Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28605294›Full record

Trial reportHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2017

Safety and long-term immunological effects of CryJ2-LAMP plasmid vaccine in Japanese red cedar atopic subjects: A phase I study.

Yan Su, Eliezer Romeu-Bonilla, Athanasia Anagnostou, David Fitz-Patrick, William Hearl, Teri Heiland

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Next-Generation Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy for Food Allergy.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Allergen Immunotherapy: Pitfalls, Perks and Unexpected Allies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Allergen immunotherapy: past, present and future.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. [Recombinant allergens, peptides, and virus-like particles for allergy immunotherapy].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2020
    Review
  19. Review
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yan Sua Immunomic Therapeutics, Inc. (ITI) , Rockville , MD , USA.
Eliezer Romeu-Bonillaa Immunomic Therapeutics, Inc. (ITI) , Rockville , MD , USA.
Athanasia Anagnostoua Immunomic Therapeutics, Inc. (ITI) , Rockville , MD , USA.
David Fitz-Patrickb East-West Medical Research Institute , Honolulu , HI , USA.
William Hearla Immunomic Therapeutics, Inc. (ITI) , Rockville , MD , USA.
Teri Heilanda Immunomic Therapeutics, Inc. (ITI) , Rockville , MD , USA.
East–West Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Japanese Red Cedar (JRC) pollen induced allergy affects one third of Japanese and the development of effective therapies remains an unachieved challenge. We designed a DNA vaccine encoding CryJ2 allergen from the JRC pollen and Lysosomal Associated Membrane Protein 1 (LAMP-1) to treat JRC allergy. These Phase IA and IB trials assessed safety and immunological effects of the investigational CryJ2-LAMP DNA vaccine in both non-sensitive and sensitive Japanese expatriates living in Honolulu, Hawaii. In the Phase IA trial, 6 JRC non-sensitive subjects and 9 JRC and/or Mountain Cedar (MC) sensitive subjects were given 4 vaccine doses (each 4mg/1ml) intramuscularly (IM) at 14-day intervals. Nine JRC and/or MC sensitive subjects were given 4 doses (2 mg/0.5 ml) IM at 14-day intervals. The safety and functional biomarkers were followed for 132 d. Following this, 17 of 24 subjects were recruited into the IB trial and received one booster dose (2 mg/0.5 ml) IM approximately 300 d after the first vaccination dose to which they were randomized in the first phase of the trial. All safety endpoints were met and all subjects tolerated CryJ2-LAMP vaccinations well. At the end of the IA trial, 10 out of 12 JRC sensitive and 6 out of 11 MC sensitive subjects experienced skin test negative conversion, possibly related to the CryJ2-LAMP vaccinations. Collectively, these data suggested that the CryJ2-LAMP DNA vaccine is safe and may be immunologically effective in treating JRC induced allergy.

Indexed as

AdultAllergensAsian PeopleDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHawaiiHumansHypersensitivityImmunization ScheduleInjections, IntramuscularMaleMiddle AgedPlant ProteinsTreatment OutcomeVaccines, DNAYoung AdultAllergensPlant ProteinsVaccines, DNACryJ2DNA VaccineJRC AllergyLAMPSkin Test

Identifiers

PMID28605294
PMCPMC5718801
OpenAlexW2626423038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.