Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 355

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Correlation between Immunologic Responses to a Recombinant Glycoprotein 120 Vaccine and Incidence of HIV‐1 Infection in a Phase 3 HIV‐1 Preventive Vaccine Trial

Open access
Gilbert, Peter B., Peterson, Michael L., Follmann, Dean, Hudgens, Michael G., Francis, Donald P., Gurwith, Marc, Heyward, William L., Jobes, David V., Popovic, Vladimir, Self, Steven G., Sinangil, Faruk, Burke, Donald, Berman, Phillip W.·2005·The Journal of Infectious Diseases

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An objective of the first efficacy trial of a candidate vaccine containing recombinant human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 envelope glycoprotein 120 (rgp120) antigens was to assess correlations between antibody responses to rgp120 and the incidence of HIV-1 infection. METHODS: Within the randomized trial (for vaccinees, n=3598; for placebo recipients, n=1805), binding and neutralizing antibody responses to rgp120 were quantitated. A case-cohort design was used to study correlations between antibody levels and HIV-1 incidence. RESULTS: Peak antibody levels were significantly inversely correlated with HIV-1 incidence. The relative risk (RR) of infection was 0.63 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.89) per log(10) higher neutralization titer against HIV-1(MN), and the RRs of infection for second-, third-, and fourth-quartile responses of antibody blocking of gp120 binding to soluble CD4 versus first-quartile responses (the lowest responses) were 0.35, 0.28, and 0.22, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite inducing a complex, robust immune response, the vaccine was unable to reduce the incidence of HIV-1. Two interpretations of the correlative results are that the levels of antibodies (i) caused both an increased (low responders) and decreased (high responders) risk of HIV-1 acquisition or (ii) represented a correlate of susceptibility to HIV-1 but had no causal effect on susceptibility. Although the data cannot definitively discriminate between these 2 explanations, (ii) appears to be more likely.

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 · 10.1086/428405

Cites

25 of 25 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

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

Show all 25 references

Cited by

See all 355

Metadata

Authors
Gilbert, P. B., Peterson, M. L., Follmann, D., Hudgens, M. G., Francis, D. P., Gurwith, M., Heyward, W. L., Jobes, D. V., Popovic, V., Self, S. G., Sinangil, F., Burke, D., & Berman, P. W.
Venue
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
Published
2005-03
Volume
191
Issue
5
Pages
666-677
ISSN
  • 0022-1899 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6613
OpenAlex
W2138957964
Cited by
355
References
25
FWCI
8.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Correlation between Immunologic Responses to a Recombinant Glycoprotein 120 Vaccine and Incidence of HIV‐1 Infection in a Phase 3 HIV‐1 Preventive Vaccine Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/428405
The paper
Gilbert, P. B., Peterson, M. L., Follmann, D., Hudgens, M. G., Francis, D. P., Gurwith, M., Heyward, W. L., Jobes, D. V., Popovic, V., Self, S. G., Sinangil, F., Burke, D., & Berman, P. W. (2005). Correlation between Immunologic Responses to a Recombinant Glycoprotein 120 Vaccine and Incidence of HIV‐1 Infection in a Phase 3 HIV‐1 Preventive Vaccine Trial. The Journal of Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1086/428405

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.