Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30355697›Full record

ArticleJournal of virology2019

Yanming An, Lisa M Parsons, Ewa Jankowska, Darya Melnyk, Manju Joshi, John F Cipollo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of virology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Complex-TypeInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Message in a bottle: mRNA vaccination for influenza.The Journal of general virology · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2021
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Impact of Protein Glycosylation on the Design of Viral Vaccines.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2021
    Review
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.

Yanming AnFood and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, DBRRII, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Lisa M ParsonsFood and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Division of Bacterial, Parasitic and Allergenic Products, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Ewa JankowskaFood and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Division of Bacterial, Parasitic and Allergenic Products, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Darya MelnykFood and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Division of Biological Standards and Quality Control, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Manju JoshiFood and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Division of Biological Standards and Quality Control, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
John F CipolloFood and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Division of Bacterial, Parasitic and Allergenic Products, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA john.cipollo@fda.hhs.gov.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prior to each annual flu season, health authorities recommend three or four virus strains for inclusion in the annual influenza vaccine: a type A:H1N1 virus, a type A:H3N2 virus, and one or two type B viruses. Antigenic differences between strains are found in the glycosylation patterns of the major influenza virus antigen, hemagglutinin (HA). Here we examine the glycosylation patterns of seven reference antigens containing HA used in influenza vaccine potency testing. These reagents are supplied by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) or the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC) for use in vaccine testing. Those produced in hen egg, Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK), and insect (Sf9) expression systems were examined. They are closely related or identical to antigens used in commercial vaccines. The reference antigens studied were used in the 2014-2015 influenza season and included A/California/07/2009 H1N1, A/Texas/50/2012 H3N2, and B/Massachusetts/02/2012. Released glycan and HA-specific glycopeptide glycosylation patterns were examined. We also examined the sensitivity of the single radial immunodiffusion (SRID) potency test to differences in HA antigen glycosylation. Based on deglycosylation studies applied using standard assay procedures, the SRID assay was not sensitive to any HA antigen glycosylation status from any cell system. Mapping of glycosites with their occupying glycan to functional regions, including antigenic sites, lectin interaction regions, and fusion domains, was performed and has implications for immune processing, immune responses, and antigenic shielding. Differences in glycosylation patterns, as dictated by the cell system used for expression, may impact these functions.

Indexed as

AnimalsChickensDogsGlycosylationHemagglutinin Glycoproteins, Influenza VirusHumansImmunodiffusionInfluenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeInfluenza A Virus, H3N2 SubtypeInfluenza B virusInfluenza VaccinesMadin Darby Canine Kidney CellsSf9 CellsSpecies SpecificityHemagglutinin Glycoproteins, Influenza VirusInfluenza Vaccinesglycan maskingglycopeptidemass spectrometryvaccine

Identifiers

PMID30355697
PMCPMC6321900

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.