Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27814377›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2016

Antibody Persistence and Booster Responses to Split-Virion H5N1 Avian Influenza Vaccine in Young and Elderly Adults.

Rajeka Lazarus, Sarah Kelly, Matthew D Snape, Corinne Vandermeulen, Merryn Voysey, Karel Hoppenbrouwers, Annick Hens, Pierre Van Damme, Stephanie Pepin, Isabel Leroux-Roels and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase II
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00415129 (Safety and Immunogenicity of an Intramuscular Pandemic Influenza Vaccine in Adults and the Elderly), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT00415129 phase2completednot on this map

Safety and Immunogenicity of an Intramuscular Pandemic Influenza Vaccine in Adults and the Elderly

TypeinterventionalSponsorSanofi Pasteur, a Sanofi CompanyRan2006 to 2009Enrolled600ConditionsInfluenza, Orthomyxoviridae InfectionsArmsA/H5N1 inactivated, split-virion influenza virus
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

12 authors.

Rajeka LazarusOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, Centre for Clinical Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine, University of Oxford and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Sarah KellyOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, Centre for Clinical Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine, University of Oxford and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Matthew D SnapeOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, Centre for Clinical Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine, University of Oxford and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Corinne VandermeulenCenter for Environment and Health, Leuven University, Leuven, Belgium.
Merryn VoyseyNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Karel HoppenbrouwersCenter for Environment and Health, Leuven University, Leuven, Belgium.
Annick HensCentre for the Evaluation of Vaccination, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Pierre Van DammeCentre for the Evaluation of Vaccination, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Stephanie PepinSanofi Pasteur, Marcy l'Etoile, France.
Isabel Leroux-RoelsCenter for Vaccinology, Ghent University and Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Geert Leroux-RoelsCenter for Vaccinology, Ghent University and Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Andrew J PollardOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, Centre for Clinical Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine, University of Oxford and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Avian influenza continues to circulate and remains a global health threat not least because of the associated high mortality. In this study antibody persistence, booster vaccine response and cross-clade immune response between two influenza A(H5N1) vaccines were compared. Participants aged over 18-years who had previously been immunized with a clade 1, A/Vietnam vaccine were re-immunized at 6-months with 7.5 μg of the homologous strain or at 22-months with a clade 2, alum-adjuvanted, A/Indonesia vaccine. Blood sampled at 6, 15 and 22-months after the primary course was used to assess antibody persistence. Antibody concentrations 6-months after primary immunisation with either A/Vietnam vaccine 30 μg alum-adjuvanted vaccine or 7.5 μg dose vaccine were lower than 21-days after the primary course and waned further with time. Re-immunization with the clade 2, 30 μg alum-adjuvanted vaccine confirmed cross-clade reactogenicity. Antibody cross-reactivity between A(H5N1) clades suggests that in principle a prime-boost vaccination strategy may provide both early protection at the start of a pandemic and improved antibody responses to specific vaccination once available.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00415129.

Indexed as

Adjuvants, ImmunologicAdolescentAdultAnimalsAntibodies, ViralAntibody FormationBirdsHumansImmunization, SecondaryIndonesiaInfluenza A Virus, H5N1 SubtypeInfluenza, HumanInfluenza in BirdsInfluenza VaccinesMaleMiddle AgedAdjuvants, ImmunologicAntibodies, ViralInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID27814377
PMCPMC5096706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.