Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28385608›Full record

ArticleVaccine2017

Comparison of the nine polymorphic membrane proteins of Chlamydia trachomatis for their ability to induce protective immune responses in mice against a C. muridarum challenge.

Sukumar Pal, Alison Favaroni, Delia F Tifrea, Philipp T Hanisch, Sören E T Luczak, Johannes H Hegemann, Luis M de la Maza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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.

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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Advances inMicroorganisms · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Expert review of vaccines · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Frontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Seventy Years ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Review
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

7 authors.

Sukumar PalDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Alison FavaroniInstitut für Funktionelle Genomforschung der Mikroorganismen, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Delia F TifreaDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Philipp T HanischInstitut für Funktionelle Genomforschung der Mikroorganismen, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Sören E T LuczakInstitut für Funktionelle Genomforschung der Mikroorganismen, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Johannes H HegemannInstitut für Funktionelle Genomforschung der Mikroorganismen, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Luis M de la MazaDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA. Electronic address: lmdelama@uci.edu.

Funding

Trapping membrane proteins with adjuvant-carrying amphipols for vaccine formulatiR01AI092129 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI COCCO, MELANIE J, DE LA MAZA, LUIS M · 2011 to 2014
$1.3M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI092129
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo test vaccines, formulated with novel antigens, to protect mice against Chlamydia infections.

methodsTo determine the ability of polymorphic membrane proteins (Pmps) to induce cross-species protective immune responses, recombinant fragments from all nine C. trachomatis serovar E Pmps were used to vaccinate BALB/c mice utilizing CpG-1826 and Montanide ISA 720 as adjuvants. C. muridarum recombinant MOMP and PBS, formulated with the same adjuvants, were used as positive and negative controls, respectively. Mice were challenged intranasally with 10

resultsFollowing vaccination the nine Pmps elicited immune responses. Based on body weight changes, or number of IFU recovered from lungs, mice vaccinated with Pmp C, G or H were the best protected. For example, over the 10-day period, the negative control group vaccinated with PBS lost significantly more body weight than mice immunized with PmpC or G (P<0.05). C. muridarum MOMP vaccinated mice were better protected against body weight losses than any group immunized with Pmps. Also, the median number of IFU recovered from the lungs of mice vaccinated with PmpC (72×10

conclusionsThis is the first time PmpC has been shown to elicit cross-species protection against a respiratory challenge. Additional work with Pmps C, G and H is recommended to determine their ability to protect animal models against genital and ocular challenges.

Indexed as

Cross ProtectionAdjuvants, ImmunologicAnimalsBacterial Outer Membrane ProteinsBacterial VaccinesChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia muridarumChlamydia trachomatisCross ReactionsDisease Models, AnimalHumansLungMembrane ProteinsMice, Inbred BALB CTreatment OutcomeVaccines, SubunitAdjuvants, ImmunologicBacterial Outer Membrane ProteinsBacterial VaccinesMembrane ProteinsVaccines, SubunitVaccines, SyntheticC. muridarumC. trachomatisPmpCPolymorphic membrane proteins (Pmps)Vaccine

Identifiers

PMID28385608
PMCPMC5464790

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.