechniquesHumansImmune SystemInsectaLipidsVaccinesViral VaccinesVirionVirus DiseasesVirusesAntigensLipidsVaccinesViral Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID20047040
PMCPMC7124136

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.