Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32790065›Full record

ReviewInfluenza and other respiratory viruses2020

A COVID-19 human viral challenge model. Learning from experience.

Rob Lambkin-Williams, John P DeVincenzo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A COVID-19 human viral challenge model. Learning from experience.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2020
    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

2 authors.

Rob Lambkin-WilliamsVirologyConsult Ltd., Brighton, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2107-0174
John P DeVincenzoUniversity of Tennessee School of Medicine, Memphis, TN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The controlled human infection model and specifically the human viral challenge model are not dissimilar to standard clinical trials while adding another layer of complexity and safety considerations. The models deliberately infect volunteers, with an infectious challenge agent to determine the effect of the infection and the potential benefits of the experimental interventions. The human viral challenge model studies can shorten the time to assess the efficacy of a new vaccine or treatment by combining this with the assessment of safety. The newly emerging SARS-CoV-2 virus is highly contagious, and an urgent race is on to develop a new vaccine against this virus in a timeframe never attempted before. The use of the human viral challenge model has been proposed to accelerate the development of the vaccine. In the early 2000s, the authors successfully developed a pathogenic human viral challenge model for another virus for which there was no effective treatment and established it to evaluate potential therapies and vaccines against respiratory syncytial virus. Experience gained in the development of that model can help with the development of a COVID-19 HVCM and the authors describe it here.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAntiviral AgentsBetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansPandemicsPatient SelectionPneumonia, ViralRespiratory Syncytial Virus, HumanSafetySARS-CoV-2Viral LoadViral VaccinesAntiviral AgentsCOVID-19 VaccinesViral Vaccinescontrolled human infection modelCOVID-19human viral challenge modelRSVSARS-CoV-19

Identifiers

PMID32790065
PMCPMC7578316

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.