ReviewThe Journal of infectious diseases2017
The Doctrine of Original Antigenic Sin: Separating Good From Evil.
Review in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 127 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
127 citing papers in PubMed, 187 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preliminary Findings From the Dynamics of the Immune Responses to Repeat Influenza Vaccination Exposures (DRIVE I) Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024Trial
- Original Antigenic Sin Shapes the Immunological Repertoire Evoked by Human Cytomegalovirus Glycoprotein B/MF59 Vaccine in Seropositive Recipients.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2019Trial
- Structural basis of antigenic drift in FMDV O/Cathay topotype variants revealed by porcine-derived single B-cell neutralizing antibodies.PLoS pathogens · 2026Article
- Pre-existing and cross-reactive immunity to avian influenza H5N1 in humans: Implications for pandemic risk and vaccine strategies.The Journal of infection · 2026Review
- Evaluating Memory B Cell Cross-Reactivity Between Ancestral and Future SARS-CoV-2 Variants-Evidence for Original Antigenic Sin.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Mechanisms Underlying the Induction of Immunological Imprinting by RNA Viruses and Intervention Strategies.Viruses · 2026Review
- Cross-reactive H5N1 Neuraminidase Antibodies by Age and Influenza A Imprinting Cohorts of the Past Century: Population-Based Serosurvey, British Columbia, Canada.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Cattle antibodies identify a cross-serotype broadly neutralising foot-and-mouth disease virus epitope.NPJ vaccines · 2026Article
- An old foe comes swooping back: Whooping cough resurgence-Okay, now what?PLoS pathogens · 2026Article
- Pathological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 variants and immune responses induced in a COVID-19 macaque model.Communications biology · 2026Article
- A narrative review of heterogeneity in SARS-CoV-2 infection outcomes and vaccine efficacy: strategizing pandemic preparedness in Africa.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- SARS-CoV-2 variants: biology, pathogenicity, immunity and control.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026Review
- Translating viral genetic data to PRRSV-2 cross-neutralization using machine learning.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Review
- A public health perspective of SARS-CoV-2 evolution and surveillance strategies in Germany from 2020 to 2023.Communications medicine · 2025Review
- Seasonal Coronavirus-Induced Immunological Imprinting and Previous Herpesvirus Infections in Patients With Long COVID.Journal of medical virology · 2025Article
- Breadth of antibody activity elicited by an influenza B hemagglutinin vaccine is influenced by pre-existing immune responses to influenza B viruses.Journal of virology · 2025Article
- Article
- Role of senescent CD4Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Article
67 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The term "original antigenic sin" was coined approximately 60 years ago to describe the imprinting by the initial first influenza A virus infection on the antibody response to subsequent vaccination. These studies did not suggest a reduction in the response to current antigens but instead suggested anamnestic recall of antibody to earlier influenza virus strains. Then, approximately 40 years ago, it was observed that sequential influenza vaccination might lead to reduced vaccine effectiveness (VE). This conclusion was largely dismissed after an experimental study involving sequential administration of then-standard influenza vaccines. Recent observations have provided convincing evidence that reduced VE after sequential influenza vaccination is a real phenomenon. We propose that such reduction in VE be termed "negative antigenic interaction," given that there is no age cohort effect. In contrast, the potentially positive protective effect of early influenza virus infection later in life continues to be observed. It is essential that we understand better the immunologic factors underlying both original antigenic sin and negative antigenic interaction, to support development of improved influenza vaccines and vaccination strategies.
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.