CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Vector-borne infectious diseasesBrucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatmentMicrobial infections and disease research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Safety, efficacy and immunogenicity of a recombinant Osp subunit canine Lyme disease vaccine

Open access
Ma, Jianneng, Hine, Paul M., Clough, Ellen R., Fish, Durland, Coughlin, Richard T., Beltz, Gerald A., Shew, Marvin G.·1996·Vaccine
DOI 10.1016/s0264-410x(96)00045-x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

A subunit canine Lyme disease vaccine formulated with recombinant lipidated Osp A and OspB and saponin QS21 was assessed for safety, protective efficacy, and immunogenicity. Ten normal beagles were subcutaneously vaccinated twice at age 12 and 16 weeks, respectively. Three months after the second vaccination, the vaccinates and another 10 nonvaccinated control beagles were challenged by feeding ticks on each dog for 5 days using eight field-collected adult female and six adult male Ixodes scapularis infected with Lyme disease spirochetes per dog. Adverse reactions associated with the vaccinations were limited to injection site swellings which occurred within the first 48 h and resolved within a week. The local reaction was independent of vaccination times and tick challenge. On the basis of typical clinical signs, xenodiagnosis, and diagnostic immunoblotting, all 10 controls were infected; five developed lameness and three of them experienced at least two to three episodes of limping during a 10-month monitoring period. In contrast, eight of ten vaccinates were protected and two infected vaccinates, as judged by xenodiagnosis, were asymptomatic. None of the protected vaccinates developed antibodies to diagnostic spirochetal antigens other than OspA and OspB. In contrast, most controls produced antibodies to borrelial antigens, but not to OspA and OspB. Antibody production in vaccinates receiving a third vaccination 10 months postchallenge was greatly boosted; the geometric mean antibody titer was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) than that tested prechallenge. Thus, the subunit canine Lyme disease vaccine was safe and protective and elicited immunological memory. Vaccinated dogs were serologically distinguishable from those naturally exposed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0264-410x(96)00045-x

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Three of the studies reporting adverse events noted mild swelling and reddening at the injection site.

    “Three of these studies noted mild swelling and reddening at the injection site.1, 30, 32”

    From Efficacy of Borrelia burgdorferi vaccine in dogs in North America: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Vaccine safety section reports slight swelling at the injection sites of vaccinated dogs, supporting that part of the claim. It does not report reddening; it describes the swelling as occurring without heat or tenderness. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • One study reported that 8 of 10 dogs had a slight swelling at the injection site at the 1st vaccination and 3 of the 10 dogs had a similar reaction at the 2nd vaccination.

    “One of these studies reported that 8 of 10 dogs had a slight swelling at the injection site at the 1st vaccination and 3 of the 10 dogs had a similar reaction at the 2nd vaccination.32”

    From Efficacy of Borrelia burgdorferi vaccine in dogs in North America: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [32]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Ma, J., Hine, P. M., Clough, E. R., Fish, D., Coughlin, R. T., Beltz, G. A., & Shew, M. G.
Affiliations
  • Mallinckrodt (United States) (US)
  • Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Ma, Jianneng
ORCID
Fish, Durland
Venue
Vaccine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-10
Volume
14
Issue
14
Pages
1366-1374
ISSN
0264-410X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0264-410x(96)00045-x
OpenAlex
W2011484134
Cited by
21
References
62
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
1.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Vaccine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Vector-borne infectious diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Brucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Microbial infections and disease research
Keywords
subunit vaccine, OspA, OspB, Ixodes scapularis, Borrelia burgdorferi, vaccine safety, vaccine efficacy, immunogenicity, xenodiagnosis, antibody response, immunological memory, serological cross-reactivity, dogs
MeSH terms
Animals, Antibodies, Bacterial, Antigens, Bacterial, Bacterial Outer Membrane Proteins, Dogs, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Immune Sera, Lyme Disease, Vaccines, Synthetic, Borrelia burgdorferi Group

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review