ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2017
Antibody Immunity Induced by H7N9 Avian Influenza Vaccines: Evaluation Criteria, Affecting Factors, and Implications for Rational Vaccine Design.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emerging Viral Zoonoses: Epidemiology, Vaccination Strategies, and Implications for Global Public Health.Vaccines · 2026Review
- Infectious disease mRNA vaccines and a review on epitope prediction for vaccine design.Briefings in functional genomics · 2021Review
- Advances in gene-based vaccine platforms to address the COVID-19 pandemic.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2021Review
- Review
- Article
- Hemagglutinin-Specific Non-neutralizing Antibody Is Essential for Protection Provided by Inactivated and Viral-Vectored H7N9 Avian Influenza Vaccines in Chickens.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2019Article
- Review
- Development of in vitro and in vivo neutralization assays based on the pseudotyped H7N9 virus.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe H7N9 avian influenza virus (AIV) infections in humans have public health authorities around the world on high alert for the potential development of a human influenza pandemic. Currently, the newly-emerged highly pathogenic avian influenza A (H7N9) virus poses a dual challenge for public health and poultry industry. Numerous H7N9 vaccine candidates have been generated using various platforms. Immunization trials in animals and humans showed that H7N9 vaccines are apparently poorly immunogenic because they induced low hemagglutination inhibition and virus neutralizing antibody titers. However, H7N9 vaccines elicit comparable levels of total hemagglutinin (HA)-reactive IgG antibody as the seasonal influenza vaccines, suggesting H7N9 vaccines are as immunogenic as their seasonal counterparts. A large fraction of overall IgG antibody is non-neutralizing antibody and they target unrecognized epitopes outside of the traditional antigenic sites in HA. Further, the Treg epitope identified in H7 HA may at least partially contribute to regulation of antibody immunity. Here, we review the latest advances for the development of H7N9 vaccines and discuss the influence of serological criteria on evaluation of immunogenicity of H7N9 vaccines. Next, we discuss factors affecting antibody immunity induced by H7N9 vaccines, including the change in antigenic epitopes in HA and the presence of the Treg epitope. Last, we present our perspectives for the unique features of antibody immunity of H7N9 vaccines and propose some future directions to improve or modify antibody response induced by H7N9 vaccines. This perspective would provide critical implications for rational design of H7N9 vaccines for human and veterinary use.
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.