Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25962136›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Formulation, high throughput in vitro screening and in vivo functional characterization of nanoemulsion-based intranasal vaccine adjuvants.

Pamela T Wong, Pascale R Leroueil, Douglas M Smith, Susan Ciotti, Anna U Bielinska, Katarzyna W Janczak, Catherine H Mullen, Jeffrey V Groom, Erin M Taylor, Crystal Passmore and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Pamela T WongMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Pascale R LeroueilMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Douglas M SmithMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Susan CiottiNanoBio Corporation, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Anna U BielinskaMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Katarzyna W JanczakMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Catherine H MullenMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Jeffrey V GroomMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Erin M TaylorMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Crystal PassmoreMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Paul E MakidonMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Jessica J O'KonekMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Andrzej MycMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Tarek HamoudaNanoBio Corporation, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
James R BakerMichigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USMichigan United · USNanoBio (United States) · US

Funding

NIAID NIH HHS HHSN272200900031C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccine adjuvants have been reported to induce both mucosal and systemic immunity when applied to mucosal surfaces and this dual response appears important for protection against certain pathogens. Despite the potential advantages, however, no mucosal adjuvants are currently approved for human use. Evaluating compounds as mucosal adjuvants is a slow and costly process due to the need for lengthy animal immunogenicity studies. We have constructed a library of 112 intranasal adjuvant candidate formulations consisting of oil-in-water nanoemulsions that contain various cationic and nonionic surfactants. To facilitate adjuvant development we first evaluated this library in a series of high-throughput, in vitro assays for activities associated with innate and adaptive immune activation in vivo. These in vitro assays screened for the ability of the adjuvant to bind to mucin, induce cytotoxicity, facilitate antigen uptake in epithelial and dendritic cells, and activate cellular pathways. We then sought to determine how these parameters related to adjuvant activity in vivo. While the in vitro assays alone were not enough to predict the in vivo adjuvant activity completely, several interesting relationships were found with immune responses in mice. Furthermore, by varying the physicochemical properties of the surfactant components (charge, surfactant polar head size and hydrophobicity) and the surfactant blend ratio of the formulations, the strength and type of the immune response generated (TH1, TH2, TH17) could be modulated. These findings suggest the possibility of using high-throughput screens to aid in the design of custom adjuvants with unique immunological profiles to match specific mucosal vaccine applications.

Indexed as

Adjuvants, ImmunologicAdministration, IntranasalAnimalsCell LineChemistry, PharmaceuticalCytokinesEmulsionsEpithelial CellsFemaleHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysImmunity, CellularImmunity, HumoralMacrophagesMiceNanotechnologyNF-kappa BAdjuvants, ImmunologicCytokinesEmulsionsNF-kappa BVaccines

Identifiers

PMID25962136
PMCPMC4427474
OpenAlexW817026271

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.