Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41048464›Full record

ReviewOxford open immunology2025

A user's guide to designing efficient and safe mucosal vaccines: Challenges & potentials.

Divya Sinha, Prajwal Kargal Gopalakrishna, Stephane Paul, Stephanie Longet

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Oxford open immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Divya SinhaCIRI-Centre International de Recherche en Infectiologie, Team GIMAP, Univ Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Inserm, U1111, CNRS, UMR5308, CIC 1408 Vaccinology, F42023, Saint-Etienne, France.
Prajwal Kargal GopalakrishnaCIRI-Centre International de Recherche en Infectiologie, Team GIMAP, Univ Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Inserm, U1111, CNRS, UMR5308, CIC 1408 Vaccinology, F42023, Saint-Etienne, France.
Stephane PaulCIRI-Centre International de Recherche en Infectiologie, Team GIMAP, Univ Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Inserm, U1111, CNRS, UMR5308, CIC 1408 Vaccinology, F42023, Saint-Etienne, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8830-4273
Stephanie LongetCIRI-Centre International de Recherche en Infectiologie, Team GIMAP, Univ Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Inserm, U1111, CNRS, UMR5308, CIC 1408 Vaccinology, F42023, Saint-Etienne, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5026-431X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mucosal immunization represents a promising approach to protect against pathogens that enter through mucosal surfaces. This review provides a practical overview of the mucosal immune system's main features and explores the benefits of mucosal vaccination, including its capacity to induce both local and systemic immune responses. Key challenges-such as mechanical barriers, the tolerogenic nature of mucosal immunity and variability due to environmental influences-are examined in detail. Strategies to overcome mucosal tolerance, improve antigen uptake and enhance immunogenicity are discussed, alongside recent advances that combine multiple mucosal routes or explore less conventional pathways. The review also outlines practical considerations for optimizing vaccine delivery and evaluating immune responses, offering a user-oriented guide to the current landscape and future directions in mucosal vaccine development.

Indexed as

adjuvantsmucosal immunitymucosal vaccinesvaccine delivery

Identifiers

PMID41048464
PMCPMC12494458

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.