Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 288

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effective Post-Exposure Treatment of Ebola Infection

Open access
Feldmann, Heinz, Jones, Steven M., Daddario-DiCaprio, Kathleen M., Geisbert, Joan B., Ströher, Ute, Grolla, Allen, Bray, Mike, Fritz, Elizabeth A., Fernando, Lisa, Feldmann, Friederike, Hensley, Lisa E., Geisbert, Thomas W.·2007·PLoS Pathogens

Abstract

Ebola viruses are highly lethal human pathogens that have received considerable attention in recent years due to an increasing re-emergence in Central Africa and a potential for use as a biological weapon. There is no vaccine or treatment licensed for human use. In the past, however, important advances have been made in developing preventive vaccines that are protective in animal models. In this regard, we showed that a single injection of a live-attenuated recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus vector expressing the Ebola virus glycoprotein completely protected rodents and nonhuman primates from lethal Ebola challenge. In contrast, progress in developing therapeutic interventions against Ebola virus infections has been much slower and there is clearly an urgent need to develop effective post-exposure strategies to respond to future outbreaks and acts of bioterrorism, as well as to treat laboratory exposures. Here we tested the efficacy of the vesicular stomatitis virus-based Ebola vaccine vector in post-exposure treatment in three relevant animal models. In the guinea pig and mouse models it was possible to protect 50% and 100% of the animals, respectively, following treatment as late as 24 h after lethal challenge. More important, four out of eight rhesus macaques were protected if treated 20 to 30 min following an otherwise uniformly lethal infection. Currently, this approach provides the most effective post-exposure treatment strategy for Ebola infections and is particularly suited for use in accidentally exposed individuals and in the control of secondary transmission during naturally occurring outbreaks or deliberate release.

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 · 10.1371/journal.ppat.0030002

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Metadata

Authors
Feldmann, H., Jones, S. M., Daddario-DiCaprio, K. M., Geisbert, J. B., Ströher, U., Grolla, A., Bray, M., Fritz, E. A., Fernando, L., Feldmann, F., Hensley, L. E., & Geisbert, T. W.
Venue
PLoS Pathogens
Published
2007
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
e2
ISSN
  • 1553-7366 (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7374
OpenAlex
W2050813818
Cited by
288
References
1
FWCI
8.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Effective Post-Exposure Treatment of Ebola Infection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.ppat.0030002
The paper
Feldmann, H., Jones, S. M., Daddario-DiCaprio, K. M., Geisbert, J. B., Ströher, U., Grolla, A., Bray, M., Fritz, E. A., Fernando, L., Feldmann, F., Hensley, L. E., & Geisbert, T. W. (2007). Effective Post-Exposure Treatment of Ebola Infection. PLoS Pathogens. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.0030002

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.