ArticleVaccine2016
Extrapolating theoretical efficacy of inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccine from human immunogenicity studies.
Article in Vaccine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical phase II and III studies of an AS03-adjuvanted H5N1 influenza vaccine produced in an EB66Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2020Trial
- Estimating Standard-Dose and High-Dose Fluzone Vaccine Efficacies for Influenza A Based on Hemagglutination Inhibition Titers.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2025Article
- [Composition and mode of action of adjuvants in licensed viral vaccines].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2019Review
- Exploring the impact of inoculum dose on host immunity and morbidity to inform model-based vaccine design.PLoS computational biology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 has been a public health concern for almost 20years due to its potential ability to become transmissible among humans. Phase I and II clinical trials have assessed safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity of inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccines. A shortage of vaccine is likely to occur during the first months of a pandemic. Hence, determining whether to give one dose to more people or two doses to fewer people to best protect the population is essential. We use hemagglutination-inhibition antibody titers as an immune correlate for avian influenza vaccines. Using an established relationship to obtain a theoretical vaccine efficacy from immunogenicity data from thirteen arms of six phase I and phase II clinical trials of inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccines, we assessed: (1) the proportion of theoretical vaccine efficacy achieved after a single dose (defined as primary response level), and (2) whether theoretical efficacy increases after a second dose, with and without adjuvant. Participants receiving vaccine with AS03 adjuvant had higher primary response levels (range: 0.48-0.57) compared to participants receiving vaccine with MF59 adjuvant (range: 0.32-0.47), with no observed trends in primary response levels by antigen dosage. After the first and second doses, vaccine with AS03 at dosage levels 3.75, 7.5 and 15mcg had the highest estimated theoretical vaccine efficacy: Dose (1) 45% (95% CI: 36-57%), 53% (95% CI: 42-63%) and 55% (95% CI: 44-64%), respectively and Dose (2) 93% (95% CI: 89-96%), 97% (95% CI: 95-98%) and 97% (95% CI: 96-100%), respectively. On average, the estimated theoretical vaccine efficacy of lower dose adjuvanted vaccines (AS03 and MF59) was 17% higher than that of higher dose unadjuvanted vaccines, suggesting that including an adjuvant is dose-sparing. These data indicate adjuvanted inactivated influenza A/H5N1 virus vaccine produces high theoretical efficacy after two doses to protect individuals against a potential avian influenza pandemic.
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.