ReviewHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2022
Nano alum: A new solution to the new challenge.
Review in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adjuvant choice shapes macrophage activation and cytokine responses to freeze-thaw breast cancer antigens.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- From Classical Bacterins to Recombinant Vaccines: Critical Aspects of the Immune Response in Ruminants.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Application progress and biosafety challenges of gene editing and synthetic biotechnology in diagnosis, treatment and prevention of infectious diseases.Biosafety and health · 2025Review
- Nano/Micro-Enabled Modification and Innovation of Conventional Adjuvants for Next-Generation Vaccines.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- Mucosal immunotherapy targeting APC in lung disease.Journal of inflammation (London, England) · 2025Review
- Virus-Mimicking Polymer Nanocomplexes Co-Assembling HCV E1E2 and Core Proteins with TLR 7/8 Agonist-Synthesis, Characterization, and In Vivo Activity.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Aluminium Hydroxide Nanoparticles as an Efficient Adjuvant to Potentiate the Immune Response againstVaccines · 2023Article
- Nanoadjuvants: Promising Bioinspired and Biomimetic Approaches in Vaccine Innovation.ACS omega · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Alum adjuvant has always been the first choice when designing a vaccine. Conventional aluminum adjuvant includes aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, and amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate (AAHS), which could effectively induce the humoral, and to a lesser extent, cellular immune responses. Their safety is widely accepted for a variety of vaccines. However, conventional alum adjuvant is not an ideal choice for a vaccine antigen with poor immunogenicity, especially the subunit vaccine in which cellular response is highly demanded. The outbreak of COVID-19 requires a delicately designed vaccine without the antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) effect to ensure the safety. A sufficiently powerful adjuvant that can induce both Th
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.