Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38361919›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2024

The next-generation DNA vaccine platforms and delivery systems: advances, challenges and prospects.

Bowen Lu, Jing Ming Lim, Boyue Yu, Siyuan Song, Praveen Neeli, Navid Sobhani, Pavithra K, Srinivasa Reddy Bonam, Rajendra Kurapati, Junnian Zheng and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
102citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
26.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

102 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Bowen Lu *Cancer Institute, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Jing Ming Lim *Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States.
Boyue YuDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Siyuan SongDepartment of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States.
Praveen NeeliDepartment of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States.
Navid SobhaniDepartment of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States.
Pavithra KSchool of Chemistry, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Thiruvananthapuram, Thiruvananthapuram, India.
Srinivasa Reddy BonamDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, United States.
Rajendra KurapatiSchool of Chemistry, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Thiruvananthapuram, Thiruvananthapuram, India.
Junnian ZhengJiangsu Center for the Collaboration and Innovation of Cancer Biotherapy, Cancer Institute, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Dafei ChaiCancer Institute, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Baylor College of Medicine · USXuzhou Medical College · CNIndian Institute of Science Education and Research Thiruvananthapuram · INThe University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston · USUniversity of California, Berkeley · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccines have proven effective in the treatment and prevention of numerous diseases. However, traditional attenuated and inactivated vaccines suffer from certain drawbacks such as complex preparation, limited efficacy, potential risks and others. These limitations restrict their widespread use, especially in the face of an increasingly diverse range of diseases. With the ongoing advancements in genetic engineering vaccines, DNA vaccines have emerged as a highly promising approach in the treatment of both genetic diseases and acquired diseases. While several DNA vaccines have demonstrated substantial success in animal models of diseases, certain challenges need to be addressed before application in human subjects. The primary obstacle lies in the absence of an optimal delivery system, which significantly hampers the immunogenicity of DNA vaccines. We conduct a comprehensive analysis of the current status and limitations of DNA vaccines by focusing on both viral and non-viral DNA delivery systems, as they play crucial roles in the exploration of novel DNA vaccines. We provide an evaluation of their strengths and weaknesses based on our critical assessment. Additionally, the review summarizes the most recent advancements and breakthroughs in pre-clinical and clinical studies, highlighting the need for further clinical trials in this rapidly evolving field.

Indexed as

Vaccines, DNAAnimalsDrug Delivery SystemsHumansModels, AnimalVaccines, DNAdelivery systemDNA vaccinesnanoparticlesnon-viral vectorsviral vectors

Identifiers

PMID38361919
PMCPMC10867258
OpenAlexW4391444179

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.