Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26410807›Full record

ReviewJournal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society2015

Respiratory nanoparticle-based vaccines and challenges associated with animal models and translation.

Gourapura J Renukaradhya, Balaji Narasimhan, Surya K Mallapragada

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Mucosal vaccine delivery: Current state and a pediatric perspective.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2016
    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.

Gourapura J RenukaradhyaFood Animal Health Research Program, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, The Ohio State University, Wooster, OH 44691, United States.
Balaji NarasimhanDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, United States.
Surya K MallapragadaDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, United States. Electronic address: suryakm@iastate.edu.
Iowa State University · USThe Ohio State University · US

Funding

Enhanced Shelf-life Nanovaccine Formulation for Immunity to Biodefense PathogensR01AI111466 · NIAID · IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI NARASIMHAN, BALAJI · 2014 to 2017
$1.4M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI111466NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI111466-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccine development has had a huge impact on human health. However, there is a significant need to develop efficacious vaccines for several existing as well as emerging respiratory infectious diseases. Several challenges need to be overcome to develop efficacious vaccines with translational potential. This review focuses on two aspects to overcome some barriers - 1) the development of nanoparticle-based vaccines, and 2) the choice of suitable animal models for respiratory infectious diseases that will allow for translation. Nanoparticle-based vaccines, including subunit vaccines involving synthetic and/or natural polymeric adjuvants and carriers, as well as those based on virus-like particles offer several key advantages to help overcome the barriers to effective vaccine development. These include the ability to deliver combinations of antigens, target the vaccine formulation to specific immune cells, enable cross-protection against divergent strains, act as adjuvants or immunomodulators, allow for sustained release of antigen, enable single dose delivery, and potentially obviate the cold chain. While mouse models have provided several important insights into the mechanisms of infectious diseases, they are often a limiting step in translation of new vaccines to the clinic. An overview of different animal models involved in vaccine research for respiratory infections, with advantages and disadvantages of each model, is discussed. Taken together, advances in nanotechnology, combined with the right animal models for evaluating vaccine efficacy, has the potential to revolutionize vaccine development for respiratory infections.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAdministration, InhalationAnimalsDrug Delivery SystemsHumansNanoparticlesRespiratory Tract DiseasesTranslational Research, BiomedicalVaccinesVaccinesAnimal modelsNanovaccinesTranslationVaccine efficacy

Identifiers

PMID26410807
PMCPMC4760633
OpenAlexW1683736150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.