Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22832261›Full record

Trial reportHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2012

Phase 4 randomized trial of intradermal low-antigen-content inactivated influenza vaccine versus standard-dose intramuscular vaccine in HIV-1-infected adults.

Filippo Ansaldi, Laura Valle, Daniela de Florentiis, Valentina Parodi, Giuseppe Murdaca, Bianca Bruzzone, Paolo Durando, Maurizio Setti, Giancarlo Icardi

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IVComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Skin immunization with influenza vaccines.Current topics in microbiology and immunology · 2015
    Review
  10. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Filippo AnsaldiI.R.C.C.S. "A.O.U. San Martino-IST"; Genoa, Italy. filippo.ansaldi@unige.it
Laura Valle
Daniela de Florentiis
Valentina Parodi
Giuseppe Murdaca
Bianca Bruzzone
Paolo Durando
Maurizio Setti
Giancarlo Icardi
University of Genoa · ITOspedale Policlinico San Martino · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluated safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of intradermal (ID) trivalent inactivated split influenza vaccine, with a lower antigen content (9 mcg HA per strain) than the conventional intramuscular one (15 mcg), in HIV-1-infected adults younger than 60 years. A total of 54 HIV-1-positive participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive a single dose of either ID-administered low-antigen-content split inactivated vaccine or intramuscularly-administered (IM) standard-dose inactivated split vaccine. Subjects were provided with a diary to monitor any local and/or systemic reactions to the vaccine for 7 days following vaccination. Serum samples were collected before, 28 days and 90 days after immunization. The plasma HIV-RNA and CD4+ T-lymphocyte count were checked at day 0 and day 90. Serum hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) activity for the three influenza strains included in the vaccine composition was measured to assess the antibody response at one month and 3 months after vaccination. Both vaccines showed optimal safety and tolerability profiles. All the three Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use immunogenicity criteria for vaccine approval in adults younger than 60 were met by both vaccines against A(H1N1) and A(H3N2) viruses. Both vaccines met mean-fold-increase and seroprotection criteria but failed seroconversion criteria against B virus. No difference in terms of post-vaccination geometric mean titers, mean fold increase, seroprotection and seroconversion rates were found comparing ID and IM vaccines. In conclusion, the recently available low-antigen-content ID vaccine is safe, well-tolerated and as immunogenic as IM standard-dose influenza vaccine.

Indexed as

AdultAntibodies, ViralAntigens, ViralCD4 Lymphocyte CountDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHemagglutination Inhibition TestsHIV InfectionsHumansInfluenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeInfluenza A Virus, H2N2 SubtypeInfluenza B virusInfluenza VaccinesInjections, IntradermalInjections, IntramuscularMaleAntibodies, ViralAntigens, ViralInfluenza VaccinesRNA, ViralVaccines, Inactivated

Identifiers

PMID22832261
PMCPMC3551875
OpenAlexW1990267419

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.