Home › Research › Drug development
Alzheimer's disease Advax(CpG)- adjuvanted MultiTEP-based dual and single vaccines induce high-titer antibodies against various forms of tau and Aβ pathological molecules
Davtyan H, Zagorski K, Rajapaksha H, Hovakimyan A, Davtyan A, Petrushina I, Kazarian K, Cribbs DH et al.. Scientific reports, 2016-07-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Although β-amyloid (Aβ) may be the primary driver of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology, accumulation of pathological tau correlates with dementia in AD patients. Thus, the prevention/inhibition of AD may require vaccine/s targeting Aβ and tau simultaneously or sequentially. Since high antibody titers are required for AD vaccine efficacy, we have decided to generate vaccines, targeting Aβ (AV-1959R), Tau (AV-1980R) or Aβ/tau (AV-1953R) B cell epitopes, based on immunogenic MultiTEP platform and evaluate the immunogenicity of these vaccines formulated with Advax(CpG), delta inulin, Alhydrogel(®), Montanide-ISA51, Montanide-ISA720, MPLA-SM pharmaceutical grade adjuvants. Formulation of AV-1959R in Advax(CpG) induced the highest cellular and humoral immune responses in mice. The dual-epitope vaccine, AV-1953R, or the combination of AV-1959R and AV-1980R vaccines formulated with Advax(CpG) induced robust antibody responses against various forms of both, Aβ and tau pathological molecules. While anti-Aβ antibody titers after AV-1953R immunization were similar to that in mice vaccinated with AV-1959R or AV-1959R/AV-1980R combination, anti-tau titers were significantly lower after AV-1953R injection when compared to the AV-1980R or AV-1959R/AV-1980R. In silico 3D-modeling provided insight into the differences in immunogenicity of these vaccine constructs. In sum, AV-1959R and AV-1980R formulated with Advax(CpG) adjuvant were identified as promising immunogenic vaccines for ongoing pre-clinical assessment and future human clinical trials.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Davtyan, H., Zagorski, K., Rajapaksha, H., Hovakimyan, A., Davtyan, A., Petrushina, I., et al. (2016). Alzheimer's disease Advax(CpG)- adjuvanted MultiTEP-based dual and single vaccines induce high-titer antibodies against various forms of tau and Aβ pathological molecules. Scientific reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28912
Vancouver
Davtyan H, Zagorski K, Rajapaksha H, Hovakimyan A, Davtyan A, Petrushina I, et al. Alzheimer's disease Advax(CpG)- adjuvanted MultiTEP-based dual and single vaccines induce high-titer antibodies against various forms of tau and Aβ pathological molecules. Scientific reports. 2016. doi:10.1038/srep28912. PMID: 27363809.
BibTeX
@article{davtyan2016-27363809,
author = {Davtyan, H. and Zagorski, K. and Rajapaksha, H. and Hovakimyan, A. and Davtyan, A. and Petrushina, I. and Kazarian, K. and Cribbs, D. H. and others},
title = {{Alzheimer's disease Advax(CpG)- adjuvanted MultiTEP-based dual and single vaccines induce high-titer antibodies against various forms of tau and Aβ pathological molecules}},
journal = {Scientific reports},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1038/srep28912},
pmid = {27363809},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28912}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- While anti-Aβ antibody titers after AV-1953R immunization were similar to that in mice vaccinated with AV-1959R or AV-1959R/AV-1980R combination, anti-tau titers were significantly lower after AV-1953R injection when compared to the AV-1980R or AV-1959R/AV-1980R.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Scientific reports) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27363809) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Drug development
Also tagged “molecules”
4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “molecules”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.