Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 316

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Serological Basis for Use of Meningococcal Serogroup C Conjugate Vaccines in the United Kingdom: Reevaluation of Correlates of Protection

Open access
Borrow, Ray, Andrews, Nick, Goldblatt, David, Miller, Elizabeth·2001·Infection and Immunity
DOI 10.1128/iai.69.3.1568-1573.2001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The antibody data supporting the use of meningococcal serogroup C conjugate (MCC) vaccines in the United Kingdom were generated by serum bactericidal assay (SBA) using rabbit complement (rSBA). This may give higher titers than those obtained with human complement (hSBA), for which the “gold standard” correlate of protection for meningococcal C disease is a titer of ≥4. Comparison of rSBA and hSBA titers in sera from unvaccinated adults with an rSBA titer of ≥8 showed that for 93% (27 of 29) the titer was ≥4 by hSBA, confirming natural protection. Furthermore, sera from MCC vaccinees showed that an rSBA titer of <8 or ≥128 discriminated susceptibility and protection well (85% with rSBA titers of <8 had hSBA titers of <4, and 99% with rSBA titers of ≥128 had hSBA titers of ≥4). However, discrimination was poor in the rSBA titer range 8 to 64, with only 60% having hSBA titers of ≥4. In such cases we propose that protection can be assumed if there is a fourfold rise in titer between pre- and postvaccination sera or if there is a characteristic booster response to a polysaccharide challenge dose with, if available, evidence of antibody avidity maturation or an hSBA titer of result ≥4. Applying these criteria to toddlers, 10 to 40% of whom had titers in the range 8 to 64 after a single dose of MCC vaccine, showed that 94% had a fourfold rise in titer, including 98% of those in the titer range 8 to 64. In addition, of those with titers of <128 post-MCC vaccination, 90% had titers of ≥128 after a 10-μg polysaccharide booster dose, compared with only 7% of unprimed age-matched toddlers given a full 50-μg dose. Furthermore, the increase in geometric mean avidity index pre- and postbooster was independent of post-primary MCC titer. These results indicated that the majority of toddlers with an rSBA titer between 8 and 64, and some of those with an hSBA result of <4, have mounted a protective immune response with the induction of immunological memory.

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 · 10.1128/iai.69.3.1568-1573.2001

Cites

26 of 26 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 26 references

Cited by

See all 316

Metadata

Authors
Borrow, R., Andrews, N., Goldblatt, D., & Miller, E.
Venue
Infection and Immunity
Publisher
American Society for Microbiology
Published
2001-03
Volume
69
Issue
3
Pages
1568-1573
ISSN
  • 0019-9567 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5522
DOI
10.1128/iai.69.3.1568-1573.2001
OpenAlex
W2130460485
Cited by
316
References
26
FWCI
16.62
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: Serological Basis for Use of Meningococcal Serogroup C Conjugate Vaccines in the United Kingdom: Reevaluation of Correlates of Protection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/iai.69.3.1568-1573.2001
The paper
Borrow, R., Andrews, N., Goldblatt, D., & Miller, E. (2001). Serological Basis for Use of Meningococcal Serogroup C Conjugate Vaccines in the United Kingdom: Reevaluation of Correlates of Protection. Infection and Immunity. https://doi.org/10.1128/iai.69.3.1568-1573.2001

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.