PARTA:

SECTIONI

ReviewersName:
EMail:
Title:

NealethB.Nanquil
nbnanquil@neu.edu.ph

Authors:
DateSentToReviewer:
DateExpectedFromReviewer:

HIVVaccines:NewFrontiersinVaccineDevelopment

AnnDuerr,JudithN.Wasserhet,andLawrenceCorey

PARTB:
ReviewerOnly

SECTIONII:CommentsperSectionofManuscript

Itisinterestingtoknowthatscientistsaretryingtocomeupwithavaccine
Generalcomment:
usingthetraditionalwayagainstsuchcomplexvaccine.Itisalmosttoo
impossibletothinkthattheycouldmakeavaccinetopreventHIV.

TheintroductiondescribedhowmuchofakillerHIVvirusisandthatitdoes
nothaveatreatmentonceyouareinfected.So,inordertodecreasethenumber
Introduction:
ofinfectedpeople,youhavetopreventtheinfectionfromhappening.

Themethodologyofeachpartareconnectedandclearlyexplained.Everypart
isdiscussedwithalltheimportantinformationaboutthetrialsmadewiththe
Methodology:
vaccine.

Pending
Results:

Whenitcomestothediscussion,everytrialmadefortheeffectivenessofthe
Discussion:
vaccinewasdetailedandnotsugarcoated.

SECTIONII(Cont.)

Duerr,A.,J.N.Wasserheit,andL.Corey.2006.HIVvaccines:newfrontiers
Bibliography/References:
invaccinedevelopment.Clin.Infect.Dis.43:500511.

Others:

Decision:

SECTIONIIIPleaseratethefollowing:
(1=Excellent)(2=Good)(3=Fair)(4=poor)

Originality:
2
ContributionToTheField:
3
TechnicalQuality:
2
ClarityofPresentation:
3
DepthofResearch:
4


SECTIONIV:AdditionalComments
Pleaseaddanyadditionalcomments(Includingcomments/suggestionsregardingonlinesupplementary
materials,ifany):

PARTC
A. GeneralQuestions
1. Isthejournalpaperorganized,clearlywritten,andcomplete?Isitpublishedinarespected
journal?
Thejournalisorganizedandwellwritten.Itispublishedinarespectedjournal.
2. Whatistheaffiliationoftheauthor/s?Doesthisindicateanypossiblebiases?
None.Therewasnopartisanshipobserved.
B. IntroductionandLiteratureReview
1. Hasrelatedresearchbeenadequatelyevaluatedandcritiqued?
No,Ihavenotseenanyneitherevaluationnorcritiques.
2. Isliteraturereviewrelevantanduptodate?
Yes,sincetheproblemofthisjournalisbasicallyaworldwideinfectionasofnowthathas
killedthousandsofpeople.
3. Istheprogram/interventiondescribedinsufficientdetail?
Yes,sincethejournalisallaboutcreatingavaccineforHIVinfection.

4. Istheprogram/interventionbasedontheory?
No,theideaoftheinterventionwasobtainedfromEdwardJenner,theonewhowasa
pioneerofsmallpoxvaccine,theworldsfirstvaccine.Theybelievedhattheycouldmakeavaccineto
preventHIVusingEdwardJennersidea.
5. Isthepurposeofstudyclearlystated?
Yes,thepurposewasclearlystated.
C. Methodology
1. Isthedesignappropriate?Canitbereplicated?
No.
Twoofthemosteffectiveapproacheshaveharnessedlive,attenuatedorganismsand
inactivatedorganisms.Unfortunately,neitherhasprovenoptimalforHIVvaccinedevelopment.Live,
attenuatedvirusvaccinesinitiallyappearedtobesuccessfulinpreventingexperimentalchallengein
nonhumanprimateshowever,attenuatedHIVmutantsappeartobepathogenicinhumans.Thedesign
canbereplicateddependingonthevirusathand.
2. Isthesampleappropriate?Howweresubjectsrecruited?Samplesize?
Thesampleswereappropriatebutineffective.Thejournaldidnotstatehowsubjectswere
recruited.
3. Aresubjectsdescribedinsufficientdetail?Isthereacontrolgroup?
Yes,subjectsweredescribedinsufficientdetail.Thereisalsoacontrolgroup.
4. Whatethicalconsiderationswereaddressed?Didresearcherspecifyhowinformedconsent,
confidentiality,etc.werehandled?
No,theresearcherdidnotspecifyaboutconfidentiality.
5. Aretestingproceduresdescribedindetailandaretheyappropriate?
Yes,testingprocedureswereallindetail.
6. Areinstrumentsvalid,reliableandappropriate?
Yesbutthevaccinesarestillinprocess.
7. Whatstatisticalproceduresfordataanalysiswereused?Aretheyclearlydescribed?Arethey
appropriatefortheresearchproblem?

PotentialadvantagesanddisadvantagesofmajorHIVvaccinestrategieswereshownin
thetableaswellasHIVcandidatesforthevaccines.
D. Results
1. Doresultsevaluatethestatedquestion?Areresultscomplete?Isthedataclear?
Notyet,thevaccineisstillinprogressbutthedataforthetrialswereclear.
2. Arestatisticalanalysescompletedandappropriate?Arestatisticalsignificantlevelsindicated?
Yes,analysisarecompleteandappropriate.
E. Discussion/Conclusion/Recommendation
1. Aretheresultsrelatedbacktothestatedquestion?Aretheresultsreliableandvalid?
Notyet,theeffectsofthevaccineswerestillnotsuccessful.
2. Aretheconclusionsappropriatelybasedonthestatisticalresults?
Yes.

3. Areconclusionsjustified?Aregeneralizationsmade?
Yes,conclusionswerejustified.
4. Aresuggestionsforadditionalresearchprovided?
Yes,sincethevaccineisstillintheprocessofbeingeffectiveagainstHIVinfection.
F. References
1. Arereferencescomplete,accurateandcurrent?
Yes,allreferenceswereindicatedbelowthearticle.