Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27155494›Full record

Trial reportVaccine2016

Evaluation of early immune response-survival relationship in cynomolgus macaques after Anthrax Vaccine Adsorbed vaccination and Bacillus anthracis spore challenge.

G S Sivko, G V Stark, K P Tordoff, K L Taylor, E Glaze, M VanRaden, J M Schiffer, J A Hewitt, C P Quinn, E O Nuzum

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Vaccine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Use of Anthrax Vaccine in the United States: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, 2019.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2019
    Guideline
  2. TheMicrobiology spectrum · 2019
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

G S SivkoBattelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH 43201, USA. Electronic address: sivkog@battelle.org.
G V StarkBattelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH 43201, USA.
K P TordoffBattelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH 43201, USA.
K L TaylorDivision of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD 20892-9825, USA.
E GlazeDivision of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD 20892-9825, USA.
M VanRadenDivision of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD 20892-9825, USA.
J M SchifferCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329-4027, USA.
J A HewittDivision of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD 20892-9825, USA.
C P QuinnCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329-4027, USA.
E O NuzumDivision of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD 20892-9825, USA.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases · USBattelle · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

NIAID NIH HHS HHSN272201200003I
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anthrax Vaccine Adsorbed (AVA, BioThrax) is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) of anthrax in adults. The PEP schedule is 3 subcutaneous (SC) doses (0, 14 and 28 days), in conjunction with a 60 day course of antimicrobials. The objectives of this study were to understand the onset of protection from AVA PEP vaccination and to assess the potential for shortening the duration of antimicrobial treatment (http://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/mcm/phemce/Documents/2014-phemce-sip.pdf). We determined the efficacy against inhalation anthrax in nonhuman primates (NHP) of the first two doses of the PEP schedule by infectious challenge at the time scheduled for receipt of the third PEP dose (Day 28). Forty-eight cynomolgus macaques were randomized to five groups and vaccinated with serial dilutions of AVA on Days 0 and 14. NHP were exposed to Bacillus anthracis Ames spores on Day 28 (target dose 200 LD

Indexed as

AnimalsAnthraxAnthrax VaccinesAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibodies, BacterialAntibodies, NeutralizingBacillus anthracisFemaleMacaca fascicularisMalePost-Exposure ProphylaxisRandom AllocationRespiratory Tract InfectionsSurvival AnalysisVaccinationAnthrax VaccinesAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibodies, BacterialAntibodies, NeutralizingAnthraxBacillus anthracisBioThraxCorrelates of protection

Identifiers

PMID27155494
PMCPMC5097032
OpenAlexW2346926481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.