MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414195801 · doi:10.1007/s40883-025-00473-2

Safety and Biocompatibility of a Spray-Dried Influenza Microparticle Vaccine in Mice

2025· article· en· W4414195801 on OpenAlexaff
Alaric C. Siddoway, David Verhoeven, Tyler Harm, Michael J. Wannemuehler, Surya K. Mallapragada, Balaji Narasimhan

Bibliographic record

VenueRegenerative Engineering and Translational Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsImmunovaccine (Canada)
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNanovaccine Institute, Iowa State UniversityNational Institutes of HealthDivision of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesIowa State University
KeywordsBiocompatibilityMicroparticleInfluenza vaccineImmunogenicityImmune systemVaccination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Influenza virus is a persistent source of morbidity and moribundity, and effective disease control requires ever-evolving effective vaccines. In this work, we evaluate the safety and biocompatibility of two novel polymeric particle-based influenza vaccines. Mice were immunized either intranasally or subcutaneously with these two formulations and examined at 1 h, 1 day, and 14 days post-immunization for histopathology in liver, kidneys, and lungs and serum biomarker analysis. Mice that received an intranasal vaccination were also observed for pulmonary disruption via whole body plethysmography. Examination of tissues post-immunization found only limited inflammation, with no difference observed in plethysmography measurements and no serum biomarkers (e.g., AST, AlkPhos) indicating tissue damage. Collectively, these data support the conclusion that these polymeric particle-based influenza vaccine formulations were well tolerated by the animals and did not induce any adverse side effects. Lay summary: Particle-based influenza vaccines were safety tolerated by mice and did not induce any adverse side effects. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40883-025-00473-2.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegenerative Engineering and Translational MedicineSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207