Early Appearance of Bactericidal Antibodies after Polysaccharide Challenge of Toddlers Primed with a Group C Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine: What Is Its Role in the Maintenance of Protection?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The contribution of memory responses after meningococcal vaccination to protection may depend on the rapidity of the response. Toddlers were challenged with a licensed polysaccharide (PS) vaccine 1 year after vaccination with a single dose of meningococcal group C-CRM(197) conjugate (MCC) vaccine at the age of 12 to 15 months. Bactericidal antibodies and immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies detected by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) were measured before challenge and 4, 7, 14, or 21 Days later ("Days" refer to treatment groups, "days" to sampling days). Among 281 subjects in the intent-to-treat population, 173 per-protocol (PP) subjects were challenged with 10 microg PS antigen and 103 others with a 50-microg PS vaccinating dose. Capsular PS-specific ELISA IgG titers were negligible in baseline samples and increased only twofold within 4 days of PS administration. In contrast, the proportion of PP subjects with serum bactericidal antibody (SBA) titers of >or=1:8 or >or=1:128 increased, respectively, from 41% and 16% before challenge to 84% and 74% at Day 4 and to 100% and 97% at Day 7. Recipients of 50 microg PS responded with similar kinetics but showed a trend toward higher antibody levels. Unexpectedly, 69% of subjects bled on days 2 to 3 already had achieved SBA titers of >or=1:8. The majority of toddlers previously immunized with MCC and challenged 1 year later with PS antigen mounted protective levels of bactericidal antibody within 2 to 4 days.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".