Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21640778›Full record

ArticleVaccine2011

Intranasal delivery of Norwalk virus-like particles formulated in an in situ gelling, dry powder vaccine.

Lissette S Velasquez, Samantha Shira, Alice N Berta, Jacquelyn Kilbourne, Babu M Medi, Ian Tizard, Yawei Ni, Charles J Arntzen, Melissa M Herbst-Kralovetz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Main Aspects of Pharmaceutical Development ofCurrent pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Prospects for RNAi Therapy of COVID-19.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Intranasal immunization with aluminum salt-adjuvanted dry powder vaccine.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2018
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Intranasal immunization with dry powder vaccines.European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V · 2018
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lissette S VelasquezCenter for Infectious Diseases and Vaccinology, The Biodesign Institute, Arizona State University, PO Box 875001, Tempe, AZ 85287-5001, USA.
Samantha Shira
Alice N Berta
Jacquelyn Kilbourne
Babu M Medi
Ian Tizard
Yawei Ni
Charles J Arntzen
Melissa M Herbst-Kralovetz
Arizona State University · USTexas A&M University · USUniversity of Arizona · US

Funding

Production CoreU19AI062150 · NIAID · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI ARNTZEN, CHARLES JOEL · 2004 to 2008
$7.2M
NIAID NIH HHS 1 U19 AI062150-01NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI062150
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of a vaccine to prevent norovirus infections has been focused on immunization at a mucosal surface, but has been limited by the low immunogenicity of self-assembling Norwalk virus-like particles (NV VLPs) delivered enterically or at nasal surfaces. Nasal immunization, which offers the advantage of ease of immunization, faces obstacles imposed by the normal process of mucociliary clearance, which limits residence time of applied antigens. Herein, we describe the use of a dry powder formulation (GelVac) of an inert in situ gelling polysaccharide (GelSite) extracted from Aloe vera for nasal delivery of NV VLP antigen. Powder formulations, with or without NV VLP antigen, were similar in structure in dry form or when rehydrated in simulated nasal fluids. Immunogenicity of the dry powder VLP formulation was compared to equivalent antigen/adjuvant liquid formulations in animals. For the GelVac powder, we observed superior NV-specific serum and mucosal (aerodigestive and reproductive tracts) antibody responses relative to liquid formulations. Incorporation of the TLR7 agonist gardiquimod in dry powder formulations did not enhance antibody responses, although its inclusion in liquid formulations did enhance VLP immunogenicity irrespective of the presence or absence of GelSite. We interpret these data as showing that GelSite-based dry powder formulations (1) stabilize the immunogenic structural properties of VLPs and (2) induce systemic and mucosal antibody titers which are equal or greater than those achieved by VLPs plus adjuvant in a liquid formulation. We conclude that in situ gelation of the GelVac dry powder formulation at nasal mucosal surfaces delays mucociliary clearance and thereby prolongs VLP antigen exposure to immune effector sites.

Indexed as

Adjuvants, ImmunologicAdministration, IntranasalAnimalsAntibodies, ViralAntibody FormationCaliciviridae InfectionsCell LineFemaleGuinea PigsHumansMiceMicroscopy, ElectronMucous MembraneNorovirusPolysaccharidesPowdersAdjuvants, ImmunologicAntibodies, ViralPolysaccharidesPowdersVaccines, Virus-Like Particle

Identifiers

PMID21640778
PMCPMC3138837
OpenAlexW2072451494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.