ライフサイエンスコーパス: cross-protection

1 V-ADVISE model ($191 800 when assuming 4vHPV cross-protection).

2 There is also evidence of cross protection.

3 inant PC epitope on SPn capable of providing cross protection.

4 A)-based current vaccines provide suboptimum cross protection.

5 ediated cross-reactivity and associated with cross protection.

6 illustrating the potential of Th17-mediated cross protection.

7 the cells of nitrogen, suggesting a type of cross protection.

8 y for poliovirus type 2, suggesting possible cross protection.

9 ed infection and a group with some degree of cross-protection.

10 t with epidemiologic estimates of VE showing cross-protection.

11 Gnotobiotic piglets were used to investigate cross-protection.

12 heless capable of contributing to long-lived cross-protection.

13 Both T lymphocytes and Ab contribute to such cross-protection.

14 have been described, but they do not lead to cross-protection.

15 aled little role for serum or mucosal Abs in cross-protection.

16 development of a pandemic vaccine with broad cross-protection.

17 splayed differences in cross-recognition and cross-protection.

18 helical region of PspA in the elicitation of cross-protection.

19 o react with HIV-1 that could play a role in cross-protection.

20 ination and EBOV challenge, there was little cross-protection.

21 recognize 35B, and thus, 35D CPS may provide cross-protection.

22 oted broadly reactive antibody responses and cross-protection.

23 in inducing mucosal immunity and conferring cross-protection.

24 rotypes to understand long-term immunity and cross-protection.

25 accurately extract the timing and extent of cross-protection.

26 nity to hemagglutinin (HA) and provides poor cross-protection.

27 MAYV, suggests a role for innate immunity in cross-protection.

28 allenge, respectively, indicating incomplete cross-protection.

29 'core stress responses' that provide stress cross-protection.

30 tion, assuming for HPV45 either 95% or lower cross-protection.

31 in frequent infections and a lack of durable cross-protection.

32 binding by a SIT-induced IgG and thus limit cross-protection.

33 may play a critical role in vaccine-induced cross-protection.

34 rated by 6 months additionally provided some cross-protection.

35 ed RMs were challenged with SVV to determine cross-protection.

36 (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.96), which suggests cross-protection.

37 f 1.06-2.06 for the first wave and, assuming cross-protection, 1.21-3.58 in the second.

38 (ADCC), and better neutralizing and stronger cross-protection activities against H1, H3, H5, and H7 s

39 ucted to gain insight into the high level of cross-protection afforded by RotaTeqTM against these G8

40 This superior cross-protection afforded by the CLDC adjuvant required

41 Current vaccines cannot provide cross protection against different strains, and there ar

42 out showing weight loss and confers complete cross protection against lethal challenge with heterolog

43 e crucial role of the receptor in conferring cross protection against peanut allergens other than Ara

44 d-type (WT) GP/VSVDeltaG and did not provide cross protection against Sudan virus.

45 implies that lactoferrin could provide broad cross protection against the enteropathogens that share

46 disease remains essential, as the extent of cross protection against vaccine-related serotypes is st

47 ty of Shigella group B, a strategy for broad cross-protection against 14 Shigella flexneri serotypes

48 o of the three truncated PspAs each elicited cross-protection against 71%-100% of the S. pneumoniae c

49 firm its infectivity for calves and complete cross-protection against a bovine coronavirus (DB2 strai

50 ed as a booster, have the potential to offer cross-protection against a broad spectrum of variants.

51 ns, because rejection of mKSA did not induce cross-protection against a challenge with parental 4T1.

52 ermine if this vaccine regimen could provide cross-protection against a genetically diverse species,

53 ther seasonal influenza vaccination provides cross-protection against A(H3N2)v virus.

54 The GFP-DDDHA strain also provides cross-protection against another T. cruzi isolate.

55 and intranasal PHC boost demonstrate optimal cross-protection against antigenically drifted and shift

56 burgdorferi sl genospecies, does not provide cross-protection against B. afzelii, mostly likely due t

57 -CoV-2 spike protein can provide a low-level cross-protection against beta- and alphacoronaviruses.

58 plant developmental responses and resultant cross-protection against biotic stress.

59 nt mosaic B hemagglutinin proteins conferred cross-protection against both homologous and heterologou

60 tion with TC-PC177 failed to induce complete cross-protection against challenge by the highly virulen

61 Vaccination with PIV5-N1 NA provided cross-protection against challenge with a heterosubtypic

62 e whether infection with TC-PC177 can induce cross-protection against challenge with a highly virulen

63 important, the HA-DNA vaccine conferred 95% cross-protection against challenge with lethal antigenic

64 al/HK/W312/97 ca virus provided the broadest cross-protection against challenge with three antigenica

65 he 1-to-115 fragment, however, elicited some cross-protection against clades 2 and 4 in BALB/c mice b

66 nteraction pattern, suggesting immunological cross-protection against coxsackievirus B1.

67 In this study, we explored the mechanism of cross-protection against cutaneous lesion-causing Leishm

68 nd active IgE sensitization, and resulted in cross-protection against different allergens.

69 ighly efficient in induction of long-lasting cross-protection against different influenza virus strai

70 domonas yielded significant but not absolute cross-protection against different strains of P. aerugin

71 formulation to specific immune cells, enable cross-protection against divergent strains, act as adjuv

72 animals vaccinated with the cVLP showed 20% cross-protection against drifted (Philippines) and 60% p

73 Omicron BA.5 nAb titers suggest cross-protection against emerging variants.

74 luded in the vaccine, are inept at providing cross-protection against emerging/novel strains.

75 ologous COVID-19 vaccination may confer some cross-protection against endemic seasonal coronaviruses.

76 Current flu vaccines have failed to provide cross-protection against evolving viruses in the field.

77 cular viruses conferred short-lived relative cross-protection against FRI.

78 ria meningitidis infection may offer partial cross-protection against gonorrhea.

79 e-based vaccines, such as MenB-4C, may offer cross-protection against gonorrhea.

80 y Bexsero vaccination may provide additional cross-protection against gonorrhoea.

81 y responses, involved in providing long-term cross-protection against H3N2 influenza virus when compa

82 against 2 unrelated pathogens and stimulate cross-protection against H5N1 influenza viruses.

83 ion with FAdV-9-S19 also provided a moderate cross-protection against HCoV-229E disease in the cynomo

84 d challenged cynomolgus macaques to evaluate cross-protection against HCoV-229E.

85 mucosal M2e antibody responses and conferred cross-protection against heterosubtypic H1N1, H3N2, and

86 fferences in protective immunity, especially cross-protection against heterovariant and heterosubtypi

87 ether, 2vHPV is predicted to provide partial cross-protection against HPV-31, -33, -35, -45, -52, and

88 CD8(+) T cells confer cross-protection against IAV strains, however the respon

89 d a role for latent herpesvirus infection in cross-protection against infection and exacerbation of c

90 influenza A virus infection may not provide cross-protection against influenza B virus infection.

91 Heterosubtypic immunity (HSI) is defined as cross-protection against influenza virus of a different

92 ion of mice with Ldp27(-/-)also demonstrated cross-protection against Leishmania major and Leishmania

93 cines ID83/GLA-SE and ID93/GLA-SE may confer cross-protection against M. leprae infection.

94 protection against M. tuberculosis, induces cross-protection against M. leprae that is comparable or

95 We observed strong cross-protection against MAYV for mice pre-exposed to wi

96 ted by CHIKV are responsible for the partial cross-protection against MAYV.

97 nce both supporting and opposing the idea of cross-protection against microbial pathogens and insect

98 ategy of mucosal vaccination that stimulates cross-protection against multiple influenza virus subtyp

99 nstrating that Th17 memory cells can provide cross-protection against multiple serotypes of Klebsiell

100 ults indicated that rAPMV3 alone can provide cross-protection against NDV challenge.

101 uced by inactivated vaccines provide limited cross-protection against new viral serotypes.

102 inical need is greatest, and does not confer cross-protection against newly emerging phylogroup II ly

103 membrane vesicles (OMVs) provide a degree of cross-protection against Ng infection.

104 pes in cancer) and vaccine properties (i.e., cross-protection against non-targeted HPV types), compar

105 se include duration of protection, degree of cross-protection against nonvaccine types, efficacy in m

106 gher neutralizing antibody titres, providing cross-protection against Omicron BA.1 and BA.2.

107 body effector functions and T-cell memory in cross-protection against orthopoxviruses.

108 icated only for EBOV infections with limited cross-protection against other filoviruses.

109 Partial cross-protection against other HPV types has been report

110 on against the vaccinating strain but little cross-protection against other influenza strains or subt

111 of one strain of E. chaffeensis would confer cross-protection against other strains needs to be inves

112 HPV16/18 vaccines offer cross-protection against other types, for example, HPV45

113 eric VK210/247 antigen can elicit high level cross-protection against parasites expressing either CSP

114 g amino acids 314 to 418 were able to elicit cross-protection against pneumococci expressing PspA pro

115 A (rPspA)/EF5668, like rPspA/Rx1, can elicit cross-protection against pneumococci of different capsul

116 that cellular immunity is crucial to mediate cross-protection against reinfection with a different se

117 ble, non-allergenic, non-toxic, and to offer cross-protection against related Trypanosoma species and

118 ed SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive T cell-mediated cross-protection against SARS-CoV-2 is partially depende

119 role of cross-reactive immunity in mediating cross-protection against secondary heterotypic DENV infe

120 Subsequent studies showed that PCV7 provided cross-protection against serotype 6A but not serotype 6C

121 lular immune response that conferred partial cross-protection against simian varicella virus (SVV) ch

122 epitope of vaccinia virus that will provide cross-protection against smallpox in HLA-A2.1-positive i

123 e to control SARS-CoV-2 variants and lead to cross-protection against some endemic coronaviruses.

124 PCV10 might provide cross-protection against some vaccine-related serotypes.

125 virus or influenza virus infection conferred cross-protection against subsequent FRI episodes relativ

126 also included to determine the potential for cross-protection against SUDV infection.

127 This effect was tumor-specific, since no cross-protection against syngeneic, ganglioside GD2+ EL-

128 immunization with contemporary TIV provides cross-protection against the 1918 virus in ferrets.

129 m several CCHFV strains and exhibited robust cross-protection against the heterologous CCHFV strain A

130 The extent of cross-protection against the heterologous parasite strai

131 e inactivated vaccines do not provide robust cross-protection against the multiple antigenic variants

132 nfection with one type/subtype could provide cross-protection against the others.

133 0 to 2000, to induce cross-reactivity to and cross-protection against the pandemic swine-origin H1N1

134 ns that circulated 50-60 y ago might provide cross-protection against the swine-origin 2009 H1N1 infl

135 d induce cross-reactive T-cell responses and cross-protection against the tumor.

136 ntemporary Victoria immunity provides robust cross-protection against the Yamagata lineage, whereas Y

137 Monovalent vaccines do not offer cross-protection against these viruses whose endemic are

138 r, suggesting that LAIV provided substantial cross-protection against this variant influenza A virus

139 nst the homologous virus and provided strong cross-protection against two heterologous species of cas

140 vaccines, such as durability of protection, cross-protection against variant strains, and costs of l

141 Some B cell subsets provide extensive cross-protection against variants of the ever-mutating v

142 g infection and vaccination shape subsequent cross-protection against VOC, with implications for futu

143 To assess the potential for cross-protection among genital human papillomavirus (HPV

144 Cross-protection among pneumococcal serotypes within ser

145 neered mild (essentially symptomless)-strain cross protection and RNA-mediated transgenic resistance.

146 a safe vaccine is hampered due to absence of cross-protection and increased risk in secondary infecti

147 V vaccines for T cell responses might confer cross-protection and prevent antibody-mediated enhanceme

148 emic is plausible given sufficient levels of cross-protection are attained via natural infection duri

149 Therefore, high levels of cross-protection are predicted in the mouse model.

150 Influenza vaccines with broad cross-protection are urgently needed to prevent an emerg

151 In vivo cross-protection assays showed that a substantial portio

152 However, the basis for such cross-protection at the molecular level is incompletely

153 Thus, some conjugate vaccines may elicit cross-protection better than others.

154 model illustrate how different strengths of cross-protection between circulating coronaviruses could

155 investigate the mechanisms behind asymmetric cross-protection between contemporary FLUBV lineages.

156 JEV-endemic areas, and clinical data suggest cross-protection between DENV and JEV.

157 ich are the major mediator of heterosubtypic cross-protection between different subtypes of influenza

158 ngly suggest that while there may be limited cross-protection between highly (>85% L1 amino acid iden

159 dge of immune mechanisms responsible for the cross-protection between highly divergent viruses such a

160 overlapping subsets of antigenic variants if cross-protection between pathogen types sharing any vari

161 risingly, however, we found no difference in cross-protection between respiratory-deficient and wild-

162 nfections, there is reciprocal immunological cross-protection between spotted fever group and typhus

163 changes in lineage frequencies combined with cross-protection between strains of the same lineage.

164 In this article, we examine the strength of cross-protection between successive waves of the 1918-19

165 Our data demonstrate that cross-protection between the EBOV species can be achieve

166 Additionally, studies of cross-protection between the newly identified emerging G

167 V (PRV) G9P[13] and evaluated the short-term cross-protection between this strain and human RV (HRV)

168 s the possible immunological mechanism(s) of cross-protection between ZIKV and DENV and whether DENV

169 with high ZIKV seroprevalence due to one-way cross-protection between ZIKV and SPONV.

170 determine immune components contributing to cross-protection, but also to gain insight into the immu

171 ironmental stress response (ESR) and for the cross-protection by a preliminary heat stress (or slow g

172 ant level does not appear to explain partial cross-protection by the bivalent HPV vaccine.

173 ica Vaccine Trial (CVT) demonstrated partial cross-protection by the bivalent human papillomavirus (H

174 In mice, cross-protection can also be elicited by systemic immuni

175 Cross-protection can be achieved by activating CD8+ and

176 In this paper, we show that cross-protection can be conferred by adoptively transfer

177 broad immune components responsible for such cross-protection can be determined.

178 accelerated clearance of a new viral strain (cross-protection) can be elicited by prior infection (he

179 ood model fit for the two-serotype TSIR with cross-protection, capturing the seasonality and geograph

180 oglycosylated HA (HA(mg))] can elicit better cross-protection compared with the fully glycosylated HA

181 Few studies have evaluated the relative cross-protection conferred by infection with different g

182 tigated the presence of short-lived relative cross-protection conferred by specific prior viral infec

183 Cross-protection decreased and cross-sensitization incre

184 ction with Omicron BA.1 alone offers limited cross-protection despite moderate enhancement.

185 g, and the EV71 vaccine does not give useful cross-protection, despite the capsid proteins of the two

186 This response provides cross-protection during subsequent proteotoxic stress, s

187 Cross-protection during which drug-sensitive species wer

188 Cross-protection elicited by these three fragments was e

189 lso high, with little non-cognate biological cross-protection evident under physiological conditions.

190 tion against reinfection with all serotypes (cross-protection), followed by lifelong immunity to the

191 period of resistance against all serotypes (cross-protection), followed by lifelong resistance to th

192 co-authors detail the extent of coronavirus cross-protection following both vaccination and natural

193 ies of human subjects to suggest a window of cross-protection following DENV infection since Sabin's

194 The duration and strength of cross-protection following infection with EV-A71 or CV-A

195 different antigens may be required to induce cross-protection for genetically distinct viruses.

196 We previously demonstrated a role in cross-protection for pre-existing cross-reactive Abs, ma

197 oint of view of gene expression patterns and cross-protection for survival.

198 iant influenza viruses generated significant cross-protection for the recipients and indirect (herd)

199 KV, and moderately but significantly reduced cross-protection from CHIKV-vaccinated animals.

200 CLDC-adjuvanted vaccine provided significant cross-protection from either a sublethal or lethal influ

201 Limited mpox vaccination coverage, declining cross-protection from historical smallpox vaccination ca

202 Assessing potential cross-protection from leading S. pyogenes vaccine candid

203 underscores the importance of analyzing the cross-protection from previous non-Omicron infection.

204 emerged SARS-CoV-2 mutant D614G, suggesting cross-protection from reinfection by either strain.

205 ublic health implications of a plausible BCG cross-protection from severe COVID-19 are discussed.

206 ence for a potential biological basis of BCG cross-protection from severe COVID-19, and refine the ep

207 A degree of vaccine-induced cross-protection has also been demonstrated against gene

208 Limited or no cross-protection has been demonstrated between the T. pa

209 This, plus observations on short-term cross-protection, have implications for vaccination and

210 Contrary to the cross-protection hypothesis, prior DENV infection was as

211 tential vaccine targets capable of eliciting cross-protection immunity against pneumococcal infection

212 lemented conventional vaccination to enhance cross-protection.IMPORTANCEThis study highlights a signi

213 ate adjuvants, which serve to enhance immune cross-protection, improve humoral and cell-mediated immu

214 s from the agricultural sector and assessing cross-protection in a chicken challenge model.

215 The cross-reactive antibodies afforded cross-protection in a mouse model system.

216 emic and mucosal sites, boosting significant cross-protection in animals against heterologous viruses

217 her HI nor VN testing provides correlates of cross-protection in ferrets.

218 s are needed to fully evaluate the extent of cross-protection in humans among the variants and protot

219 agged SYNV variants display mutual exclusion/cross-protection in Nicotiana benthamiana plants.

220 Wa G1P[8] and generated complete short-term cross-protection in pigs challenged with HRV or PRV, whe

221 f FimA as a common immunogen able to provide cross-protection in streptococcal endocarditis by determ

222 We suggest that cross-protection in the common mucosal immune system is

223 human or AGM sera between RSV and PVM and no cross-protection in the mouse model.

224 This vaccine strategy provided broad cross-protection in the mouse model.

225 indicate that these O antigens do not confer cross-protection in vivo.

226 tential of non-pathogenic strains to provide cross-protection in vivo.

227 pertussis has been attributed to the lack of cross protection induced by pertussis vaccines.

228 igens, suggesting they are not necessary for cross-protection induced by carriage.

229 No lasting cross protection is afforded to heterologous serotypes f

230 The cross-protection is associated with a high level of vacc

231 rily mediated by virus-neutralizing Abs, the cross-protection is associated with Abs directed to cons

232 analysis in mice revealed that the observed cross-protection is associated with superior UTRs [Carbo

233 Enhancing influenza vaccine cross-protection is imperative to alleviate the signific

234 The clinical benefit of cross-protection is not expected to be fully additive to

235 The basis for the observed variation in cross-protection is not known, but our results suggest t

236 It is important to know how much cross-protection is offered between strains following va

237 ability of these common epitopes to provide cross-protection is unknown.

238 e data also suggest that complex patterns of cross-protection may exist across NoV genotypes in human

239 ge cells were found to be important for this cross protection mediated by immune sera.

240 we investigated peptide vaccination induced cross-protection mediated by CD8(+) T cells in two autoi

241 consider disease setting and, without broad cross-protection, might lead to lineage replacement.

242 The two strains form a successful cross-protection mutualism without a period of coevoluti

243 cherichia coli strains can form an effective cross-protection mutualism, protecting each other in the

244 onse to A(H3N2)v is consistent with the poor cross-protection observed among TIV-immune animals.

245 c understanding of the nature of serological cross-protection observed in people over 60 years of age

246 ty provides a mechanistic explanation of the cross-protection observed in the clinic and shows that i

247 Cross-protection occurs because potentially pathogenic s

248 specificity, cross-reactivity, affinity and cross-protection of mAb102.1F10 towards homologous calci

249 ariant-specific antibodies, suggesting broad cross-protection of Omicron variants.

250 This result can explain the previously noted cross-protection of osmotic stress against oxidative and

251 g decade, as well as the potential impact of cross-protection on future seasonal coronavirus transmis

252 than 20 years of age, with no indication of cross-protection or herd effects.

253 Complement-mediated neutralisation enhances cross-protection, overcoming antigenic distance.

254 tanding of the mediators responsible for the cross-protection period is important for vaccine design,

255 The duration and mechanisms of the transient cross-protection period remain elusive.

256 Superinfection exclusion (SIE) or cross-protection phenomena have been documented for plan

257 +) T, and CD19(+) B cells) did not alter the cross-protection phenotype, suggesting that distinct cel

258 have implications for the interpretation of cross-protection potential between evolutionary distant

259 munization approach, we observed an improved cross-protection rate, with 5 of 6 guinea pigs surviving

260 However, the mechanisms responsible for such cross-protection remain elusive.

261 To substantiate cross-protection reported across AS04-adjuvanted bivalen

262 Still, cross-protection reports are rare and dependent on the p

263 tion and determine the level of coverage and cross-protection required to reduce or eliminate the inf

264 These cross-protection results complement the vaccine's prophy

265 Limited cross-protection studies suggest that in order to ensure

266 interactions between DENV and ZIKV, we find cross-protection suppresses incidence of dengue followin

267 specific virus and host responses, including cross-protection, systemic virus movement, hypersensitiv

268 uggest that genomic distance better explains cross-protection than distance measures based on capsid

269 When assuming no 4vHPV cross-protection, the incremental cost per quality-adjus

270 itivity analyses in the scenario of no 4vHPV cross-protection, the simplified model results ranged fr

271 ; however, it remains unclear what degree of cross-protection they confer against the common cold cor

272 e reemergence of SARS-CoV but also providing cross-protection, thus interrupting zoonotic transmissio

273 with M2 VLP supplemented vaccine transferred cross protection to naive mice.

274 by PSRV in Hawaii, starting from the use of cross protection to parasite-derived resistance with tra

275 tween different influenza strains may impart cross-protection to H5N1 strain of influenza.

276 f incident HPV-16/18 infections and provided cross-protection to HPV-31/33/45.

277 Heterosubtypic immunity (HSI) is defined as cross-protection to infection with an influenza A virus

278 The mechanisms of broad cross-protection to influenza viruses of different subty

279 inactivated pneumococcal vaccines may confer cross-protection to multiple pneumococcal serotypes and

280 s 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outpaces monovalent vaccine cross-protection to new viral variants.

281 man serum panels revealed limited population cross-protection to tested viruses, particularly for ant

282 influenza virus to evaluate the duration of cross-protection to the H1N1 pandemic strain by vaccinat

283 We provide evidence of sustained cross-protection up to 8 years postvaccination in a high

284 tes the contribution of cellular immunity to cross-protection using mouse models of DENV infection.

285 Additionally, cross protection was not consistently achieved in bats p

286 ve as a model for future vaccine studies, as cross-protection was also observed.

287 Cross-protection was associated with substantial expansi

288 he ability of genetic immunization to elicit cross-protection was demonstrated by the survival of imm

289 Cross-protection was dependent on group 2 innate lymphoi

290 with PS-GAMP-adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine, strong cross-protection was elicited against distant H1N1 and h

291 Cross-protection was found between 6B and 6A but not bet

292 ous regions of other PspAs could also elicit cross-protection was investigated.

293 Cross-protection was likely not dependent on serum virus

294 No cross-protection was seen with distantly related type B

295 contemporary viruses may drive differential cross-protection, where infection with Yamagata lineage

296 nties, but not in PCV13 counties, suggesting cross-protection with 6A, which is included in PCV13.

297 nted in both countries when assuming vaccine cross-protection with both the current and second-genera

298 No cross-protection with other paramyxoviruses, such as res

299 The extent of cross-protection within a subfamily has been difficult t

300 With >/=80% coverage, even 50% cross-protection would reduce HPV45 by >/=94%.