ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2015
Factors influencing preclinical in vivo evaluation of mumps vaccine strain immunogenicity.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Better Standardization of Therapeutic Antibody Quality in Emerging Diseases Epidemics Possible?Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Evidence-Based Tracking of MDRAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- COVID-19 convalescent plasma as long-term therapy in immunodeficient patients?Transfusion clinique et biologique : journal de la Societe francaise de transfusion sanguine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immunogenicity testing in animals is a necessary preclinical assay for demonstration of vaccine efficacy the results of which are often the basis for the decision whether to proceed or withdraw the further development of the novel vaccine candidate. However, in vivo assays are rarely, if at all, optimized and validated. Here we clearly demonstrate the importance of in vivo assay (mumps virus immunogenicity testing in guinea pigs) optimization for gaining reliable results and the suitability of Fractional factorial design of experiments (DoE) for such a purpose. By the use of DoE with resolution IV (2IV((4-1))) we clearly revealed that the parameters significantly increasing assay sensitivity were interval between animal immunizations followed by the body weight of experimental animals. The quantity (0 versus 2%) of the stabilizer (fetal bovine serum, FBS) in the sample was shown as non-influencing parameter in DoE setup. However, the separate experiment investigating only the FBS influence, and performed under other parameters optimally set, showed that FBS also influences the results of immunogenicity assay. Such finding indicated that (a) factors with strong influence on the measured outcome can hide the effects of parameters with modest/low influence and (b) the matrix of mumps virus samples to be compared for immunogenicity must be identical for reliable virus immunogenicity comparison. Finally the 3 mumps vaccine strains widely used for decades in the licensed vaccines were for the first time compared in an animal model, and results obtained were in line with their reported immunogenicity in human population supporting the predictive power of the optimized in vivo assay.
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.