Human Immune Response to a Plague Vaccine Comprising Recombinant F1 and V Antigens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human immune response to a new recombinant plague vaccine, comprising recombinant F1 (rF1) and rV antigens, has been assessed during a phase 1 safety and immunogenicity trial in healthy volunteers. All the subjects produced specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) in serum after the priming dose, which peaked in value after the booster dose (day 21), with the exception of one individual in the lowest dose level group, who responded to rF1 only. Three subjects, found to have an anti-rV titer at screening, were excluded from the overall analysis. Human antibody functionality has been assessed by quantification of antibody competing for binding to rV in vitro and also by the transfer of protective immunity in human serum into the naive mouse. Human and macaque IgG competed for binding to rV in vitro with a mouse monoclonal antibody, previously shown to protect mice against challenge with plague, suggesting that this protective B-cell epitope on rV is conserved between these three species. Total IgG to rV in individuals and the titer of IgG competing for binding to rV correlated significantly at days 21 (r = 0.72; P < 0.001) and 28 (r = 0.82; P < 0.001). Passive transfer of protective immunity into mice also correlated significantly with total IgG titer to rF1 plus rV at days 21 (r(2) = 98.6%; P < 0.001) and 28 (r(2) = 76.8%; P < 0.03). However, no significant vaccination-related change in activation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells was detected at any time. Potential serological immune correlates of protection have been investigated, but no trends specific to vaccination could be detected in cellular markers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".