ArticleFrontiers in immunology2018
Evaluating Human Immune Responses for Vaccine Development in a Novel Human Spleen Cell-Engrafted NOD-SCID-IL2rγNull Mouse Model.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- T Cell Development and Responses in Human Immune System Mice.Annual review of immunology · 2025Review
- Population genomic evidence of structured and connectedEcology and evolution · 2024Article
- Humanized mouse model for vaccine evaluation: an overview.Clinical and experimental vaccine research · 2024Review
- Humanized Mice Are Instrumental to the Study ofFrontiers in immunology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The lack of preclinical models able to faithfully predict the immune responses which are later obtained in the clinic is a major hurdle for vaccines development as it increases markedly the delays and the costs required to perform clinical studies. We developed and evaluated the relevance to human immune responses of a novel humanized mouse model, humanized-spleen cells-NOD-SCID-gamma null (Hu-SPL-NSG), in which we grafted human spleen cells in immunodeficient NOD-SCID-IL-2rγnull (NSG) mice. We selected the malaria vaccine candidate, Liver Stage Antigen 3-Full Length, because we had previously observed a major discrepancy between preclinical and clinical results, and compared its immunogenicity with that of a shorter form of the molecule, LSA3-729. NSG mice engrafted with human spleen lymphocytes were immunized with either LSA3-FL or LSA3-729, both adjuvanted with montanide ISA720. We found that the shorter LSA3-729 triggered the production of human antibodies and a T-helper-type 1 cellular immune response associated with protection whereas LSA3-FL did not. Results were consistent in five groups receiving lymphocytes from five distinct human donors. We identified antigenic regions in the full-length molecule, but not in the shorter version, which induced T-regulatory type of cellular responses. These regions had failed to be predicted by previous preclinical experiments in a wide range of animal models, including primates. Results were reproducible using spleen cells from all five human donors. The findings in the Hu-SPL-NSG model were similar to the results obtained using LSA3-FL in the clinic and hence could have been used to predict them. The model does not present graft versus host reaction, low survival of engrafted B lymphocytes and difficulty to raise primary immune responses, all limitations previously reported in humanized immune-compromised mice. Results also point to the shorter construct, LSA3-729 as a more efficient vaccine candidate. In summary, our findings indicate that the Hu-SPL-NSG model could be a relevant and cost-saving choice for early selection of vaccine candidates before clinical development, and deserves being further evaluated.
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.