MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125399376 · doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000003621

Evaluation of Recombinant Herpes Zoster Vaccine for Primary Immunization of Varicella-seronegative Transplant Recipients

2021· article· en· W3125399376 on OpenAlexaff
Arnaud G. L’Huillier, Cédric Hirzel, Victor H. Ferreira, Matthew Ierullo, Terrance Ku, Nazia Selzner, Jeffrey Schiff, S. Juvet, Congrong Miao, D. Scott Schmid, Atul Humar, Deepali Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMedicineImmunogenicityImmunologyShinglesImmunizationVaccinationVaricella zoster virusVirologySeroconversionAdverse effectChickenpox VaccineVaricella vaccineVirusImmune systemInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immunization of varicella-zoster virus (VZV)-seronegative solid organ transplant (SOT) patients using the live-attenuated varicella vaccine is generally contraindicated, leaving no widely applicable immunization option. The recombinant subunit herpes zoster vaccine (RZV) is indicated for VZV-seropositive persons to prevent shingles but could potentially also protect VZV-seronegative persons against varicella. We performed a safety and immunogenicity evaluation of RZV in VZV-seronegative SOT recipients as an option for protection. METHODS: VZV-seronegative adult SOT patients with no history of varicella/shingles vaccine or disease were given 2 doses of RZV vaccine 2-6 mo apart. Blood was drawn prevaccination (V1), before the second dose (V2), and 4 wk after the second dose (V3). Humoral immunity (anti-glycoprotein E) and cell-mediated immunity were evaluated, with polyfunctional cells defined as cells producing ≥2 cytokines. RESULTS: Among 31 eligible VZV-seronegative SOT patients screened, 23 were enrolled. Median age was 38 y and median time since transplant procedure was 3.8 y. The most frequent transplant types were liver (35%) and lung (30%). Median anti-glycoprotein E levels significantly increased from V1 to V3 (P = 0.001) and V2 to V3 (P < 0.001), even though only 55% had a positive seroresponse. Median polyfunctional CD4 T-cell counts increased from V1 to V2 (54/106 versus 104/106 cells; P = 0.041) and from V2 to V3 (380/106; P = 0.002). Most adverse events were mild with no rejection episodes. CONCLUSIONS: RZV was safe and elicited significant humoral and cellular responses in VZV-seronegative SOT patients and has the potential to be considered as a preventive strategy against primary varicella.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207