MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285740580 · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2022.880368

RSV Prevention in All Infants: Which Is the Most Preferable Strategy?

2022· review· en· W4285740580 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Immunology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSanofi
KeywordsPalivizumabMedicineImmunizationPediatricsPopulationAsthmaIntensive care medicineImmunologyVirusImmune systemEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes a spectrum of respiratory illnesses in infants and young children that may lead to hospitalizations and a substantial number of outpatient visits, which result in a huge economic and healthcare burden. Most hospitalizations happen in otherwise healthy infants, highlighting the need to protect all infants against RSV. Moreover, there is evidence on the association between early-life RSV respiratory illness and recurrent wheezing/asthma-like symptoms As such, RSV is considered a global health priority. However, despite this, the only prevention strategy currently available is palivizumab, a monoclonal antibody (mAb) indicated in a subset of preterm infants or those with comorbidities, hence leaving the majority of the infant population unprotected against this virus. Therefore, development of prevention strategies against RSV for all infants entering their first RSV season constitutes a large unmet medical need. The aim of this review is to explore different immunization approaches to protect all infants against RSV. Prevention strategies include maternal immunization, immunization of infants with vaccines, immunization of infants with licensed mAbs (palivizumab), and immunization of infants with long-acting mAbs (e.g., nirsevimab, MK-1654). Of these, palivizumab use is restricted to a small population of infants and does not offer a solution for all-infant protection, whereas vaccine development in infants has encountered various challenges, including the immaturity of the infant immune system, highlighting that future pediatric vaccines will most likely be used in older infants (>6 months of age) and children. Consequently, maternal immunization and immunization of infants with long-acting mAbs represent the two feasible strategies for protection of all infants against RSV. Here, we present considerations regarding these two strategies covering key areas which include mechanism of action, "consistency" of protection, RSV variability, duration of protection, flexibility and optimal timing of immunization, benefit for the mother, programmatic implementation, and acceptance of each strategy by key stakeholders. We conclude that, based on current data, immunization of infants with long-acting mAbs might represent the most effective approach for protecting all infants entering their first RSV season.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.299 · 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