Archaeosomes as Adjuvants for Combination Vaccines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study evaluated the potential of archaesomes, prepared from the total polar lipids extracted from Methanobrevibacter smithii, as adjuvants for combination (multivalent) vaccines. Groups of Balb/c mice were immunized subcutaneously at day 0 and 21 with one of the following vaccines: trivalent vaccine formulated by the simultaneous co-encapsulation of bovine serum albumine (BSA), ovalbumin (OVA) and hen egg lysozyme (HEL) into archaeosomes (CEC vaccine); an univalent archaeosome vaccine (UVE vaccine) containing either BSA, OVA or HEL; or an admixture vaccine (AMC vaccine) consisting of the three UVE vaccines. Serum specific antibody (IgG + M) responses were determined at day 32, 112 and 203, and specific IgG1 and IgG2a responses were determined at day 112. Mice immunized with the CEC of AMC vaccine developed strong and sustained specific antibody responses to all three antigens at a magnitude similar to those seen in control mice immunized with UVE vaccines. Moreover, the serum BSA-, OVA-, and HEL-specific IgG1 and IgG2a levels in the CEC and AMC immunized mice were overall comparable to those of the UVE immunized control mice. Boosting CEC and AMC vaccinated mice with antigens alone at day 203 elicited strong antibody memory responses, comparable to those in the UVE vaccinated groups. These results show that archaeosomes could be used as adjuvants in developing combination vaccines.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".