ArticleVaccine2016
Cross-species prediction of human survival probabilities for accelerated anthrax vaccine absorbed (AVA) regimens and the potential for vaccine and antibiotic dose sparing.
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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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 · 2019Guideline
- Trial
- Review
- Vaccine Licensure in the Absence of Human Efficacy Data.Vaccines · 2022Review
- Article
- Dangerous Pathogens as a Potential Problem for Public Health.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Review
- The Fluorocycline TP-271 Is Efficacious in Models of Aerosolized Bacillus anthracis Infection in BALB/c Mice and Cynomolgus Macaques.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2017Article
- A Bivalent Anthrax-Plague Vaccine That Can Protect against Two Tier-1 Bioterror Pathogens,Frontiers in immunology · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.