ArticleVirology journal2026
Design and computational evaluation of a prophylactic and therapeutic multi-epitope vaccine candidate against cervical cancer.
Article in Virology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computational systems immunology and multi-scale modeling for the design of a Multi-Epitope Vaccine (MEV) against emerging multidrug-resistant Klebsiella michiganensis.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2026Article
- Development and evaluation of a multi-epitope subunit vaccine against Salmonella Enteritidis infection.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Evolutionary Dynamics of Human Papillomavirus in Thailand: Immunoinformatic Design of a Synergistic L1/L2 Vaccine Candidate.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- In silico framework for designing and validating a multi-stage subunit vaccine against Tuberculosis using reverse vaccinology approach.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women worldwide, caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV). HPV16 /18 are strongly associated with the development of cervical cancer. HPV vaccines are not widely available in economically underdeveloped areas. They also have limited efficacy against pre-existing HPV infections and cervical lesions. Therefore, the study aims to computationally design a vaccine that induces both prophylactic and therapeutic immunity against cervical cancer. Using computational approaches, we designed a multi-epitope vaccine incorporating 62 cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) epitopes, 7 helper T lymphocyte (HTL) epitopes, and 3 linear B-cell epitopes from conserved regions of HPV16/18 E6, E7, and L2 proteins. To increase immunogenicity, the adjuvant RS-09 (APPHALS) was added to the N-terminal of the vaccine. The chosen CTL and HTL epitopes have the potential to achieve 100% worldwide population coverage. The vaccine candidate has appropriate physicochemical properties. The vaccine's secondary and tertiary structures were predicted, followed by refinement and validation of the models. The vaccine has a high affinity for Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), as indicated by its molecular docking score of -1164.4 kcal/mol and RMSD fluctuation range of 17 to 22.5 angstroms (Å) at the end of the MD simulation period. Immune response simulation showed that the vaccine candidate could induce strong humoral and cellular immune responses. The vaccine sequence's GC content was calculated to be 48.99%, and subsequently, in silico cloning of the vaccine was performed in the pET28a (+) vector. The results reveal that this vaccine is highly immunogenic; however, experimental testing is required to confirm its efficacy and safety.
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.