ArticleVaccine2016
Preclinical dose-ranging studies of a novel dry powder norovirus vaccine formulation.
Article in Vaccine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in the Functionalization of Vaccine Delivery Systems: Innovative Strategies and Translational Perspectives.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Nano-adjuvanted dry powder vaccine for the mucosal immunization against airways pathogens.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Human Norovirus: Experimental Models of Infection.Viruses · 2019Review
- Intranasal immunization with aluminum salt-adjuvanted dry powder vaccine.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2018Article
- More robust gut immune responses induced by combining intranasal and sublingual routes for prime-boost immunization.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2018Article
- Intranasal immunization with dry powder vaccines.European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V · 2018Review
- Article
- Intranasal delivery of a bivalent norovirus vaccine formulated in an in situ gelling dry powder.PloS one · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Norovirus is the primary cause of viral gastroenteritis in humans with multiple genotypes currently circulating worldwide. The development of a successful norovirus vaccine is contingent on its ability to induce both systemic and mucosal antibody responses against a wide range of norovirus genotypes. Norovirus virus-like particles (VLPs) are known to elicit systemic and mucosal immune responses when delivered intranasally. Incorporation of these VLPs into an intranasal powder vaccine offers the advantage of simplicity and induction of neutralizing systemic and mucosal antibodies. Nasal immunization, which provides the advantage of ease of administration and a mucosal delivery mechanism, faces the real issue of limited nasal residence time due to mucociliary clearance. Herein, we describe a novel dry powder (GelVac™) formulation of GI or GII.4 norovirus VLPs, two dominant circulating genotypes, to identify the optimal antigen dosages based on systemic and mucosal immune responses in guinea pigs. Systemic and mucosal immunogenicity of each of the VLPs was observed in a dose-dependent manner. In addition, a boosting effect was observed after the second dosing of each VLP antigen. With the GelVac™ formulation, a total antigen dose of ≥ 15 μg was determined to be the maximally immunogenic dose for both GI and GII.4 norovirus VLPs based on evaluation for 56 days. Taken together, these results indicate that norovirus VLPs could be used as potential vaccine candidates without using an immunostimulatory adjuvant and provide a basis for the development of a GelVac™ bivalent GI/GII.4 norovirus VLP vaccine.
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.