ArticleVeterinary world2020
Production, immunogenicity, stability, and safety of a vaccine against
Article in Veterinary world, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- AnFrontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Aluminium Hydroxide Nanoparticles as an Efficient Adjuvant to Potentiate the Immune Response againstVaccines · 2023Article
- Immunogenicity of a newly developed vaccine againstVeterinary world · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimThe beta toxin is causing the most severe MATERIALS AND
methodsThe crude toxoid harvest contained 710 limits of flocculation (Lf)/mL. The vaccine was formulated. Each 1 mL of the final vaccine product contained at least 50 Lf/mL of beta toxoids, 0.2 mL 3% aluminum hydroxide gel (equivalent to 5.18 mg of aluminum), <0.001% W/V thiomersal, formaldehyde <0.05% W/V, and ~0.7 mL phosphate-buffered saline (pH 7.2). The efficacy of the vaccine was evaluated by potency, stability, and safety tests.
resultsThe vaccine demonstrated 24.36 IU/mL (standard deviation, ±0.56) and 14.74 IU/mL (±0.36) of neutralizing antibodies in rabbits and cattle, respectively. Indeed, these levels were above the minimum recommended by international protocols since the obtained antibody levels had 2.43- and 1.47-fold increase in both rabbits and cattle, respectively, over the minimum antitoxin level suggested by the United States Department of Agriculture. Interestingly, our formulation was capable of inducing 1.65-fold higher immune responses in rabbits than that stimulated in cattle (65% increase) with a significant difference (p<0.0001). The vaccine was stable up to 30 months. The vaccinated rabbits were suffered from a temporarily slight increase in temperatures in the first 10 h without any significant difference (p>0.05).
conclusionThe research showed a procedure for the manufacturing process of the vaccine against
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.