Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24519873›Full record

Observational studyClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2014

An outpatient, ambulant-design, controlled human infection model using escalating doses of Salmonella Typhi challenge delivered in sodium bicarbonate solution.

Claire S Waddington, Thomas C Darton, Claire Jones, Kathryn Haworth, Anna Peters, Tessa John, Ben A V Thompson, Simon A Kerridge, Robert A Kingsley, Liqing Zhou and 9 more

Open access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
26.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

101 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 152 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. IgA and IgG1 Specific to Vi Polysaccharide ofFrontiers in immunology · 2019
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. EnhancedInfection and immunity · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

41 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Claire S WaddingtonOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford.
Thomas C Darton
Claire Jones
Kathryn Haworth
Anna Peters
Tessa John
Ben A V Thompson
Simon A Kerridge
Robert A Kingsley
Liqing Zhou
Kathryn E Holt
Ly-Mee Yu
Stephen Lockhart
Jeremy J Farrar
Marcelo B Sztein
Gordon Dougan
Brian Angus
Myron M Levine
Andrew J Pollard
University of Oxford · GBUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · USWellcome Sanger Institute · GBEmergent BioSolutions (United Kingdom) · GBNational Institute for Health Research · GBUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

Wild-type S. typhi Infection in Humans: Integrated Immunoprotective MechanismsU19AI082655 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI SZTEIN, MARCELO B. · 2009 to 2018
$27.8M
IMMUNE MECHANISMS OF PROTECTION IN S TYPHI VACCINESR01AI036525 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI Marcelo B. Sztein · 1994 to 2026
$12.2M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI-036525NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI036525NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI-082655NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI082655Wellcome Trust 092661Wellcome Trust 100891
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTyphoid fever is a major global health problem, the control of which is hindered by lack of a suitable animal model in which to study Salmonella Typhi infection. Until 1974, a human challenge model advanced understanding of typhoid and was used in vaccine development. We set out to establish a new human challenge model and ascertain the S. Typhi (Quailes strain) inoculum required for an attack rate of 60%-75% in typhoid-naive volunteers when ingested with sodium bicarbonate solution.

methodsGroups of healthy consenting adults ingested escalating dose levels of S. Typhi and were closely monitored in an outpatient setting for 2 weeks. Antibiotic treatment was initiated if typhoid diagnosis occurred (temperature ≥38°C sustained ≥12 hours or bacteremia) or at day 14 in those remaining untreated.

resultsTwo dose levels (10(3) or 10(4) colony-forming units) were required to achieve the primary objective, resulting in attack rates of 55% (11/20) or 65% (13/20), respectively. Challenge was well tolerated; 4 of 40 participants fulfilled prespecified criteria for severe infection. Most diagnoses (87.5%) were confirmed by blood culture, and asymptomatic bacteremia and stool shedding of S. Typhi was also observed. Participants who developed typhoid infection demonstrated serological responses to flagellin and lipopolysaccharide antigens by day 14; however, no anti-Vi antibody responses were detected.

conclusionsHuman challenge with a small inoculum of virulent S. Typhi administered in bicarbonate solution can be performed safely using an ambulant-model design to advance understanding of host-pathogen interactions and immunity. This model should expedite development of diagnostics, vaccines, and therapeutics for typhoid control.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAmbulatory CareAntibodies, BacterialBacteremiaBacterial SheddingFemaleHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, ImmunologicalSalmonella typhiSodium BicarbonateTyphoid FeverTyphoid-Paratyphoid VaccinesAntibodies, BacterialSodium BicarbonateTyphoid-Paratyphoid Vaccinescontrolled human infectionenteric infectionhuman challenge studySalmonella Typhityphoid fever

Identifiers

PMID24519873
PMCPMC3982839
OpenAlexW2123106908

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.