Systems Biology Methods Applied to Blood and Tissue for a Comprehensive Analysis of Immune Response to Hepatitis B Vaccine in Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional vaccine design has been based on trial-and-error approaches, which have been generally successful. However, there have been some major failures in vaccine development and we still do not have highly effective licensed vaccines for tuberculosis, HIV, respiratory syncytial virus and other major infections of global significance. Approaches at rational vaccine design have been limited by our understanding of the immune response to vaccination at the molecular level. Tools now exist to undertake in-depth analysis using systems biology approaches, but to be fully realized studies are required in humans with intensive blood and tissue sampling. Methods that support this intensive sampling need to be developed and validated as feasible. To this end, we describe here a detailed approach that was applied in a study of 15 healthy adults, who were immunized with hepatitis B vaccine. A total of ~350 mL of blood, 2 lymph node samples and 12 microbiome samples were obtained over a ~7-month period, enabling comprehensive analysis of the immune response at the molecular level, including single cell and tissue sample analysis. Samples were collected for analysis of immune phenotyping, whole blood and single cell gene expression, proteomics, lipidomics, epigenetics, whole blood response to key immune stimuli, cytokine responses, in vitro T cell responses, antibody repertoire analysis and the microbiome. Data integration was undertaken using different approaches – NetworkAnalyst and DIABLO. Our results demonstrate that such intensive sampling studies are feasible in healthy adults, and data integration tools exist to analyze the vast amount of data generated from a multi-omics systems biology approach. This will provide the basis for a better understanding of vaccine-induced immunity and accelerate future rational vaccine design.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".