Poor efficacy of intradermal administration of recombinant hepatitis B virus immunization in HIV‐infected individuals who fail to respond to intramuscular administration of hepatitis B virus vaccine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: It is recommended that hepatitis B virus (HBV)-susceptible, HIV-infected persons be immunized for HBV. However, 44-76% of HIV-infected persons fail to respond to a standard series of recombinant HBV vaccine. Intradermal (i.d.) administration of HBV vaccine has been effective in nonresponders to intramuscularly administered vaccine among healthcare workers, haemodialysis patients and renal transplant recipients. We evaluated the immunogenicity of HBV vaccine given by the intradermal route in HIV-infected individuals who failed to respond to two series of HBV vaccine given intramuscularly. METHODS: Recombinant HBV vaccine [10 microg HBV surface antigen (HBsAg)/mL] was administered as 0.25 mL i.d. every 2 weeks for four doses in 12 HIV-infected adults who failed to respond to six doses of HBV vaccine administered by the intramuscular route. Anti-HBs was tested at least 2 weeks following the fourth dose of i.d. administered vaccine, and if the anti-HBs titre was negative or <30 IU/L, a second series of four i.d. doses were administered every 2 weeks. Anti-HBs was measured at least 2 weeks following the second series of i.d. administered HBV vaccine and 6 and 12 months after the last dose. RESULTS: Protective levels of anti-HBs (>10 IU/L) were achieved in six subjects (50%) after four doses. Administration of four additional i.d. doses to the six nonresponders did not result in any additional seroconverters. Five of the six responders had no detectable anti-HBs at 12 months after the last dose of i.d. administered vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: The i.d. route of administration of recombinant HBV vaccine does not appear to be immunogenic in HIV-infected adults who fail to respond to six doses of intramuscularly administered 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".