Single Intranasal Mucosal<i>Mycobacterium bovis</i>BCG Vaccination Confers Improved Protection Compared to Subcutaneous Vaccination against Pulmonary Tuberculosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whether the intranasal (i.n.) route of Mycobacterium bovis BCG vaccination provides better protection against pulmonary tuberculosis than subcutaneous (s.c.) vaccination remains an incompletely solved issue. In the present study, we compared both immune responses and protection elicited by single BCG vaccinations via the i.n. or s.c. route in BALB/c mice. While both i.n. and s.c. vaccination triggered comparable levels of primary immune activation in the spleen and draining lymph nodes, i.n. vaccination led to a greater antigen-specific gamma interferon recall response in splenocytes than s.c. vaccination upon secondary respiratory mycobacterial challenge, accompanied by an increased frequency of antigen-specific lymphocytes. There was also a quicker cellular response in the lungs of i.n. vaccinated mice upon mycobacterial challenge. Mice vaccinated i.n. were found to be much better protected, particularly in the lung, than s.c. vaccinated counterparts against pulmonary tuberculosis at both 3 and 6 months postvaccination. These results suggest that the i.n. route of vaccination improves the protective effect of the current BCG 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 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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".