From Google Scholar & other sources: Selected Journal Articles, Newsletters, Dissertations, Theses, Commentary

Epidemiology and Infection
Volume 142 – Issue 10 – October 2014
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayIssue?jid=HYG&tab=currentissue
FirstView Articles Published online: 22 August 2014
A probability model for evaluating the bias and precision of influenza vaccine effectiveness estimates from case-control studies.
M. HABER, Q. AN, I. M. FOPPA, D. K. SHAY, J. M. FERDINANDS and W. A. ORENSTEIN
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0950268814002179
SUMMARY
As influenza vaccination is now widely recommended, randomized clinical trials are no longer ethical in many populations. Therefore, observational studies on patients seeking medical care for acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs) are a popular option for estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). We developed a probability model for evaluating and comparing bias and precision of estimates of VE against symptomatic influenza from two commonly used case-control study designs: the test-negative design and the traditional case-control design. We show that when vaccination does not affect the probability of developing non-influenza ARI then VE estimates from test-negative design studies are unbiased even if vaccinees and non-vaccinees have different probabilities of seeking medical care against ARI, as long as the ratio of these probabilities is the same for illnesses resulting from influenza and non-influenza infections. Our numerical results suggest that in general, estimates from the test-negative design have smaller bias compared to estimates from the traditional case-control design as long as the probability of non-influenza ARI is similar among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. We did not find consistent differences between the standard errors of the estimates from the two study designs.

Epidemics
Available online 27 August 2014
Seven challenges in Modelling Vaccine Preventable Diseases
C.J.E. Metcalfa, O.N. Bjørnstadc, K. Eamesd, W.J. Edmundsd, S. Funkd, T.D. Hollingsworthe, f, J. Lesslerg, C. Viboudh, B.T. Grenfella, h
Highlights
:: Mathematical models have informed vaccination from the underlying science to program design.
:: This is an exciting time as novel challenges are emerging from changing biology and advancing vaccine technology.
:: Population scale challenges range from modeling immune heterogeneity to dynamics near elimination.
:: Within host challenges include modeling immune memory, evolution of escape, and new vaccine biology.
Abstract
Vaccination has been one of the most successful public health measures since the introduction of basic sanitation. Substantial mortality and morbidity reductions have been achieved via vaccination against many infections, and the list of diseases that are potentially controllable by vaccines is growing steadily. We introduce key challenges for modeling in shaping our understanding and guiding policy decisions related to vaccine preventable diseases.

Clinical Infectious Diseases
Volume 59, Issue suppl 2 Pp. S80-S84
Ending the Global HIV/AIDS Pandemic: The Critical Role of an HIV Vaccine
Anthony S. Fauci, Gregory K. Folkers, and Hilary D. Marston
Author Affiliations
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
Abstract
While the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/AIDS pandemic continues, the incidence of HIV infections has fallen because of the deployment of antiretroviral drugs and multiple prevention modalities. To achieve a durable end to the pandemic, a vaccine remains essential. Recent advances in vaccinology offer new promise for an effective HIV vaccine.

Current Gene Therapy
Volume 14, No. 2, 2014
http://benthamscience.com/journal/contents.php?journalID=cgt&issueID=124005
Editorial (Thematic Issue: The Coming of Age of DNA Vaccines)
ANikolai Petrovsky
Affiliation: Director, Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, SA 5042 Australia.
Abstract
Conventional immunization approaches utilize live attenuated pathogens, inactivated organisms, recombinant proteins or polysaccharide antigens to induce protective immunity. Twenty years ago in a major breakthrough it was shown that immune responses could instead be elicited by injecting plasmid DNA encoding relevant vaccine antigens [1-3]. This heralded the start of DNA vaccination. DNA vaccines offer many potential advantages; including speed and simplicity of manufacture. Despite early hype, this technology has yet to yield approved human products although there are already a number of approved veterinary DNA vaccines suggesting human applications are only a matter of time [4]. It should be remembered that monoclonal antibodies took over 2 decades from initial discovery to final successful human application. By these standards DNA vaccine technology is still in its relatively infancy. Hence this special edition on DNA vaccines is timely to examine the state of the art in DNA vaccine technology. It is hoped this collections of papers will help address the perennial question asked on all long journeys, “are we there yet?” These papers convey a sense of the tremendous distance that DNA vaccine technology has come over the 20 years since its initial discovery. In particular, issues of DNA vaccine safety have by and large been satisfactorily addressed, leaving vaccine efficacy as the only real remaining challenge [5]. Despite the passage of time there is still a sense of excitement that surrounds the DNA vaccine field. These papers convey a willingness of those in the field to press on to solve the remaining challenges to bring DNA vaccines to the human market. This augurs well for the eventual success of DNA vaccine technology. A variety of key topics are covered by this collection. The excellent review by Jim Williams describes the state of the art in DNA plasmid design. It highlights just how far plasmid design has been advanced and explores how plasmids can be fine-tuned for maximal protein expression. Kwilas et al., describe a novel delivery approach that uses a jet injector device to deliver the plasmid intramuscularly without the need for a needle. Interestingly this form of administration appears to also enhance plasmid expression and vaccine immunogenicity. Another area where there have been major advances is the area of DNA vaccine adjuvants. Capitani et al. demonstrate that plasmids encoding aggregation-promoting domains act as DNA vaccine adjuvants by triggering frustrated autophagy leading to caspase activation and apoptotic cell death. The induction of cell death is common to traditional vaccine adjuvants including alum and squalene oil emulsions [6], but poses safety risks as excess cell death may trigger unwanted side effects and even autoimmunity in susceptible individuals [7, 8]. No discussion of DNA vaccines would be complete without including electroporation as a method of enhancing plasmid expression. Davtyan et al. describe studies on electroporation settings to maximize delivery of an Alzheimer’s disease DNA vaccine encoding a β-amyloid epitope. Electroporation remains a potent tool for maximizing DNA delivery but with the downsides of inconvenience, cost and discomfort. Finally, Lucyna Cova examines the history of hepatitis B DNA vaccine development, describing the many challenges encountered along the way. This is a story that could easily be repeated for the many other DNA vaccines under development. I trust this collection of papers on current DNA vaccine research will convince the reader that the field of DNA vaccines is not dead, and in fact under the surface vigorous research and development efforts continue towards a key milestone which will be approval of the first human DNA vaccine. Considering the more than 20 years that monoclonal antibody technology had to spend in the wilderness before all their problems were solved and they became the pharmaceutical industry’s biggest success story, DNA vaccines may yet have their time in the sun.