In this task, you're given a paragraph from the research paper and your task is to generate a suitable title for the research paper based on the given paper. Under 100 words is a good title length.

Example Input: Background: The development of a protective vaccine against canine visceral leishmaniasis (CVL) is an alternative approach for interrupting the domestic cycle of Leishmania infantum. Given the importance of sand fly salivary proteins as potent immunogens obligatorily co-deposited during transmission of Leishmania parasites, their inclusion in an anti-Leishmania vaccine has been investigated in the last few decades. In this context, we previously immunized dogs with a vaccine composed of L. braziliensis antigens plus saponin as the adjuvant and sand fly salivary gland extract (LBSapSal vaccine). This vaccine elicited an increase in both anti-saliva and anti-Leishmania IgG isotypes, higher counts of specific circulating CD8 + T cells, and high NO production. Methods: We investigated the immunogenicity and protective effect of LBSapSal vaccination after intradermal challenge with 1 × 10 7 late-log-phase L. infantum promastigotes in the presence of sand fly saliva of Lutzomyia longipalpis. The dogs were followed for up to 885 days after challenge. Results: The LBSapSal vaccine presents extensive antigenic diversity with persistent humoral and cellular immune responses, indicating resistance against CVL is triggered by high levels of total IgG and its subtypes (IgG1 and IgG2); expansion of circulating CD5 + , CD4 + , and CD8 + T lymphocytes and is Leishmania-specific; and reduction of splenic parasite load. Conclusions: These results encourage further study of vaccine strategies addressing Leishmania antigens in combination with proteins present in the saliva of the vector.
Example Output: LBSapSal-vaccinated dogs exhibit increased circulating T-lymphocyte subsets (CD4 + and CD8 + ) as well as a reduction of parasitism after challenge with Leishmania infantum plus salivary gland of Lutzomyia longipalpis

Example Input: Background: Influenza-like illness (ILI) may be caused by a variety of pathogens. Clinical observations are of little help to recognise myxovirus infection and implement appropriate prevention measures. The limited use of molecular tools underestimates the role of other common pathogens. Objectives: During the early weeks of the 2009-2010 flu pandemic, a clinical and virological survey was conducted in adult and paediatric patients with ILI referred to two French University hospitals in Paris and Tours. Aims were to investigate the different pathogens involved in ILI and describe the associated symptoms. Methods: H1N1v pandemic influenza diagnosis was performed with real time RT-PCR assay. Other viral aetiologies were investigated by the molecular multiplex assay RespiFinder19H. Clinical data were collected prospectively by physicians using a standard questionnaire. Results: From week 35 to 44, endonasal swabs were collected in 413 patients. Overall, 68 samples (16.5%) were positive for H1N1v. In 13 of them, other respiratory pathogens were also detected. Among H1N1v negative samples, 213 (61.9%) were positive for various respiratory agents, 190 in single infections and 23 in mixed infections. The most prevalent viruses in H1N1v negative single infections were rhinovirus (62.6%), followed by parainfluenza viruses (24.2%) and adenovirus (5.3%). 70.6% of H1N1v cases were identified in patients under 40 years and none after 65 years. There was no difference between clinical symptoms observed in patients infected with H1N1v or with other pathogens. Our results highlight the high frequency of non-influenza viruses involved in ILI during the pre-epidemic period of a flu alert and the lack of specific clinical signs associated with influenza infections. Rapid diagnostic screening of a large panel of respiratory pathogens may be critical to define and survey the epidemic situation and to provide critical information for patient management.
Example Output: High Burden of Non-Influenza Viruses in Influenza-Like Illness in the Early Weeks of H1N1v Epidemic in France

Example Input: Introduction: This study compares the detection of 14 common respiratory viruses by two different real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) methods: in house singleplex tests developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the commercially available Fast Track Diagnostic (FTD®) Respiratory Pathogens 33 multiplex test. Methods: A total of 217 nasopharyngeal swabs were analyzed using CDC singleplex rRT-PCR and FTD® Respiratory Pathogens 33 multiplex assays, for the detection of 14 respiratory viruses. Results: The results showed that 179/217 (82.5%) samples were positive with the singleplex method and 183/217 (84.3%) with the FTD® Respiratory Pathogens 33 multiplex test. Excellent or satisfactory agreement was obtained for all viruses (k N 0.6) except Parainfluenzavirus 4 (k = 0.24) and influenza B (k = 0.51). Conclusion: Although the multiplex FTD kits were more expensive than the singleplex assay, the FTD kits yielded rapid results in a shorter timeframe, increasing efficiency of diagnosis.
Example Output:
Comparison of FTD® respiratory pathogens 33 and a singleplex CDC assay for the detection of respiratory viruses: A study from Cameroon