ArticleThe Journal of veterinary medical science2017
Prior exposure to Bordetella species as an exclusion criterion in the baboon model of pertussis.
Article in The Journal of veterinary medical science, 2017. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of oral, nebulized and combination antibiotic treatment of Bordetella bronchiseptica in baboons (Papio spp.).Journal of veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics · 2021Article
- Neutralization of pertussis toxin by a single antibody prevents clinical pertussis in neonatal baboons.Science advances · 2020Article
- Review
- Antibody Specificity Following a RecentFrontiers in immunology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The baboon model of Bordetella pertussis infection is the newest and most clinically accurate model of the human disease to date. However, among the 15 experimentally infected baboons in this study, a subset of baboons did not exhibit the expected high bacterial colonization levels or increase in white blood cell count. Moreover, cultures of nasopharyngeal wash samples from several baboons suggested B. bronchiseptica coinfection. Analysis of serum antibodies recognizing filamentous hemagglutinin, pertussis toxin and B. pertussis lipo-oligosaccharide indicated that several baboons had likely been previously exposed to Bordetella species and that prior exposure correlated with partial protection from B. pertussis infection. Notably, all animals with a baseline Fha titer of 5 IU/ml or below exhibited symptoms typical of the model, suggesting this value can be used as inclusion criteria for animals prior to study enrollment. While B. pertussis infection is endemic to human populations and B. bronchiseptica is common in wild small mammals, this study illustrates that baboons can readily harbor both organisms. Awareness of Bordetella species that share antigens capable of generating protective immune responses and tracking of prior exposure to those species is required for successful use of the baboon model of pertussis.
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.