ArticleViruses2021
Cross-Antigenicity between EV71 Sub-Genotypes: Implications for Vaccine Efficacy.
Article in Viruses, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Dynamic epidemiological changes of hand, foot, and mouth disease and real-world effectiveness of EV-A71 vaccination: A case study in Shanghai (2009-2023).Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Standardized neutralizing antibody assay for Coxsackievirus A10 in clinical trial: A framework for multivalent hand, foot, and mouth disease vaccine evaluation.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Screening of a potential coxsackievirus B4 vaccine strain through analysis of biological features.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A New Inactivated Coxsackievirus B2 Vaccine: Biological Properties, Immunogenicity, and Protective Effects in Mice.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Efficacy, Immunogenicity, and Safety of Enterovirus 71 Vaccines in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Vaccines · 2026Review
- A screening study on the detection strain of Coxsackievirus A6: the key to evaluating neutralizing antibodies in vaccines.Emerging microbes & infections · 2024Article
- Enteroviruses: epidemic potential, challenges and opportunities with vaccines.Journal of biomedical science · 2024Review
- Screening of a new candidate coxsackievirus B1 vaccine strain based on its biological characteristics.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the cross-neutralization activities elicited by Coxsackievirus A10 vaccine strains.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated enterovirus A71 vaccines in children aged 6-35 months in China: a non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 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
14 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enterovirus A-71 (EV71) is a global, highly contagkkious pathogen responsible for severe cases of hand-food-mouth-disease (HFMD). The use of vaccines eliciting cross neutralizing antibodies (NTAbs) against the different circulating EV71 sub-genotypes is important for preventing HFMD outbreaks. Here, we tested the cross-neutralizing activities induced by EV71 genotype/sub-genotype A, B0-B4, C1, C2, C4, and C5 viruses using rats. Differences were noted in the cross-neutralization of the 10 sub-genotypes tested but there were generally good levels of cross-neutralization except against genotype A virus, against which neutralization antibody titres (NTAb) where the lowest with NTAbs being the highest against sub-genotype B4. Moreover, NTAb responses induced by C4, B4, C1, and C2 viruses were homogenous, with values of maximum/minimum NTAb ratios (MAX/MIN) against all B and C viruses ranging between 4.0 and 6.0, whereas MAX/MIN values against B3 and A viruses were highly variable, 48.0 and 256.0, respectively. We then dissected the cross-neutralizing ability of sera from infants and children and rats immunized with C4 EV71 vaccines. Cross-neutralizing titers against the 10 sub-genotypes were good in both vaccinated infants and children and rats with the MAX/MIN ranging from 1.8-3.4 and 5.1-7.1, respectively, which were similar to those found in naturally infected patients (2.8). Therefore, we conclude that C4 EV71 vaccines can provide global protection to infants and children against HFMD caused by different sub-genotypes.
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.