Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36672560›Full record

ReviewBiomedicines2022

Will Omics Biotechnologies Save Us from Future Pandemics? Lessons from COVID-19 for Vaccinomics and Adversomics.

Alessandra Ferraresi, Ciro Isidoro

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedicines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alessandra FerraresiLaboratory of Molecular Pathology, Department of Health Sciences, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Via Solaroli 17, 28100 Novara, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7192-9672
Ciro IsidoroLaboratory of Molecular Pathology, Department of Health Sciences, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Via Solaroli 17, 28100 Novara, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5494-3034

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic had cross-cutting impacts on planetary health, quotidian life, and society. Mass vaccination with the current gene-based vaccines has helped control the pandemic but unfortunately it has not shown effectiveness in preventing the spread of the virus. In addition, not all individuals respond to these vaccines, while others develop adverse reactions that cannot be neglected. It is also a fact that some individuals are more susceptible to infection while others develop effective immunization post-infection. We note here that the person-to-person and population variations in vaccine efficacy and side effects have been studied in the field of vaccinomics long before the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the field of adversomics examines the mechanisms of individual differences in the side effects of health interventions. In this review, we discuss the potential of a multi-omics approach for comprehensive profiling of the benefit/risk ratios of vaccines. Vaccinomics and adversomics stand to benefit planetary health and contribute to the prevention of future pandemics in the 21st century by offering precision guidance to clinical trials as well as promoting precision use of vaccines in ways that proactively respond to individual and population differences in their efficacy and safety. This vision of pandemic prevention based on personalized instead of mass vaccination also calls for equity in access to precision vaccines and diagnostics that support a vision and practice of vaccinomics and adversomics in planetary health.

Indexed as

adversomicsCOVID-19infectious diseasesomicspersonalized vaccinationvaccinesvaccinomics

Identifiers

PMID36672560
PMCPMC9855897

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.