Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26426060›Full record

ReviewVaccines2015

Micelle-Based Adjuvants for Subunit Vaccine Delivery.

Thomas Trimaille, Bernard Verrier

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccines, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Advanced biomedical research · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Enhancing vaccine effectiveness with delivery technology.Current opinion in biotechnology · 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

2 authors.

Thomas TrimailleAix-Marseille Université, CNRS, CR UMR 7273, 13397 Marseille, France. thomas.trimaille@univ-amu.fr.
Bernard VerrierUniversité Lyon 1, CNRS, LBTI UMR 5305, 69367 Lyon, France. bernard.verrier@ibcp.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the development of subunit vaccines with purified or recombinant antigens for cancer and infectious diseases, the design of improved and safe adjuvants able to efficiently target the antigen presenting cells, such as dendritic cells, represents a crucial challenge. Nanoparticle-based antigen delivery systems have been identified as an innovative strategy to improve the efficacy of subunit vaccines. Among them, self-assembled micellar nanoparticles from amphiphilic (macro)molecules have recently emerged as promising candidates. In this short review, we report on the recent research findings highlighting the versatility and potential of such systems in vaccine delivery.

Indexed as

amphiphilic copolymersantigensmicellespeptide amphiphiles

Identifiers

PMID26426060
PMCPMC4693219

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.