ArticleClinical and experimental vaccine research2021
Immunogenicity of glycine nanoparticles containing a chimeric antigen as
Article in Clinical and experimental vaccine research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparison between adjuvant and delivering functions of iron oxide and calcium phosphate nanoparticles, using a model protein againstClinical and experimental vaccine research · 2025Article
- Febrile neutropenia in an immunocompetent patient with brucellosis: a case report and literature review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Review
- Immunization of mice with chimeric protein-loaded aluminum hydroxide and selenium nanoparticles induces reduction ofClinical and experimental vaccine research · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Brucellosis Vaccines: A Comprehensive Review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Review
- Evaluation of chimeric proteins for serological diagnosis of brucellosis in cattle.Veterinary world · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBrucellosis as a worldwide zoonotic illness affect domestic animals and humans doesn't have any vaccine for the prevention of infection in humans yet. The aim of this study was to evaluate the specific immune response following the administration of glycine nanoparticles as adjuvant and delivery system of a chimeric antigen contained trigger factor, Omp31, and Bp26 in murine model. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe chimeric antigen of
resultsThe protein retention in the nanoparticles was successfully done and the nanoparticle characteristics were appropriate. The average size of glycine particles containing antigen was about 174 nm, and the absorption of protein was approximately 61.27% of the initial value, with a release rate of approximately 70% after 8 hours. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay result proved that the immunized sera of mice which were administered with nano-formula contains high levels of antibodies (immunoglobulin G) against recombinant chimeric antigen and also a high level of mucosal antibody (immunoglobulin A) in the oral group, which showed a desirable immunity against
conclusionThe results showed that chimeric antigen-loaded glycine nanoparticles can act as a vaccine candidate for inducing the cellular and humoral immune response against brucellosis.
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.