ReviewCurrent opinion in HIV and AIDS2012
Profiling immunity to HIV vaccines with systems biology.
Review in Current opinion in HIV and AIDS, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimization of a whole blood phenotyping assay for enumeration of peripheral blood leukocyte populations in multicenter clinical trials.Journal of immunological methods · 2014Trial
- Antiviral innate immunity through the lens of systems biology.Virus research · 2016Review
- Review
- A systems biology approach to the effect of aging, immunosenescence and vaccine response.Current opinion in immunology · 2014Review
- Systems-level analysis of innate immunity.Annual review of immunology · 2014Review
- Using epigenetics to define vaccine-induced memory T cells.Current opinion in virology · 2013Review
- Systems immunogenetics of vaccines.Seminars in immunology · 2013Review
- Immune mechanisms in malaria: new insights in vaccine development.Nature medicine · 2013Review
- Merck Ad5/HIV induces broad innate immune activation that predicts CD8⁺ T-cell responses but is attenuated by preexisting Ad5 immunity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2012Article
- Vaccines: from empirical development to rational design.PLoS pathogens · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe recent modest success of the RV144 HIV vaccine trial in Thailand has shown that development of an HIV vaccine is possible. Designing a vaccine that achieves better protection, however, will require a more complete understanding of vaccine mechanisms of action and correlates of protection. Systems biology approaches enable integration of large datasets from a variety of assays and offer new approaches to understanding how vaccine-induced immune responses are coordinately regulated. In this review, we discuss the recent advances in clinical trial design, specimen collection, and assay standardization that will generate datasets for systems analyses of immune responses to HIV vaccines. RECENT
findingsSeveral recently published HIV vaccine trials have shown that different HIV vaccine prime/boost combinations can greatly affect the immune response generated, but mechanistic insights into their modes of action are lacking. Novel systems biology studies of efficacious, licensed vaccines provide a new template for analysis of HIV vaccines. To generate datasets appropriate for systems analysis, current HIV vaccine clinical trials are undergoing design modifications and increased standardization of specimen collection and immune response assays. SUMMARY: Systems biology approaches to HIV vaccine evaluation are driving new methods of HIV vaccine immune response profiling in clinical trials and will hopefully lead to new improved HIV vaccines in the near future.
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.