ReviewViruses2017
Hazard Characterization of Modified Vaccinia Virus Ankara Vector: What Are the Knowledge Gaps?
Review in Viruses, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- ATMP Environmental Exposure Assessment in European Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Multi-omics analysis reveals the dynamic interplay between Vero host chromatin structure and function during vaccinia virus infection.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Scanning the Horizon for Environmental Applications of Genetically Modified Viruses Reveals Challenges for Their Environmental Risk Assessment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Whole genome sequencing of recombinant viruses obtained from co-infection and superinfection of Vero cells with modified vaccinia virus ankara vectored influenza vaccine and a naturally occurring cowpox virus.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Development of Modified Vaccinia Virus Ankara-Based Vaccines: Advantages and Applications.Vaccines · 2022Review
- Advancements in the Growth and Construction of Recombinant Lumpy Skin Disease Virus (LSDV) for Use as a Vaccine Vector.Vaccines · 2021Article
- Review
- NF-κB as an Important Factor in Optimizing Poxvirus-Based Vaccines against Viral Infections.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- CRISPR/Cas9-Advancing Orthopoxvirus Genome Editing for Vaccine and Vector Development.Viruses · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) is the vector of choice for human and veterinary applications due to its strong safety profile and immunogenicity in vivo. The use of MVA and MVA-vectored vaccines against human and animal diseases must comply with regulatory requirements as they pertain to environmental risk assessment, particularly the characterization of potential adverse effects to humans, animals and the environment. MVA and recombinant MVA are widely believed to pose low or negligible risk to ecosystem health. However, key aspects of MVA biology require further research in order to provide data needed to evaluate the potential risks that may occur due to the use of MVA and MVA-vectored vaccines. The purpose of this paper is to identify knowledge gaps in the biology of MVA and recombinant MVA that are of relevance to its hazard characterization and discuss ongoing and future experiments aimed at providing data necessary to fill in the knowledge gaps. In addition, we presented arguments for the inclusion of uncertainty analysis and experimental investigation of verifiable worst-case scenarios in the environmental risk assessment of MVA and recombinant MVA. These will contribute to improved risk assessment of MVA and recombinant MVA vaccines.
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.