ArticleClinical and experimental immunology2022
Heterosubtypic, cross-reactive immunity to human Cytomegalovirus glycoprotein B.
Article in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) genome is highly variable and heterosubtypic immunity should be considered in vaccine development since it can enhance protection in a cross-reactive manner. Here, we developed a protein array to evaluate heterosubtypic immunity to CMV glycoprotein B (gB) in natural infection and vaccination. DNA sequences of four antigenic domains (AD1, AD2, AD4/5, and AD5) of gB were amplified from six reference and 12 clinical CMV strains, and the most divergent genotypes were determined by phylogenetic analysis. Assigned genotypes were in vitro translated and immobilized on protein array. Then, we tested immune response of variable serum groups (primarily infected patients, reactivated CMV infections and healthy individuals with latent CMV infection, as well gB-vaccinated rabbits) with protein in situ array (PISA). Serum antibodies of all patient cohorts and gB-vaccinated rabbits recognized many genetic variants of ADs on protein array, including but not limited to the subtype of infecting strain. High-grade cross-reactivity was observed. In several patients, we observed none or neglectable immune response to AD1 and AD2, while the same patients showed high antibody response to AD4/5 and AD5. Among the primary infected patients, AD5 was the predominant AD, in antibody response. The most successful CMV vaccine to date contains gB and demonstrates only 50% efficacy. In this study, we showed that heterosubtypic and cross-reactive immunity to CMV gB is extensive. Therefore, the failure of CMV gB vaccines cannot be explained by a highly, strain-specific immunity. Our observations suggest that other CMV antigens should be addressed in vaccine design.
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.