Source Paper
Hok Hei Tam, Mariane B. Melo, Myungsun Kang, Jeisa M. Pelet, Vera M. Ruda et al.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences • 2016
Significance We explored the effect of nontraditional vaccine dosing profiles on antibody titers of vaccines and discovered that certain dosing profiles demonstrate >10-fold higher antibody production than the traditional single-dose prime–boost method. We also present a computational model that captures the experimental results and provides a mechanistic understanding of the biology behind the effectiveness of our strategy. This work has clinical significance in vaccine design because it is a simple method to increase the efficacy of subunit vaccines, which may lead to the development of efficacious vaccines for diseases such as HIV.
Objective: Compare traditional bolus vaccine dosing versus repeated injections or osmotic pump delivery of HIV antigens over 1-2 weeks to measure humoral immune responses and antibody production
This is a HIV Antigen Vaccination with Escalating Dosing Profiles protocol using Not specified in provided text as the model organism. The procedure involves 7 procedural steps, 1 equipment items, 2 materials. Extracted from a 2016 paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Model and subjects
Not specified in provided text • Not specified in provided text • unknown • Not specified in provided text • Not specified in provided text
Study window
~2 week study window
Core workflow
Bolus vaccination • Repeated injection dosing • Osmotic pump delivery
Primary readouts
Key equipment and reagents
Verified items
0
Direct vendor links
0
Use this page as an execution guide, then fall back to the source paper whenever you need exact exclusions, dosing details, or assay-specific caveats.
Confirm first
Use the page like this
Start here. The step list is optimized for running the experiment, with direct vendor links available inline when you need to source a cited item.
Traditional single-dose prime-boost vaccination method with complete antigen and adjuvant dose administered at once
Note: Control condition for comparison
“traditional single-dose prime–boost method”
Administration of HIV antigens and adjuvant through multiple repeated injections over 1-2 weeks
Note: Total antigen and adjuvant dose equivalent to bolus group
“administering a given total dose of antigen and adjuvant over 1–2 wk through repeated injections”
Sustained antigen and adjuvant delivery via osmotic pump over 1-2 weeks
Note: Total antigen and adjuvant dose equivalent to bolus group
“administering a given total dose of antigen and adjuvant over 1–2 wk through repeated injections or osmotic pumps”
Antigen and adjuvant administered with exponentially increasing dose escalation over vaccination period
Note: Elicited >10-fold increases in antibody production relative to bolus vaccination
“exponentially increasing (exp-inc) dosing profiles eliciting >10-fold increases in antibody production relative to bolus vaccination post prime”
Assess antibody titers and production following vaccination with different dosing profiles
Note: Primary outcome measure
“certain dosing profiles demonstrate >10-fold higher antibody production than the traditional single-dose prime–boost method”
Evaluate prolonged antigen availability in lymph nodes following different dosing regimens
Note: Consistent with computational predictions
“we found that exp-inc dosing led to prolonged antigen retention in lymph nodes”
Measure Tfh cell and germinal center B-cell numbers following vaccination
Note: Mechanistic assessment of immune response
“increased Tfh cell and germinal center B-cell numbers”
This section explains what the experiment is doing, which readouts matter, what the data artifacts usually look like, and how the analysis should flow from raw capture to reported result.
Compare traditional bolus vaccine dosing versus repeated injections or osmotic pump delivery of HIV antigens over 1-2 weeks to measure humoral immune responses and antibody production
Objective
Compare traditional bolus vaccine dosing versus repeated injections or osmotic pump delivery of HIV antigens over 1-2 weeks to measure humoral immune responses and antibody production
Subjects
From paperNot specified in provided text • Not specified in provided text • unknown • Not specified in provided text • Not specified in provided text
Cohort notes
From paperText provided is title page and abstract only; detailed methods section not included
Bolus vaccination (Single administration)
Repeated injection dosing (1-2 weeks)
Osmotic pump delivery (1-2 weeks)
Exponentially increasing dosing profile (1-2 weeks)
Antibody titers and production
From paperComputational modeling of germinal center response to predict and explain experimental results
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Humoral immune responses
From paperComputational modeling of germinal center response to predict and explain experimental results
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Antigen retention in lymph nodes
From paperComputational modeling of germinal center response to predict and explain experimental results
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Tfh cell numbers
From paperComputational modeling of germinal center response to predict and explain experimental results
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Antibody titers and production
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Humoral immune responses
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Antigen retention in lymph nodes
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Tfh cell numbers
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Acquisition
Collect raw experimental outputs with enough metadata to preserve sample identity, condition, and timing.
Preprocessing / cleaning
Computational modeling of germinal center response to predict and explain experimental results
Scoring or quantification
Quantify the primary readouts for this experiment: Antibody titers and production; Humoral immune responses; Antigen retention in lymph nodes; Tfh cell numbers.
Statistical comparison
Statistical method not yet structured for this page.
Reporting output
Report representative outputs alongside summary comparisons for Antibody titers and production, Humoral immune responses, Antigen retention in lymph nodes, Tfh cell numbers.
Source links and direct wording from the methods section for validation and deeper review.
Citation
Hok Hei Tam et al. (2016). Sustained antigen availability during germinal center initiation enhances antibody responses to vaccination. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
“”
“”
“”
“”
Direct vendor pages are linked from the protocol above. This section stays focused on the full comparison view and the prep checklist.
Gather these items before starting the experiment. Check off items as you prepare.
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Use this section as the page quality checkpoint. It keeps section navigation, evidence access, readiness, and verification meaning in one place.
Current status surfaces were computed from experiment data updated Mar 14, 2026.
Source access
Jump back into the original paper or the methods evidence section when you need exact wording, exclusions, or method-specific caveats.
This protocol has structured steps plus evidence quotes, and is ready for canonical sync.
Steps
7
Evidence Quotes
10
Protocol Items
3
Linked Products
0
Canonical Sync
Pending
What this means
The completeness score reflects how much structured protocol data is present: steps, methods evidence, listed materials, linked products, and paper provenance.
Computed from the current experiment record updated Mar 14, 2026.
Canonical Sync shows whether a ConductGraph-backed protocol is available for this experiment route right now. It is a sync-status signal, not a claim that every downstream vendor link or step detail is perfect.
Steps
7
Evidence
10
Specific Products
0/0
Canonical Sync
Pending
What this score means
The verification score reflects evidence coverage, subject detail, paper provenance, step depth, and whether linked products resolve to specific item pages instead of generic searches.
Computed from the current experiment record updated Mar 14, 2026.
A page can have structured steps and still need review when evidence is thin, product links are generic, or canonical protocol coverage is still pending.
What still needs work
Aspiration Lesion
Memory Persistence Assessment
Fear Conditioning Test
Spatial Memory Task