Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36694907›Full record

ArticleActa naturae

Comparison of the Effectiveness of Transepidemal and Intradermal Immunization of Mice with the Vacinia Virus.

S N Shchelkunov, A A Sergeev, K A Titova, S A Pyankov, E V Starostina, M B Borgoyakova, L A Kisakova, D N Kisakov, L I Karpenko, S N Yakubitskiy

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta naturae. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S N ShchelkunovState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
A A SergeevState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
K A TitovaState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
S A PyankovState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
E V StarostinaState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
M B BorgoyakovaState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
L A KisakovaState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
D N KisakovState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
L I KarpenkoState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
S N YakubitskiyState Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR, Rospotrebnadzor, Koltsovo, Novosibirsk region, 630559 Russia.
State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The spread of the monkeypox virus infection among humans in many countries outside of Africa, which started in 2022, is now drawing the attention of the medical and scientific communities to the fact that immunization against this infection is sorely needed. According to current guidelines, immunization of people with the first-generation smallpox vaccine based on the vaccinia virus (VACV) LIVP strain, which is licensed in Russia, should be performed via transepidermal inoculation (skin scarification, s.s.). However, the long past experience of using this vaccination technique suggests that it does not ensure virus inoculation into patients' skin with enough reliability. The procedure of intradermal (i.d.) injection of a vaccine can be an alternative to s.s. inoculation. The effectiveness of i.d. vaccination can depend on the virus injection site on the body. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the development of the humoral and cellular immune responses in BALB/c mice immunized with the LIVP VACV strain, which was administered either by s.s. inoculation or i.d. injection into the same tail region of the animal. A virus dose of 105 pfu was used in both cases. ELISA of serum samples revealed no significant difference in the dynamics and level of production of VACV-specific IgM and IgG after i.d. or s.s. vaccination. A ELISpot analysis of splenocytes from the vaccinated mice showed that i.d. administration of VACV LIVP to mice induces a significantly greater T-cell immune response compared to s.s. inoculation. In order to assess the protective potency, on day 45 post immunization, mice were intranasally infected with lethal doses of either the cowpox virus (CPXV) or the ectromelia virus (ECTV), which is evolutionarily distant from the VACV and CPXV. Both vaccination techniques ensured complete protection of mice against infection with the CPXV. However, when mice were infected with a highly virulent strain of ECTV, 50% survived in the i.d. immunized group, whereas only 17% survived in the s.s. immunized group. It appears, therefore, that i.d. injection of the VACV can elicit a more potent protective immunity against orthopoxviruses compared to the conventional s.s. technique.

Indexed as

antibodiesintradermal injectionorthopoxvirusesskin scarificationT cellsvaccinia virus

Identifiers

PMID36694907
PMCPMC9844093
OpenAlexW4317566885

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.