Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21347616›Full record

ReviewThe AAPS journal2011

A rational, systematic approach for the development of vaccine formulations.

Garry L Morefield

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The AAPS journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

1 author.

Garry L MorefieldVaxForm LLC, Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania 18002, USA. garry.morefield@vaxform.com

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the continuous emergence of new infectious diseases and new strains of current diseases, such as the novel H1N1 influenza in 2009, in combination with expanding competition in the vaccine marketplace, the pressure to develop vaccine formulations right the first time is increasing. As vaccines are complex, costly, and have high risk associated with their development, it is necessary to maximize the potential for development of a successful formulation quickly. To accomplish this goal, the historical empirical approach to formulation development needs to be updated with a rational, systematic approach allowing for more rapid development of safe, efficacious, and stable vaccine formulations. The main components to this approach are biophysical characterization of the antigen, evaluation of stabilizers, investigation of antigen interactions with adjuvants, evaluation of product contact materials, and monitoring stability both in real time and under accelerated conditions. An overview of investigations performed for each of these components of formulation development is discussed. The information gained in these studies is valuable in forming the base of knowledge for the design of a robust formulation. With the use of continually advancing technology in combination with maintaining a rational, systematic approach to formulation development, there is a great increase in the probability of successfully developing a safe, effective, and stable vaccine formulation.

Indexed as

Drug DesignAdjuvants, ImmunologicAnimalsAntigensDrug StabilityExcipientsHumansTechnology, PharmaceuticalTime FactorsVaccinesAdjuvants, ImmunologicAntigensExcipientsVaccines

Identifiers

PMID21347616
PMCPMC3085699

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.