ReviewFrontiers in immunology2026
Serological differentiation between Mpox infection and vaccine-induced immunity: a mini-review.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, mpox has emerged as a significant global public health threat. The widespread distribution of the virus, coupled with the legacy of historical smallpox vaccination, has underscored the critical need to serologically distinguish between natural mpox infection and vaccine-induced humoral immune responses. However, the high antigenic similarity among Orthopoxvirus species leads to the production of cross-reactive antibodies, limiting the differentiation capacity of conventional serological assays. This mini-review evaluates current serological approaches aimed at discriminating between mpox infection and vaccine-induced immunity. Specifically, we analyze multiplexed immunoassays, comparative ratios based on orthologous antigens, machine learning-supported serological models, peptide-based platforms, and recombinant protein-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methods. The findings of this review indicate that multiplex immunoassays, orthologous antigen ratio-based approaches, and machine learning algorithms exhibit the highest discriminatory potential for distinguishing natural mpox infection from vaccine-induced immune responses. In addition, MPXV A27L and ATI-N-CPXV antigens may be considered promising candidates for serological differentiation, although their performance requires further investigation.
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.