In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".

Paragraph: Dendritic cells (DCs) are recognized as highly potent antigen-presenting cells that are able to stimulate cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) responses with antitumor activity. Consequently, DCs have been explored as cellular vaccines in cancer immunotherapy. To that end, DCs are modified with tumor antigens to enable presentation of antigen-derived peptides to CTLs. In this review we discuss the use of viral vectors for in situ modification of DCs, focusing on their clinical applications as anticancer vaccines. Among the viral vectors discussed are those derived from viruses belonging to the families of the Poxviridae, Adenoviridae, Retroviridae, Togaviridae, Paramyxoviridae, and Rhabdoviridae. We will further shed light on how the combination of viral vector-based vaccination with T-cell supporting strategies will bring this strategy to the next level. Since their discovery in 1973, it was clear that dendritic cells (DCs) stood out above the immune cell pack (1, 2). They are morphologically distinct from all other immune cell types and are gifted with an unparalleled capacity to take up, process and present self and foreign antigens to both CD4 + and CD8 + T cells. DCs are critical intermediaries between the innate and adaptive immune systems, as they stimulate, regulate, and shape both immunity and tolerance in all its disguises. Ralph Steinmann, who discovered these cells, was awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2011, because the discovery of DCs changed medicine (3). Dendritic cells in both humans and mice represent a population of at least four different subtypes with distinct phenotypical and functional characteristics (4-7). These subsets are: plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs), two subsets of conventional DCs (cDC1 and cDC2), and inflammatory DCs. The latter represent a monocyte-derived subset that appears during inflammatory responses (Table 1) . Recently, additional types of human blood DCs, monocytes, and progenitors were revealed using single cell RNA-sequencing. The group of Prof. Nir Hacohen identified pDCs next to cDC progenitor-derived cDC1 (Clec9A + ) and two types of CD1c + cDC2, of which one can also be derived from CD14 + DCs. Furthermore they found a CD141 − CD1c − CD11c + DC subset derived from CD16 + monocytes and an AXL + Siglec6 + subset (8). Future research will have to unravel a possible murine representative for the human cDC2 and AXL + Siglec6 + DC subset. Also, Langerhans cells have been considered an important DC subset for vaccination as they are localized in the epidermis (HLA-DR + CD11c + CD1a + CD207 + ). However, recent evidence suggests that they are related to macrophages, another antigen-presenting cell (APC) type with potential antitumor activity (9). 
 Title: The Journey of in vivo Virus Engineered Dendritic Cells From Bench to Bedside: A Bumpy Road
True

Paragraph: Background: Viral aetiologies are the most common cause of central nervous system (CNS) infections. Approximately one-half of CNS infections remain of undetermined origin. High-throughput sequencing (HTS) brought new perspectives to CNS infection investigations, allowing investigation of viral aetiologies with an unbiased approach. HTS use is still limited to specific clinical situations. Objectives: The aim of this review was to evaluate the contribution and pitfalls of HTS for the aetiologic identification of viral encephalitis, meningoencephalitis, and meningitis in CNS patient samples. Sources: PubMed was searched from 1 January 2008 to 2 August 2018 to retrieve available studies on the topic. Additional publications were included from a review of full-text sources. Content: Among 366 studies retrieved, 29 used HTS as a diagnostic technique. HTS was performed in cerebrospinal fluid and brain biopsy samples of 307 patients, including immunocompromised, immunocompetent paediatric, and adult cases. HTS was performed retrospectively in 18 studies and prospectively in 11. HTS led to the identification of a potential causal virus in 41 patients, with 11 viruses known and ten not expected to cause CNS infections. Various HTS protocols were used. Implications: The additional value of HTS is difficult to quantify because of various biases. Nevertheless, HTS led to the identification of a viral cause in 13% of encephalitis, meningoencephalitis, and meningitis cases in which various assays failed to identify the cause. HTS should be considered early in clinical management as a complement to routine assays. Standardized strategies and systematic studies are needed for the integration of HTS in clinical management. M.-C. Zanella, Clin Microbiol Infect 2019;25:422 
 Title: High-throughput sequencing for the aetiologic identification of viral encephalitis, meningoencephalitis, and meningitis. A narrative review and clinical appraisal
False

Paragraph: Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV, produced a scare Abstract when it appeared in 2003 in China and later quickly spread to other countries around the world. Although it has since disappeared, its threat to human health remains. Therefore, studies on the prevention and treatment of SARS are important for dealing with epidemics of this and other infectious diseases. The most promising newly developed technology for intervention in SARS may be RNA interference, an endogenous cellular process for the inhibition of gene expression mediated by sequence-specific double-stranded RNAs. Numerous studies have reported the therapeutic potential of RNA interference for the treatment of various human diseases ranging from cancers to infectious diseases such as HIV and hepatitis. To date, most studies on inhibition of SARS-CoV replication using small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) have been conducted in cell lines in vitro. One study using siRNAs to inhibit SARS-CoV infection in Rhesus macaques demonstrated that siRNAs were effective both prophylactically and therapeutically with no adverse effects in the animals. Challenges remaining for the application of siRNA in vivo for SARS prevention and treatment include the specificity of the siRNAs and the efficiency of delivery. However, with improvements in siRNA design and delivery methods, RNA interference has the potential to become another major weapon for combating dangerous infections due to viruses such as SARS-CoV. 
 Title: Therapeutic and Prophylactic Potential of Small Interfering RNAs against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Progress to Date

False