Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31955522›Full record

ArticleInfluenza and other respiratory viruses2020

Detection of anti-NS1 antibodies after pandemic influenza exposure: Evaluation of a serological method for distinguishing H1N1pdm09 infected from vaccinated cases.

Anna Hayman Robertson, Milada Mahic, Miloje Savic, Gro Tunheim, Olav Hungnes, Lill Trogstad, Walter Ian Lipkin, Siri Mjaaland

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Influenza and other respiratory viruses, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Anna Hayman RobertsonDivision of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-6295-0528
Milada MahicDivision of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Miloje SavicDivision of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Gro TunheimDivision of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8280-8243
Olav HungnesDivision of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Lill TrogstadDivision of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Walter Ian LipkinCenter for Infection and Immunity, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Siri MjaalandDivision of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReliable exposure information is crucial for assessing health outcomes of influenza infection and vaccination. Current serological methods are unable to distinguish between anti-hemagglutinin (HA) antibodies induced by infection or vaccination.

objectivesWe aimed to explore an alternative method for differentiating influenza infection and vaccination.

methodsSera from animals inoculated with influenza viruses or purified H1N1pdm09 HA were obtained. Human samples were selected from a pregnancy cohort established during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. Unvaccinated, laboratory-confirmed cases (N = 18), vaccinated cases without influenza-like-illness (N = 18) and uninfected, unvaccinated controls (N = 18) were identified based on exposure data from questionnaires, national registries and maternal hemagglutination inhibition (HI) titres at delivery. Animal and human samples were tested for antibodies against the non-structural protein 1 (NS1) and HA from H1N1pdm09, using a Luciferase Immunoprecipitation System (LIPS).

resultsAnti-NS1 H1N1pdm09 antibodies were detected in sera from experimentally infected, but not from vaccinated, animals. Anti-HA H1N1pdm09 antibodies were detectable after either of these exposures. In human samples, 28% of individuals with laboratory-confirmed influenza were seropositive for H1N1pdm09 NS1, whereas vaccinated cases and controls were seronegative. There was a trend for H1N1pdm09 NS1 seropositive cases reporting more severe and longer duration of symptomatic illness than seronegative cases. Anti-HA H1N1pdm09 antibodies were detected in all cases and in 61% of controls.

conclusionsThe LIPS method could differentiate between sera from experimentally infected and vaccinated animals. However, in human samples obtained more than 6 months after the pandemic, LIPS was specific, but not sufficiently sensitive for ascertaining cases by exposure.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, ViralCohort StudiesFerretsHumansInfluenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesSerologic TestsVaccinationViral Nonstructural ProteinsAntibodies, ViralInfluenza VaccinesINS1 protein, influenza virusViral Nonstructural ProteinsH1N1pdm09influenzaNS1pandemicserologyvaccination

Identifiers

PMID31955522
PMCPMC7182603

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.