ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2014
Thermostable cross-protective subunit vaccine against Brucella species.
Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immune response and protective efficacy of an experimentally developed inactivated oil adjuvantJournal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Brucellosis Vaccines: A Comprehensive Review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A subunit vaccine candidate was produced from Brucella suis 145 (biovar 4; expressing both the A antigen of Brucella abortus and the M antigen of Brucella melitensis). The preparation consisted mostly of polysaccharide (PS; >90% [wt/wt]; both cell-associated PS and exo-PS were combined) and a small amount of protein (1 to 3%) with no apparent nucleic acids. Vaccinated mice were protected (these had a statistically significant reduction in bacterial colonization compared to that of unvaccinated controls) when challenged with representative strains of three Brucella species most pathogenic for humans, i.e., B. abortus, B. melitensis, and B. suis. As little as 1 ng of the vaccine, without added adjuvant, protected mice against B. suis 145 infection (5 × 10(5) CFU), and a single injection of 1 μg of this subunit vaccine protected mice from B. suis 145 challenge for at least 14 months. A single immunization induced a serum IgG response to Brucella antigens that remained elevated for up to 9 weeks. The use of heat (i.e., boiling-water bath, autoclaving) in the vaccine preparation showed that it was thermostable. This method also ensured safety and security. The vaccine produced was immunogenic and highly protective against multiple strains of Brucella and represents a promising candidate for further evaluation.
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.