Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21918118›Full record

ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2011

DNA vaccination elicits protective immune responses against pandemic and classic swine influenza viruses in pigs.

J Patrick Gorres, Kelly M Lager, Wing-Pui Kong, Michael Royals, John-Paul Todd, Amy L Vincent, Chih-Jen Wei, Crystal L Loving, Eraldo L Zanella, Bruce Janke and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Swine influenza A virus: challenges and novel vaccine strategies.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Pigs lackingFrontiers in genome editing · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Protective effect of a polyvalent influenza DNA vaccine in pigs.Veterinary immunology and immunopathology · 2018
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Microneedles: an innovative platform for gene delivery.Drug delivery and translational research · 2015
    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

13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

J Patrick GorresLaboratory Animal Medicine, Vaccine Research Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.
Kelly M Lager
Wing-Pui Kong
Michael Royals
John-Paul Todd
Amy L Vincent
Chih-Jen Wei
Crystal L Loving
Eraldo L Zanella
Bruce Janke
Marcus E Kehrli
Gary J Nabel
Srinivas S Rao
National Institutes of Health · USAgricultural Research Service · USNational Animal Disease Center · USIowa State University · USPharmaJet (United States) · USUniversidade de Passo Fundo · BR

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Swine influenza is a highly contagious viral infection in pigs that significantly impacts the pork industry due to weight loss and secondary infections. There is also the potential of a significant threat to public health, as was seen in 2009 when the pandemic H1N1 influenza virus strain emerged from reassortment events among avian, swine, and human influenza viruses within pigs. As classic and pandemic H1N1 strains now circulate in swine, an effective vaccine may be the best strategy to protect the pork industry and public health. Current inactivated-virus vaccines available for swine influenza protect only against viral strains closely related to the vaccine strain, and egg-based production of these vaccines is insufficient to respond to large outbreaks. DNA vaccines are a promising alternative since they can potentially induce broad-based protection with more efficient production methods. In this study we evaluated the potentials of monovalent and trivalent DNA vaccine constructs to (i) elicit both humoral and gamma interferon (IFN-γ) responses and (ii) protect pigs against viral shedding and lung disease after challenge with pandemic H1N1 or classic swine H1N1 influenza virus. We also compared the efficiency of a needle-free vaccine delivery method to that of a conventional needle/syringe injection. We report that DNA vaccination elicits robust serum antibody and cellular responses after three immunizations and confers significant protection against influenza virus challenge. Needle-free delivery elicited improved antibody responses with the same efficiency as conventional injection and should be considered for development as a practical alternative for vaccine administration.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralHemagglutination Inhibition TestsInfluenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeInfluenza VaccinesInterferon-gammaLeukocytes, MononuclearLungOrthomyxoviridae InfectionsSwineSwine DiseasesVaccinationVaccines, DNAViral LoadVirus SheddingAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralInfluenza VaccinesInterferon-gammaVaccines, DNA

Identifiers

PMID21918118
PMCPMC3209026
OpenAlexW2028348667

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.