Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28420073›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2017

Future Prospects for the Development of Cost-Effective Adenovirus Vaccines.

Cyrielle Fougeroux, Peter J Holst

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Cyrielle FougerouxDepartment of Immunology and Microbiology, Copenhagen University, København K 1014, Denmark. cyrielle@sund.ku.dk.
Peter J HolstDepartment of Immunology and Microbiology, Copenhagen University, København K 1014, Denmark. pholst@sund.ku.dk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccination is one of the most efficient tools for disease prevention, and a continuously growing field of research. However, despite progress, we still need more efficient and cost-effective vaccines that would improve access to those in need. In this review, we will describe the status of virus-vectored vaccine technology with a focus on adenoviral-based vaccines. Adenovirus (Ad) vaccines have proven to be efficient in military vaccinations against Ad4 and Ad7 and as highly efficient vectored vaccines against rabies. The question of how other adenovirus-based vaccines can become as efficient as the rabies vaccine is the underlying theme in this review. Here, we will first give an overview of the basic properties of vectored vaccines, followed by an introduction to the characteristics of adenoviral vectors and previously tested modifications of the vector backbone and expression cassettes, with a focus on how they can contribute to increased vaccine cost-effectiveness. Finally, we will highlight a few successful examples of research that have attempted to improve the use of adenoviral-based vaccines by improving the transgene immunogenicity.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAdenoviridaeAnimalsBiotechnologyGenetic VectorsHumansImmunityTransgenesVaccines, SyntheticVirus ReplicationVaccines, Syntheticadenovirusaffordable vaccine candidatesimmune responsesprotective immunityreplication competenttransgenevaccinevaccine technology platform

Identifiers

PMID28420073
PMCPMC5412272
OpenAlexW2601401486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.