Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27558619›Full record

ArticleVaccine2016

Cross-species prediction of human survival probabilities for accelerated anthrax vaccine absorbed (AVA) regimens and the potential for vaccine and antibiotic dose sparing.

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

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

8 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. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

G V StarkBattelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH 43201, USA. Electronic address: starkg@battelle.org.
G S SivkoBattelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH 43201, USA.
M VanRadenDivision of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD 20892-9825, USA.
J SchifferCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329-4027, USA.
K L TaylorDivision of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Bethesda, MD 20892-9825, 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) was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) indication in adults 18-65years of age. The schedule is three doses administered subcutaneous (SC) at 2-week intervals (0, 2, and 4weeks), in conjunction with a 60-day course of antimicrobials. The Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise (PHEMCE) developed an animal model to support assessment of a shortened antimicrobial PEP duration following Bacillus anthracis exposure. A nonhuman primate (NHP) study was completed to evaluate the efficacy of a two dose anthrax vaccine absorbed (AVA) schedule (0, 2weeks) aerosol challenged with high levels of B. anthracis spores at week4- the time point at which humans would receive the third vaccination of the approved PEP schedule. Here we use logistic regression models to combine the survival data from the NHP study along with serum anthrax lethal toxin neutralizing activity (TNA) and anti-PA IgG measured by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) data to perform a cross-species analysis to estimate survival probabilities in vaccinated human populations at this time interval (week4 of the PEP schedule). The bridging analysis demonstrated that high levels of NHP protection also yield high predicted probability of human survival just 2weeks after the second dose of vaccine with the full or half antigen dose regimen. The absolute difference in probability of human survival between the full and half antigen dose was estimated to be at most approximately 20%, indicating that more investigation of the half-antigen dose for vaccine dose sparing strategies may be warranted.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnthraxAnthrax VaccinesAnti-Bacterial AgentsHumansModels, StatisticalPost-Exposure ProphylaxisPrimatesSurvival AnalysisAnthrax VaccinesAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnthraxBacillus anthracisBootstrapCorrelate of protectionCross-species predictionLogistic regression

Identifiers

PMID27558619
PMCPMC5130595
OpenAlexW2516732050

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.