| Title |
Improved proliferation of antigen-specific cytolytic T lymphocytes using a multimodal nanovaccine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s112432 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bo Li, Michael Siuta, Vanessa Bright, Dmitry Koktysh, Brittany K Matlock, Megan E Dumas, Meiying Zhu, Alex Holt, Donald Stec, Shenglou Deng, Paul B Savage, Sebastian Joyce, Wellington Pham |
| Abstract |
The present study investigated the immunoenhancing property of our newly designed nanovaccine, that is, its ability to induce antigen-specific immunity. This study also evaluated the synergistic effect of a novel compound PBS-44, an α-galactosylceramide analog, in boosting the immune response induced by our nanovaccine. The nanovaccine was prepared by encapsulating ovalbumin (ova) and an adjuvant within the poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) nanoparticles. Quantitative analysis of our study data showed that the encapsulated vaccine was physically and biologically stable; the core content of our nanovaccine was found to be released steadily and slowly, and nearly 90% of the core content was slowly released over the course of 25 days. The in vivo immunization studies exhibited that the nanovaccine induced stronger and longer immune responses compared to its soluble counterpart. Similarly, intranasal inhalation of the nanovaccine induced more robust antigen-specific CD8(+) T cell response than intraperitoneal injection of nanovaccine. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 17% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 November 2016.
All research outputs
#8,261,140
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,007
of 4,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,759
of 317,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#28
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,121 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,794 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.