ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Effective Aerosol Inoculation of Dose-Escalated Seasonal Influenza H3N2 Virus in Controlled Human Infection Model.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human challenge models (CHIMs) are instrumental in advancing influenza research but have traditionally relied on intranasal inoculation, which does not mimic the natural aerosol transmission of the virus. We conducted a dose-escalation influenza CHIM study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of two modern aerosol delivery systems: a flow-focusing monodisperse aerosol generator (FMAG) and a medical nebulizer. Fourteen healthy adults aged 18-49 years were exposed to influenza A/Perth/16/2009 (H3N2) in a controlled inpatient setting. Infection rates were 75% (3/4) with FMAG and 50% (2/4) with the nebulizer at the higher dose. Infections were self-limited, with sinus congestion, rhinorrhea, and cough being the most common symptoms. No serious adverse events occurred. Viral shedding was reproducible across respiratory sites, and seroconversion occurred in 33% of infected participants. Symptom timing and viral kinetics were comparable to those observed in prior intranasal CHIMs. Participants receiving nebulizer-delivered virus showed earlier viral detection in the oral cavity, suggesting broader airway deposition. These findings demonstrate that aerosol influenza challenge is both safe and effective and can simulate natural infection more accurately than intranasal delivery. This reintroduction of aerosolized influenza challenge provides a robust platform for studying transmission dynamics, tissue-specific immune responses, and for evaluating next-generation vaccines and therapeutics under conditions that better approximate real-world exposure.
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.