The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Natural immune boosting in pertussis dynamics and the potential for long-term vaccine failure
Open accessAbstract
Incidence of whooping cough, unlike many other childhood diseases for which there is an efficacious vaccine, has been increasing over the past twenty years despite high levels of vaccine coverage. Its reemergence has been particularly noticeable among teenagers and adults. Many hypotheses have been put forward to explain these two patterns, but parsimonious reconciliation of clinical data on the limited duration of immunity with both pre- and postvaccine era age-specific incidence remains a challenge. We consider the immunologically relevant, yet epidemiologically largely neglected, possibility that a primed immune system can respond to a lower dose of antigen than a naive one. We hypothesize that during the prevaccine era teenagers’ and adults’ primed immunity was frequently boosted by reexposure, so maintaining herd immunity in the face of potentially eroding individual immunity. In contrast, low pathogen circulation in the current era, except during epidemic outbreaks, allows immunity to be lost before reexposure occurs. We develop and analyze an age-structured model that encapsulates this hypothesis. We find that immune boosting must be more easily triggered than primary infection to account for age-incidence data. We make age-specific and dynamical predictions through bifurcation analysis and simulation. The boosting model proposed here parsimoniously captures four key features of pertussis data from highly vaccinated countries: ( i ) the shift in age-specific incidence, ( ii ) reemergence with high vaccine coverage, ( iii ) the possibility for cyclic dynamics in the pre- and postvaccine eras, and ( iv ) the apparent shift from susceptible-infectious-recovered (SIR)-like to susceptible-infectious-recovered-susceptible (SIRS)-like phenomenology of infection and immunity to Bordetella pertussis .
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Ecological models and data in R
Bolker, B. M. (2008) · doi:10.2307/j.ctvcm4g37 · Cited by 1,297
Cited by
Statistical physics of vaccination
Wang, Z., Bauch, C. T., Bhattacharyya, S., d'Onofrio, A., Manfredi, P., Perc, M., Perra, N., Salathé, M., & Zhao, D. (2016) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.10.006 · Cited by 872
Metadata
- Authors
- Lavine, J. S., King, A. A., & Bjørnstad, O. N.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2011-03-21
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 7259-7264
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2072539442
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Natural immune boosting in pertussis dynamics and the potential for long-term vaccine failure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1014394108
- The paper
- Lavine, J. S., King, A. A., & Bjørnstad, O. N. (2011). Natural immune boosting in pertussis dynamics and the potential for long-term vaccine failure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1014394108
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.