Group A streptococcal vaccines: facts versus fantasy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides an overview of progress of the development of group A streptococcal (GAS) vaccines with a focus on recent advances. RECENT FINDINGS: Historically, GAS vaccine development has focused on the N-terminus of the M protein, which ultimately led to successful phase I/II clinical trials of a 26-valent recombinant M protein vaccine in 2004-2005. More recently, interest in antigens conserved among most, if not all, group A streptococci has increased. However, no vaccines containing these antigens have reached clinical trials. Three strategies have been used to develop conserved antigen vaccine candidates: use of the conserved region of the M protein; use of well described virulence factors as antigens, including streptococcal C5a peptidase, streptococcal carbohydrate, fibronectin-binding proteins, cysteine protease and streptococcal pili; and use of reverse vaccinology to identify novel antigens. SUMMARY: Several vaccine candidates against GAS infection are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development. Although there is great hope that one of these vaccine candidates will reach licensure in the next decade, only one, the multivalent N-terminal vaccine, has entered clinical trials in the last 30 years. Although strong advocacy for GAS vaccine development is important, there remains an urgent need to institute available public health control measures against GAS diseases globally, particularly in developing countries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".