Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25648619›Full record

ReviewClinical and experimental vaccine research2015

Polyionic vaccine adjuvants: another look at aluminum salts and polyelectrolytes.

Bradford S Powell, Alexander K Andrianov, Peter C Fusco

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and experimental vaccine research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. PolyoxidoniumFrontiers in immunology · 2019
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Polyphosphazene-Based Nanotherapeutics.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025
    Review
  9. ACS applied nano materials · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Picrasidine S Induces cGAS-Mediated Cellular Immune Response as a Novel Vaccine Adjuvant.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Safety and Efficacy of thePharmaceutics · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bradford S PowellPharmAthene, Inc., Annapolis, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5957-1890
Alexander K AndrianovInstitute for Bioscience and Biotechnology Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6186-6156
Peter C FuscoPharmAthene, Inc., Annapolis, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9366-4890
Maryland Department of Natural Resources · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adjuvants improve the adaptive immune response to a vaccine antigen by modulating innate immunity or facilitating transport and presentation. The selection of an appropriate adjuvant has become vital as new vaccines trend toward narrower composition, expanded application, and improved safety. Functionally, adjuvants act directly or indirectly on antigen presenting cells (APCs) including dendritic cells (DCs) and are perceived as having molecular patterns associated either with pathogen invasion or endogenous cell damage (known as pathogen associated molecular patterns [PAMPs] and damage associated molecular patterns [DAMPs]), thereby initiating sensing and response pathways. PAMP-type adjuvants are ligands for toll-like receptors (TLRs) and can directly affect DCs to alter the strength, potency, speed, duration, bias, breadth, and scope of adaptive immunity. DAMP-type adjuvants signal via proinflammatory pathways and promote immune cell infiltration, antigen presentation, and effector cell maturation. This class of adjuvants includes mineral salts, oil emulsions, nanoparticles, and polyelectrolytes and comprises colloids and molecular assemblies exhibiting complex, heterogeneous structures. Today innovation in adjuvant technology is driven by rapidly expanding knowledge in immunology, cross-fertilization from other areas including systems biology and materials sciences, and regulatory requirements for quality, safety, efficacy and understanding as part of the vaccine product. Standardizations will aid efforts to better define and compare the structure, function and safety of adjuvants. This article briefly surveys the genesis of adjuvant technology and then re-examines polyionic macromolecules and polyelectrolyte materials, adjuvants currently not known to employ TLR. Specific updates are provided for aluminum-based formulations and polyelectrolytes as examples of improvements to the oldest and emerging classes of vaccine adjuvants in use.

Indexed as

AlumAluminum hydroxideChitosanImmunologic adjuvantInnate immunityNalp3 proteinPattern recognition receptorsPolymersPolyoxidoniumPolyphosphazeneToll like receptors

Identifiers

PMID25648619
PMCPMC4313107
OpenAlexW2005173310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.