MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027893306 · doi:10.1139/w06-065

Intranasal immunization with a recombinant truncated FimH adhesin adjuvanted with CpG oligodeoxynucleotides protects mice against uropathogenic<i>Escherichia coli</i>challenge

2006· article· en· W2027893306 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thelma Verónica Poggio, José Leonardo La Torre, Eduardo A. Scodeller

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEscherichia coli research studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstituto Nacional de Tecnología AgropecuariaUniversité Paris-Est Créteil Val-de-MarneJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsBacterial adhesinImmunogenMicrobiologyEscherichia coliAdjuvantRecombinant DNANasal administrationBiologyCpG OligodeoxynucleotideAntibody titerAntibodyVirologyImmunizationTiterImmunologyMonoclonal antibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we assessed the efficacy of an experimental intranasal vaccine against urinary-tract infections. The vaccine contained a recombinant truncated FimH (rFimHt) adhesin plus CpG oligodeoxynucleotides. The efficacy of the vaccine was compared with that of an intramuscular vaccine that was formulated with the same immunogen plus Freund's adjuvant. Our results show that serum immunoglobulin G titers of vaccinated animals were similarly enhanced in both cases. However, the intranasal vaccine elicited higher vaginal-wash-specific immunoglobulin A titers against rFimHt than the intramuscular route. Both vaccines reduced the in vivo colonization of the bladder by uropathogenic Escherichia coli more than 100-fold in a murine cystitis model. Our results indicate that a recombinant truncated FimH adhesin plus CpG oligodeoxynucleotides is a suitable immunogenic combination that can contribute to the development of a highly efficacious urinary tract infection vaccine.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicEscherichia coli research studiesFrench-language works237,207