Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29236215›Full record

ArticleVirus genes2018

Phylogenetic comparison of the VP7, VP4, VP6, and NSP4 genes of rotaviruses isolated from children in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 2015-2016, with cogent genes of the Rotarix and RotaTeq vaccine strains.

O V Morozova, T A Sashina, N V Epifanova, V V Zverev, A U Kashnikov, N A Novikova

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Virus genes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

O V MorozovaI. N. Blokhina Nizhny Novgorod Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation. olga.morozova.bsc@gmail.com.
T A SashinaI. N. Blokhina Nizhny Novgorod Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation.
N V EpifanovaI. N. Blokhina Nizhny Novgorod Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation.
V V ZverevI. N. Blokhina Nizhny Novgorod Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation.
A U KashnikovI. N. Blokhina Nizhny Novgorod Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation.
N A NovikovaI. N. Blokhina Nizhny Novgorod Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation.
Nizhniy Novgorod Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology named after Academician I.N. Blokhina · RUN. I. Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Group A rotaviruses (RVA) are one of the leading causes of gastroenteritis in young children worldwide. The introduction of universal mass vaccination around the world has contributed to a reduction in hospitalizations and outpatient visits associated with rotavirus infection. Continued surveillance of RVA strains is needed to determine long-term effects of vaccine introduction. In the present work, we carried out the analysis of the genotypic diversity of RVA strains isolated in Nizhny Novgorod (Russia) during the 2015-2016 epidemic season. Also we conducted a comparative analysis of the amino acid sequences of T-cell epitopes of wild-type and vaccine (RotaTeq and Rotarix) strains. In total, 1461 samples were examined. RVAs were detected in 30.4% of cases. Rotaviruses with genotype G9P[8] (40.5%) dominated in the 2015-16 epidemic season. Additionally, RVAs with the following genotypes were detected: G4P[8] (25.4%), G1P[8] (13%), G2P[4] (3.2%). Rotaviruses with genotypes G3P[9], G6P[9], and G1P[9] totaled 3%. The number of partially typed and untyped RVA samples was 66 (14.9%). The findings of a RVA of G6P[9] genotype in Russia were an original observation. Our analysis of VP6 and NSP4 T-cell epitopes showed highly conserved amino acid sequences. The found differences seem not to be caused by the immune pressure but were rather related to the genotypic affiliations of the proteins. Vaccination against rotavirus infection is not included in the national vaccination schedule in Russia. Monitoring of the genotypic and antigenic diversity of contemporary RVA will allow providing a comparative analysis of wild-type strains in areas with and without vaccine campaign.

Indexed as

ChildEpitopes, T-LymphocyteFecesGenetic VariationGenotypeGlycoproteinsHumansMolecular EpidemiologyRotavirusRotavirus InfectionsRotavirus VaccinesRussiaToxins, BiologicalVaccines, AttenuatedViral Nonstructural ProteinsViral Structural ProteinsEpitopes, T-LymphocyteGlycoproteinsNS28 protein, rotavirusRIX4414 vaccineRotaTeqRotavirus VaccinesToxins, BiologicalVaccines, AttenuatedViral Nonstructural ProteinsViral Structural ProteinsEpidemiologyEpitopesRotavirusRussiaVaccines

Identifiers

PMID29236215
OpenAlexW2771203193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.