Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26086590›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Microneedle Vaccination Elicits Superior Protection and Antibody Response over Intranasal Vaccination against Swine-Origin Influenza A (H1N1) in Mice.

Ju-Hyung Shin, Jae-Keun Park, Dong-Hun Lee, Fu-Shi Quan, Chang-Seon Song, Yeu-Chun Kim

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Progress in microneedle array patch (MAP) for vaccine delivery.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The success of microneedle-mediated vaccine delivery into skin.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2016
    Review
  9. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ju-Hyung ShinDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Jae-Keun ParkAvian Disease Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, Konkuk University, Hwayang-dong, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 143-701, Republic of Korea.
Dong-Hun LeeAvian Disease Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, Konkuk University, Hwayang-dong, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 143-701, Republic of Korea.
Fu-Shi QuanDepartment of Medical Zoology, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Chang-Seon SongAvian Disease Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, Konkuk University, Hwayang-dong, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 143-701, Republic of Korea.
Yeu-Chun KimDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Konkuk University · KRKorea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology · KRKyung Hee University Medical Center · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Influenza is one of the critical infectious diseases globally and vaccination has been considered as the best way to prevent. In this study, immunogenicity and protection efficacy between intranasal (IN) and microneedle (MN) vaccination was compared using inactivated swine-origin influenza A/H1N1 virus vaccine. Mice were vaccinated by MN or IN administration with 1 μg of inactivated H1N1 virus vaccine. Antigen-specific antibody responses and hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) titers were measured in all immunized sera after immunization. Five weeks after an immunization, a lethal challenge was performed to evaluate the protective efficacy. Furthermore, mice were vaccinated by IN administration with higher dosages (> 1 μg), analyzed in the same manner, and compared with 1 μg-vaccine-coated MN. Significantly higher antigen-specific antibody responses and HI titer were measured in sera in MN group than those in IN group. While 100% protection, slight weight loss, and reduced viral replication were observed in MN group, 0% survival rate were observed in IN group. As vaccine dose for IN vaccination increased, MN-immunized sera showed much higher antigen-specific antibody responses and HI titer than other IN groups. In addition, protective immunity of 1 μg-MN group was similar to those of 20- and 40 μg-IN groups. We conclude that MN vaccination showed more potential immune response and protection than IN vaccination at the same vaccine dosage.

Indexed as

Administration, IntranasalAnimalsAntibodies, ViralAntibody FormationDisease Models, AnimalDose-Response Relationship, ImmunologicEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHemagglutination Inhibition TestsImmunoglobulin GInfluenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeInfluenza VaccinesMiceOrthomyxoviridae InfectionsSurvival RateSwineVaccines, InactivatedAntibodies, ViralImmunoglobulin GInfluenza VaccinesVaccines, Inactivated

Identifiers

PMID26086590
PMCPMC4472750
OpenAlexW746503909

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.