Cited by 145Inhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyAdvanced Drug Delivery Systems

Immunization by a bacterial aerosol

Open access
Garcia-Contreras, Lucila, Wong, Yun-Ling, Muttil, Pavan, Padilla, Danielle, Sadoff, Jerry, DeRousse, Jessica, Germishuizen, Willem Andreas, Goonesekera, Sunali +6 more·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

By manufacturing a single-particle system in two particulate forms (i.e., micrometer size and nanometer size), we have designed a bacterial vaccine form that exhibits improved efficacy of immunization. Microstructural properties are adapted to alter dispersive and aerosol properties independently. Dried “nanomicroparticle” vaccines possess two axes of nanoscale dimensions and a third axis of micrometer dimension; the last one permits effective micrometer-like physical dispersion, and the former provides alignment of the principal nanodimension particle axes with the direction of airflow. Particles formed with this combination of nano- and micrometer-scale dimensions possess a greater ability to aerosolize than particles of standard spherical isotropic shape and of similar geometric diameter. Here, we demonstrate effective application of this biomaterial by using the live attenuated tuberculosis vaccine bacille Calmette–Guérin (BCG). Prepared as a spray-dried nanomicroparticle aerosol, BCG vaccine exhibited high-efficiency delivery and peripheral lung targeting capacity from a low-cost and technically simple delivery system. Aerosol delivery of the BCG nanomicroparticle to normal guinea pigs subsequently challenged with virulent Mycobacterium tuberculosis significantly reduced bacterial burden and lung pathology both relative to untreated animals and to control animals immunized with the standard parenteral BCG.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.0800043105

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • In guinea pigs, an aerosolized formulation of BCG nanomicroparticles generated better immune protection and enhanced resistance to TB infection than the standard parenteral BCG formulation.

    “When guinea pigs were administered an aerosolized formulation of BCG nanomicroparticles, they generated better immune protection and enhanced resistance to TB infection than when they were immunized with the standard parenteral BCG formulation 134 .”

    From Nanotechnology approaches for global infectious diseases (2021) · cites this paper as [134]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [3]Fuchs NA. Mechanics of Aerosols. Oxford, UK: Pergamon; 1964. Size and shape of aerosol particles, pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  2. [5]Hickey AJ, Fults KA, Pillai RS. Use of particle morphology to influence delivery of drugs from dry powder aerosols. J Biopharm Sci. 1992;3:107–113. [Google Scholar]
  3. [9]Kottrappa P. In: Rochester Third International Conference on Environmental Toxicity. Mercer TT, Morrow PE, Stober W, editors. Vol 14. Springfield, IL: CC Thomas; 1970. pp. 249–289. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Garcia-Contreras, L., Wong, Y.-L., Muttil, P., Padilla, D., Sadoff, J., DeRousse, J., Germishuizen, W. A., Goonesekera, S., Elbert, K., Bloom, B. R., Miller, R., Fourie, P. B., Hickey, A., & Edwards, D.
Affiliations
  • *University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7360;
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Aeras (US)
  • Medicine in Need South Africa, Medical Research Council Building Number 1, Soutpansberg Road, Pretoria 0002, South Africa;
  • **Manta, 264 Third Street, Cambridge, MA 02142
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-03-25
Volume
105
Issue
12
Pages
4656-4660
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2157675557
Cited by
145
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 12
FWCI
9.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Inhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
Keywords
BCG vaccine, tuberculosis, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, spray drying, lung targeting, guinea pig model
MeSH terms
Aerosols, Animals, Bacterial Vaccines, BCG Vaccine, Drug Administration Routes, Guinea Pigs, Humidity, Hypersensitivity, Delayed, Immunization, Leucine, Lung, Male, Spleen, Tuberculin, Mycobacterium smegmatis, Microbial Viability

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