ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
An engineered intradermal microneedle-array device enhances the cellular immune responses in a guinea pig model.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Intradermal (ID) vaccination can be highly immunogenic due to the density of antigen-presenting cells in the skin, but reliable ID delivery remains technically challenging. We evaluated a programmable microneedle-array intradermal injector, InocuJect, designed to distribute vaccine micro-deposits across a defined dermal area. Methods: In female Hartley guinea pigs, we compared vaccination with the automated ID device to conventional Mantoux intradermal injection followed by electroporation (ID+EP) using two vaccine platforms: a DNA vaccine encoding SARS-CoV-2 spike (pIDV-II-SARS-CoV-2) and the licensed virus-like particle vaccine GARDASIL®9. Results: For the DNA vaccine, both methods induced spike-specific and pseudovirus-neutralizing responses by day 56, with similar neutralizing titers between groups. For GARDASIL®9, both delivery methods generated comparable HPV16 L1-specific IgG at the final time points. In contrast, the automated ID device induced stronger antigen-specific cellular responses, as reflected by increased IFN-γ RNA and protein levels following peptide stimulation. Conclusions: These findings suggest that spatially distributed dermal delivery using a microneedle-array-based intradermal injector is associated with enhanced IFN-γ-based cellular immune readouts, while maintaining robust humoral responses across distinct vaccine platforms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.