Question · asked by 1 review
Anticaries vaccine or antibody (DNA, recombinant protein, nanoparticle-adjuvanted, live-vector, plant-based, or passive IgY immunization) targeting S. mutans vs Control (unvaccinated / empty vector / PBS / placebo animals): Serum IgG antibody response (immunogenicity)
- Population
- Animal caries models (mice, rats, hamsters) challenged/colonized with Streptococcus mutans; one transgenic-plant antigen-expression system
- Intervention
- Anticaries vaccine or antibody (DNA, recombinant protein, nanoparticle-adjuvanted, live-vector, plant-based, or passive IgY immunization) targeting S. mutans
- Comparison
- Control (unvaccinated / empty vector / PBS / placebo animals)
- Outcome
- Serum IgG antibody response (immunogenicity)
Anticaries vaccines elicited increased serum IgG antibody responses across the animal studies (ungraded narrative synthesis; no pooled estimate).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Anticaries vaccine or antibody (DNA, recombinant protein, nanoparticle-adjuvanted, live-vector, plant-based, or passive IgY immunization) targeting S. mutans vs Control (unvaccinated / empty vector / PBS / placebo animals) Serum IgG antibody response (immunogenicity) · Animal caries models (mice, rats, hamsters) challenged/colonized with Streptococcus mutans; one transgenic-plant… · Preclinical (animal laboratory) Anticaries vaccines elicited increased serum IgG antibody responses across the animal studies (ungraded narrative synthesis; no pooled estimate). Assessing the Efficacy and Immunogenicity of Anticaries Vaccine-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. (2025) All outcomes | no estimate extracted | Not reported | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Assessing the Efficacy and Immunogenicity of Anticaries Vaccine-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. 2025 All outcomes | August 2025 | 9 | Critically Low / Low |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.