Cited by 62Influenza Virus Research StudiesBacterial Infections and VaccinesSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research

Safety and Immunogenicity of Influenza A H5 Subunit Vaccines: Effect of Vaccine Schedule and Antigenic Variant

Open access
Belshe, Robert B., Frey, Sharon E., Graham, Irene, Mulligan, Mark J., Edupuganti, Srilatha, Jackson, Lisa A., Wald, Anna, Poland, Gregory +6 more·2011·The Journal of Infectious Diseases

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The current US national stockpile of influenza H5 vaccine was produced using the antigen from the strain A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (a clade 1 H5 virus). Recent H5 disease has been caused by antigenically divergent H5 viruses, including A/Indonesia/05/2005 (a clade 2 H5 virus). METHODS: The influence of schedule on the antibody response to 2 doses of H5 vaccines (one a clade 1 hemagglutinin protein [HA] vaccine and one a clade 2 HA vaccine) containing 90 μg of antigen was evaluated in healthy adults 18-49 years of age. RESULTS: Two doses of vaccine were required to induce antibody titers ≥ 1:10 in most subjects. Accelerated schedules were immunogenic, and antibody developed after vaccinations on days 0 and 7, 0 and 14, and 0 and 28, with the day 0 and 7 schedule inducing lower titers than those induced with the other schedules. With mixed vaccine schedules of clade 1 followed by clade 2 vaccine administration, the first vaccination primed for a heterologous boost. The heterologous response was improved when the second vaccination was given 6 months after the first, compared with the response when the second vaccination was given after an interval of 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: An accelerated vaccine schedule of injections administered at days 0 and 14 was as immunogenic as a vaccine schedule of injections at days 0 and 28, but both schedules were inferior to a vaccine schedule of injections administered at 0 and 6 months for priming for heterologous vaccine boosting. Clinical Trial Registry Number: NCT00703053.

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 · 10.1093/infdis/jiq093

Cites

12 of 12 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?

  • Humans receiving two doses of an investigational H5 vaccine based on clade 2.1.3 A/Indonesia/05/2005 PR8-IBCDC-RG2 failed to elicit neutralizing antibodies against A/Vietnam or vice versa, and heterologous prime-boost was necessary to elicit cross-neutralizing antibody responses.

    “Humans receiving two doses of an investigational H5 vaccine based on clade 2.1.3A/Indonesia/05/2005 PR8-IBCDC-RG2 failed to elicit neutralizing antibodies against A/Vietnam or vice versa and instead heterologous prime-boost was necessary to elicit cross-neutralizing antibody responses21.”

    From Clade 2.3.4.4b but not historical clade 1 HA replicating RNA vaccine protects against bovine H5N1 challenge in mice (2025) · cites this paper as [21]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Belshe, R. B., Frey, S. E., Graham, I., Mulligan, M. J., Edupuganti, S., Jackson, L. A., Wald, A., Poland, G., Jacobson, R., Keyserling, H. L., Spearman, P., Hill, H., Wolff, M., & for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases–Funded Vaccine and Treatment Evaluation Units
Affiliations
  • Saint Louis University (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Emmes (United States) (US)
Venue
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
Published
2011-03-01
Volume
203
Issue
5
Pages
666-673
ISSN
  • 0022-1899 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6613
OpenAlex
W2013230062
Cited by
62
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000454)
  • U.S. Public Health Service (HHSN-272200800003C)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (HHSN272200800004C, HHSN272200800005C)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Influenza Virus Research Studies
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Bacterial Infections and Vaccines
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Keywords
subunit vaccine, vaccination schedule, accelerated vaccination schedule, antigenic variants, heterologous booster, antibody response, hemagglutinin, vaccine immunogenicity, vaccine safety, pandemic influenza preparedness
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Antibodies, Viral, Antigenic Variation, Drug Administration Schedule, Female, Humans, Immunization, Secondary, Influenza, Human, Influenza Vaccines, Male, Middle Aged, Influenza A virus, Vaccines, Subunit, Influenza A Virus, H5N1 Subtype, Young Adult

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