ArticlePloS one2017
Qualitative differences in cellular immunogenicity elicited by hepatitis C virus T-Cell vaccines employing prime-boost regimens.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targets of protective immunity and opportunities in hepatitis C virus vaccine development.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2026Review
- Exploring T-Cell Immunity to Hepatitis C Virus: Insights from Different Vaccine and Antigen Presentation Strategies.Vaccines · 2024Review
- Construction, expression and antiviral activity analysis of recombinant adenovirus expressing human IFITM3 in vitro.International journal of biological macromolecules · 2019Article
- Potent Anti-hepatitis C Virus (HCV) T Cell Immune Responses Induced in Mice Vaccinated with DNA-Launched RNA Replicons and Modified Vaccinia Virus Ankara-HCV.Journal of virology · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
T-cell based vaccines have been considered as attractive candidates for prevention of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections. In this study we compared the magnitude and phenotypic characteristics of CD8+ T-cells induced by three commonly used viral vectors, Adenovirus-5 (Ad5), Vaccinia virus (VV) and Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA) expressing the HCV NS3/4A protein. C57/BL6 mice were primed with DNA expressing NS3/4A and boosted with each of the viral vectors in individual groups of mice. We then tracked the vaccine-induced CD8+ T-cell responses using pentamer binding and cytokine production analysis. Overall, our data indicate that the memory cells induced by Ad5 were inferior to those induced by VV or MVA. We found that Ad5 boosting resulted in rapid expansion and significantly higher frequencies of NS3-specific T-cells compared to VV and MVA boosting. However, the functional profiles, assessed through analysis of the memory cell marker CD127 and the anti-apoptotic molecule Bcl-2 in the blood, spleen, and liver; and measurements of interferon-gamma, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and interleukin-2 production indicated significantly lower frequencies of long-lived memory T-cells following Ad5 boosting compared to VV and MVA. This same set of analyses suggested that the memory cells induced following boosting with MVA were superior to those induced by both Ad5 and VV. This superiority of the MVA-induced CD8+ T-cells was confirmed following surrogate challenge of mice with a recombinant mouse herpes virus expressing the HCV NS3 protein. Higher levels of NS3-specific CD8+ T-cells displaying the functional markers CD69, Ki67 and Granzyme B were found in the spleens of mice boosted with MVA compared to VV and Ad5, both alone and in combination. These data suggest that MVA may be a more successful viral vector for induction of effective CD8+ T-cell responses against hepatitis C virus.
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.