↓ Skip to main content

Safety, tolerability, acceptability and immunogenicity of an influenza vaccine delivered to human skin by a novel high-density microprojection array patch (Nanopatch™)

Overview of attention for article published in Vaccine, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
patent
11 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
211 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Safety, tolerability, acceptability and immunogenicity of an influenza vaccine delivered to human skin by a novel high-density microprojection array patch (Nanopatch™)
Published in
Vaccine, May 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.05.053
Pubmed ID
Authors

Germain J.P. Fernando, Julian Hickling, Cesar M. Jayashi Flores, Paul Griffin, Christopher D. Anderson, S. Rachel Skinner, Cristyn Davies, Katey Witham, Melinda Pryor, Jesse Bodle, Steve Rockman, Ian H. Frazer, Angus H. Forster

Abstract

Injection using needle and syringe (N&S) is the most widely used method for vaccination, but requires trained healthcare workers. Fear of needles, risk of needle-stick injury, and the need to reconstitute lyophilised vaccines, are also drawbacks. The Nanopatch (NP) is a microarray skin patch comprised of a high-density array of microprojections dry-coated with vaccine that is being developed to address these shortcomings. Here we report a randomised, partly-blinded, placebo-controlled trial that represents the first use in humans of the NP to deliver a vaccine. Healthy volunteers were vaccinated once with one of the following: (1) NPs coated with split inactivated influenza virus (A/California/07/2009 [H1N1], 15 µg haemagglutinin (HA) per dose), applied to the volar forearm (NP-HA/FA), n = 15; (2) NPs coated with split inactivated influenza virus (A/California/07/2009 [H1N1], 15 µg HA per dose), applied to the upper arm (NP-HA/UA), n = 15; (3) Fluvax® 2016 containing 15 µg of the same H1N1 HA antigen injected intramuscularly (IM) into the deltoid (IM-HA/D), n = 15; (4) NPs coated with excipients only, applied to the volar forearm (NP-placebo/FA), n = 5; (5) NPs coated with excipients only applied to the upper arm (NP-placebo/UA), n = 5; or (6) Saline injected IM into the deltoid (IM-placebo/D), n = 5. Antibody responses at days 0, 7, and 21 were measured by haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralisation (MN) assays. NP vaccination was safe and acceptable; all adverse events were mild or moderate. Most subjects (55%) receiving patch vaccinations (HA or placebo) preferred the NP compared with their past experience of IM injection with N&S (preferred by 24%). The antigen-vaccinated groups had statistically higher HAI titres at day 7 and 21 compared with baseline (p < 0.0001), with no statistical differences between the treatment groups (p > 0.05), although the group sizes were small. The geometric mean HAI titres at day 21 for the NP-HA/FA, NP-HA/UA and IM-HA/D groups were: 335 (189-593 95% CI), 160 (74-345 95% CI), and 221 (129-380 95% CI) respectively. A similar pattern of responses was seen with the MN assays. Application site reactions were mild or moderate, and more marked with the influenza vaccine NPs than with the placebo or IM injection. Influenza vaccination using the NP appeared to be safe, and acceptable in this first time in humans study, and induced similar immune responses to vaccination by IM injection.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 211 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 211 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 14%
Student > Master 26 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Student > Bachelor 19 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 4%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 85 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 17 8%
Engineering 15 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 10 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 4%
Other 34 16%
Unknown 104 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 28 November 2023.
All research outputs
#4,174,237
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Vaccine
#4,122
of 16,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,398
of 343,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vaccine
#51
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
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 343,429 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.