ArticlePreventive medicine reports2016
Dynamics of naturally acquired antibody against Haemophilus influenzae type a capsular polysaccharide in a Canadian Aboriginal population.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Delay in booster schedule as a control parameter in vaccination dynamics.Journal of mathematical biology · 2019Article
- Modelling the effects of booster dose vaccination schedules and recommendations for public health immunization programs: the case of Haemophilus influenzae serotype b.BMC public health · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe infections caused by Haemophilus influenzae type a (Hia) have reached alarming rates in some Canadian Aboriginal communities. We sought to estimate the frequency of exposure to this pathogen and timelines for boosting protective antibodies. We developed a model of secondary antigenic challenge (natural exposure), and used data for anti-Hia antibodies in serum samples of healthy and immunocompromised adults in a population of Northwestern Ontario, Canada. We parameterized the model with available estimates from previous studies for the decay rate of antibody and its protective levels against both Hia carriage and invasive disease. Simulations were initialized using antibody concentrations from data. We investigated both the duration of immunity without secondary antigenic challenge and the average time between subsequent exposures to Hia. When there was no new natural exposure, serum antibody concentrations in healthy Aboriginal individuals decreased below the level (1 μg/ml) assumed for protection against invasive Hia disease 3 years after primary exposure. This period was shorter (about 2 years) for Aboriginal individuals suffering from chronic renal failure. We estimated that a new antigenic challenge occurs once in 5 and 2 years for healthy and immunocompromised Aboriginal individuals, respectively. More frequent natural exposure was required to maintain protective antibody levels for non-Aboriginal individuals compared to Aboriginal individuals. The findings suggest that frequent boosting of natural immunity is required to maintain the anti-Hia antibody levels protecting against invasive Hia disease, particularly in individuals with underlying medical conditions. This information has important implications for immunization when an anti-Hia vaccine becomes available.
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.