| Title |
Concurrent vaccination with two distinct vaccine platforms targeting the same antigen generates phenotypically and functionally distinct T-cell populations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy, September 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00262-009-0759-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amanda L. Boehm, Jack Higgins, Alex Franzusoff, Jeffrey Schlom, James W. Hodge |
| Abstract |
Studies comparing two or more vaccine platforms have historically evaluated each platform based on its ability to induce an immune response and may conclude that one vaccine is more efficacious than the other(s), leading to a recommendation for development of the more effective vaccine for clinical studies. Alternatively, these studies have documented the advantages of a diversified prime and boost regimen due to amplification of the antigen-specific T-cell population. We hypothesize here that two vaccine platforms targeting the same antigen might induce shared and distinct antigen-specific T-cell populations, and examined the possibility that two distinct vaccines could be used concomitantly. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 33% |
| Other | 3 | 25% |
| Professor | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 42% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 May 2012.
All research outputs
#7,454,951
of 22,790,780 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy
#1,037
of 2,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,560
of 81,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy
#8
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,790,780 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,881 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 81,121 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.