MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063445611 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0086555

Randomized Controlled Ferret Study to Assess the Direct Impact of 2008–09 Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine on A(H1N1)pdm09 Disease Risk

2014· article· en· W2063445611 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Danuta M. Skowronski, Marie‐Ève Hamelin, Gaston De Serres, Naveed Z. Janjua, Guiyun Li, Suzana Sabaiduc, Xavier Bouhy, Christian Couture, Anders Leung, Darwyn Kobasa, Carissa Embury‐Hyatt, Erwin de Bruin, Robert Balshaw, Sophie Lavigne, Martin Petric, Marion Koopmans, Guy Boivin

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Food Inspection AgencyPublic Health Agency of CanadaInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of ManitobaCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversité LavalBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInstitute of Infection and ImmunityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSanofi PasteurBritish Columbia Centre for Disease ControlEuropean CommissionMichael Smith Health Research BCWellcome TrustSanofi
KeywordsHemagglutination assayPlaceboMedicineInfluenza A virusAntibody titerVirusImmunologyTiterInternal medicineAntibodyRandomized controlled trialViral sheddingInfluenza vaccineInfluenza A virus subtype H5N1VirologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During spring-summer 2009, several observational studies from Canada showed increased risk of medically-attended, laboratory-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 illness among prior recipients of 2008-09 trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV). Explanatory hypotheses included direct and indirect vaccine effects. In a randomized placebo-controlled ferret study, we tested whether prior receipt of 2008-09 TIV may have directly influenced A(H1N1)pdm09 illness. Thirty-two ferrets (16/group) received 0.5 mL intra-muscular injections of the Canadian-manufactured, commercially-available, non-adjuvanted, split 2008-09 Fluviral or PBS placebo on days 0 and 28. On day 49 all animals were challenged (Ch0) with A(H1N1)pdm09. Four ferrets per group were randomly selected for sacrifice at day 5 post-challenge (Ch+5) and the rest followed until Ch+14. Sera were tested for antibody to vaccine antigens and A(H1N1)pdm09 by hemagglutination inhibition (HI), microneutralization (MN), nucleoprotein-based ELISA and HA1-based microarray assays. Clinical characteristics and nasal virus titers were recorded pre-challenge then post-challenge until sacrifice when lung virus titers, cytokines and inflammatory scores were determined. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups of influenza-naïve animals. Antibody rise to vaccine antigens was evident by ELISA and HA1-based microarray but not by HI or MN assays; virus challenge raised antibody to A(H1N1)pdm09 by all assays in both groups. Beginning at Ch+2, vaccinated animals experienced greater loss of appetite and weight than placebo animals, reaching the greatest between-group difference in weight loss relative to baseline at Ch+5 (7.4% vs. 5.2%; p = 0.01). At Ch+5 vaccinated animals had higher lung virus titers (log-mean 4.96 vs. 4.23pfu/mL, respectively; p = 0.01), lung inflammatory scores (5.8 vs. 2.1, respectively; p = 0.051) and cytokine levels (p>0.05). At Ch+14, both groups had recovered. Findings in influenza-naïve, systematically-infected ferrets may not replicate the human experience. While they cannot be considered conclusive to explain human observations, these ferret findings are consistent with direct, adverse effect of prior 2008-09 TIV receipt on A(H1N1)pdm09 illness. As such, they warrant further in-depth investigation and search for possible mechanistic explanations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207