ArticleVaccines2024
Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity Against MPXV of the Intradermal Administration of Modified Vaccinia Ankara Compared to the Standard Subcutaneous Route.
Article in Vaccines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward Precision Vaccinology for Mpox: Rational Antigen Design, Next-Generation Platforms, and Immune Correlates of Protection.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Review
- Longitudinal assessment of MPXV-specific IgG avidity in patients with Mpox infection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- mRNA vaccine platforms and novel delivery systems: From mechanistic principles to clinical translation.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Review
- From neglected to notoriety: a review of Mpox clinical features, virology, epidemiology, treatment and prevention strategies.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
37 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe recent resurgence of mpox in central Africa has been declared a new public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) requiring coordinated international responses. Vaccination is a priority to expand protection and enhance control strategies, but the vaccine's need exceeds the currently available doses. Intradermal (ID) administration of one-fifth of the standard modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA-BN) dose was temporarily authorized during the 2022 PHEIC. Studies conducted before 2022 provided evidence about the humoral response against the vaccinia virus (VACV) after vaccination but not against the mpox virus (MPXV). Moreover, no data are available on the T-cell response elicited by MVA-BN administered subcutaneously or intradermally.
methodsWe compare the two vaccine administration routes according to reactogenicity (
resultsWe found that the ID route elicited higher titers of MPXV-specific IgG (mean difference of 0.26 log
conclusionsMVA-BN was globally well tolerated despite higher reactogenicity for the ID than the SC route, especially for the reactions at the local injection site. The ID dose-sparing strategy was proven safe and immunogenic and would make vaccination available to more people. Our data support the current WHO recommendation of using the ID route in low-medium-income countries (LMIC), although response data in people infected with the new 1b clade are urgently needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.