Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39687168›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

A novel in-silico approach to design a multiepitope peptide as a vaccine candidate for

Mahdieh SobhZahedi, Mohammad Hossein YektaKooshali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Mahdieh SobhZahediDepartment of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
Mohammad Hossein YektaKooshali, Medical Biotechnology Research Center, School of Paramedicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Methods: Servers and bioinformatics tools were used to find and evaluate vaccine candidates. The bacterial genome was extracted and open reading frames were identified. The toxicity, allergenicity, immunogenicity, and homology of ORFs were investigated and non-toxic, non-allergenic with highly immunogenic were selected as a candidate for vaccine design. Next, epitopes were predicted and combined with adjuvants, linkers, and his-tag to create the vaccine candidate. Afterward, a thorough assessment of the vaccine was carried out. Results: After the investigations, an extracellular protein with access number WP_045528985.1 was selected as a vaccine candidate. Combining a total of 15 epitopes for B cells and T cells, the vaccine candidate was completed. The analysis showed that the structure of the vaccine is non-toxic, non-allergenic, and has a favorable immunogenicity score of 0.8573. Additionally, the designed vaccine passed all virtual tests, including analysis of physical and chemical characteristics, and valuations of secondary and tertiary structure. Conclusion: According to the results, this multiepitope peptide can be used as a promising vaccine candidate which warrants further development. Furthermore, further investigation is required to examine the functional characteristics, in vitro and in vivo experiments, potential applications, and animal model studies to confirm the safety, effectiveness, and long-term impacts of the vaccine formulation.

Indexed as

Aeromonas hydrophilaImmune systemImmunoinformaticsMultiepitope vaccineVaccine design

Identifiers

PMID39687168
PMCPMC11647838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.