Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38570502›Full record

ReviewNPJ vaccines2024

Reverse development of vaccines against antimicrobial-resistant pathogens.

Fabio Bagnoli, Ilaria Galgani, V Kumaran Vadivelu, Sanjay Phogat

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ vaccines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Pangenome-GuidedPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. 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

4 authors.

Fabio BagnoliGSK, Siena, Italy. fabio.x.bagnoli@gsk.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-3420-0452
Ilaria GalganiGSK, Siena, Italy.
V Kumaran VadiveluGSK, Rockville, MD, USA.
Sanjay PhogatGSK, Rockville, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccine R&D is typically a lengthy process taking >10 years. However, vaccines still fail in clinical development because of unreliable animal models or absent immunological correlates of protection. Without a correlate of protection, phase-1 and -2 studies of safety and immunogenicity can fail to predict phase-3 efficacy. Indeed, the history of vaccine development is replete with promising phase-1 and -2 results and failed phase-3 efficacy trials. To avoid this misfortune, we present Reverse Vaccine Development for vaccines against antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) pathogens. In this approach, instead of evaluating efficacy in phase 3, proof-of-principle efficacy is evaluated as early as possible in a population with a high incidence of disease, which may differ from the population intended for registration, and can be a controlled human infection population. To identify a correlate of protection in these populations, the vaccine-elicited immune response is compared between protected and unprotected subjects. If a correlate is identified, it can help to refine the vaccine dosage, schedule, and formulation, and facilitate the assessment of vaccine efficacy in other populations with different attack rates, subject characteristics, and disease manifestations. This may be the only way to provide life-saving vaccines to populations affected by AMR-pathogen diseases at incidences that are typically low and unsuited to phase-3 efficacy trials. The availability of a correlate of protection early in clinical development can potentially prevent failures of large phase-3 trials and unnecessary exposures of populations to inefficacious vaccines that have resulted in disinvestment in the development of vaccines against AMR pathogens.

Identifiers

PMID38570502
PMCPMC10991305

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.