Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29279280›Full record

ReviewVaccine2019

The path towards effective antivirals against rabies.

Dirk Jochmans, Johan Neyts

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. [New aspects of rabies control].Bulletin de l'Academie nationale de medecine · 2020
    Review
  6. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dirk JochmansRega Institute for Medical Research, University of Leuven (KU Leuven), Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: dirk.jochmans@kuleuven.be.
Johan NeytsRega Institute for Medical Research, University of Leuven (KU Leuven), Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BERega Institute for Medical Research · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rabies virus remains an important burden of disease claiming an estimated 60,000 lives each year, mainly children, and having a huge economical and societal cost. Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is highly effective, however in patients that present with neurological symptoms the case-fatality ratio is extremely high (>99%). During the last decades several attempts to identify potent and effective antivirals were made. Only a few of these demonstrated improvement in clinical signs in animal studies and none of the trials in humans showed significant efficacy. Here we explore novel opportunities to identify more potent anti-rabies molecules. In particular important progress has been made on antivirals against other Mononegavirales (paramyxoviruses, filoviruses) which should be an impetus to test and optimize these molecules towards anti-rabies virus therapies. Effective rabies antivirals for therapeutic use need to be molecules that can be dosed into the cerebrospinal fluid and that rapidly and potently block ongoing virus replication and as such stop the further spread of the virus. Antivirals for prophylactic use can also be envisaged and these should be able to prevent infection of peripheral nerve cells and should have the potential to replace the current anti-rabies immunoglobulins that are used in PEP.

Indexed as

Post-Exposure ProphylaxisAdenineAdenosineAdenosine MonophosphateAlanineAmidesAntiviral AgentsDrug RepositioningHumansPyrazinesPyrrolidinesRabiesRabies virusAdenineAdenosineAdenosine MonophosphateAlanineAmidesAntiviral AgentsfavipiravirgalidesivirPyrazinesPyrrolidinesremdesivirAntiviralsRabies

Identifiers

PMID29279280
PMCPMC7172090
OpenAlexW2780468247

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.