Trial reportThe Lancet. Infectious diseases2021
Safety and immunogenicity of an MF59-adjuvanted spike glycoprotein-clamp vaccine for SARS-CoV-2: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 trial.
Trial report in The Lancet. Infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04495933 (A Phase 1, Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Dosage-Escalation, Single Centre Study to Evaluate the Safety and Immunogenicity of an Adjuvanted SARS-CoV-2 Sclamp Protein Subunit Vaccine in Healthy Adults Aged 18 to 55 Years Old and Healthy Older Adults, Aged 56 Years and Over), which is not on this map. Cited by 77 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Phase 1, Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Dosage-Escalation, Single Centre Study to Evaluate the Safety and Immunogenicity of an Adjuvanted SARS-CoV-2 Sclamp Protein Subunit Vaccine in Healthy Adults Aged 18 to 55 Years Old and Healthy Older Adults, Aged 56 Years and Over
Who cites it
77 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global health preparedness for biosecurity threats: a review of emerging technologies and solutions.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose fractionation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review on mucocutaneous presentations after COVID-19 vaccination and expert recommendations about vaccination of important immune-mediated dermatologic disorders.Dermatologic therapy · 2022Pooled it
- Headache onset after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.The journal of headache and pain · 2022Pooled it
- Frequency of Adverse Events in the Placebo Arms of COVID-19 Vaccine Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Efficacy, Immunogenicity and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Pooled it
- Safety and Immunogenicity of a Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Spike Subunit Vaccine Stabilized in the Prefusion Conformation by a Second-Generation Molecular Clamp and Evaluated in Adults Aged 18-55 Years: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Active Comparator, Phase I Trial.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2026Trial
- Ganoderma lucidum spore powder enhances IFN-α-mediated antiviral capacity of COVID-19 vaccine boosters revealed by single-cell multi-omics sequencing.Journal of advanced research · 2026Article
- Skeletal muscle as a dynamic immunological niche for vaccination.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Efficacy of Immunostimulatory Adjuvants and Nano-Adjuvants in Current SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: A Comprehensive Review.Health science reports · 2025Article
- A second-generation molecular clamp stabilised bivalent candidate vaccine for protection against diseases caused by respiratory syncytial virus and human metapneumovirus.PLoS pathogens · 2025Article
- Vaccine Development for Human Pneumoviruses.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Nano/Micro-Enabled Modification and Innovation of Conventional Adjuvants for Next-Generation Vaccines.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- RBD-displaying OMV nanovaccine boosts immunity against SARS-CoV-2.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Article
- The recent advances in vaccine adjuvants.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Advances in the structure-based design of protein vaccines for respiratory infectious diseases.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
- Enhancing vaccine effectiveness in the elderly to counter antibiotic resistance: The potential of adjuvants via pattern recognition receptors.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Review
- Dynamin independent endocytosis is an alternative cell entry mechanism for multiple animal viruses.PLoS pathogens · 2024Article
17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
35 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven the scale of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the development of vaccines based on different platforms is essential, particularly in light of emerging viral variants, the absence of information on vaccine-induced immune durability, and potential paediatric use. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of an MF59-adjuvanted subunit vaccine for COVID-19 based on recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein stabilised in a pre-fusion conformation by a novel molecular clamp (spike glycoprotein-clamp [sclamp]).
methodsWe did a phase 1, double-blind, placebo-controlled, block-randomised trial of the sclamp subunit vaccine in a single clinical trial site in Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Healthy adults (aged ≥18 to ≤55 years) who had tested negative for SARS-CoV-2, reported no close contact with anyone with active or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and tested negative for pre-existing SARS-CoV-2 immunity were included. Participants were randomly assigned to one of five treatment groups and received two doses via intramuscular injection 28 days apart of either placebo, sclamp vaccine at 5 μg, 15 μg, or 45 μg, or one dose of sclamp vaccine at 45 μg followed by placebo. Participants and study personnel, except the dose administration personnel, were masked to treatment. The primary safety endpoints included solicited local and systemic adverse events in the 7 days after each dose and unsolicited adverse events up to 12 months after dosing. Here, data are reported up until day 57. Primary immunogenicity endpoints were antigen-specific IgG ELISA and SARS-CoV-2 microneutralisation assays assessed at 28 days after each dose. The study is ongoing and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04495933.
findingsBetween June 23, 2020, and Aug 17, 2020, of 314 healthy volunteers screened, 120 were randomly assigned (n=24 per group), and 114 (95%) completed the study up to day 57 (mean age 32·5 years [SD 10·4], 65 [54%] male, 55 [46%] female). Severe solicited reactions were infrequent and occurred at similar rates in participants receiving placebo (two [8%] of 24) and the SARS-CoV-2 sclamp vaccine at any dose (three [3%] of 96). Both solicited reactions and unsolicited adverse events occurred at a similar frequency in participants receiving placebo and the SARS-CoV-2 sclamp vaccine. Solicited reactions occurred in 19 (79%) of 24 participants receiving placebo and 86 (90%) of 96 receiving the SARS-CoV-2 sclamp vaccine at any dose. Unsolicited adverse events occurred in seven (29%) of 24 participants receiving placebo and 35 (36%) of 96 participants receiving the SARS-CoV-2 sclamp vaccine at any dose. Vaccination with SARS-CoV-2 sclamp elicited a similar antigen-specific response irrespective of dose: 4 weeks after the initial dose (day 29) with 5 μg dose (geometric mean titre [GMT] 6400, 95% CI 3683-11 122), with 15 μg dose (7492, 4959-11 319), and the two 45 μg dose cohorts (8770, 5526-13 920 in the two-dose 45 μg cohort; 8793, 5570-13 881 in the single-dose 45 μg cohort); 4 weeks after the second dose (day 57) with two 5 μg doses (102 400, 64 857-161 676), with two 15 μg doses (74 725, 51 300-108 847), with two 45 μg doses (79 586, 55 430-114 268), only a single 45 μg dose (4795, 2858-8043). At day 57, 67 (99%) of 68 participants who received two doses of sclamp vaccine at any concentration produced a neutralising immune response, compared with six (25%) of 24 who received a single 45 μg dose and none of 22 who received placebo. Participants receiving two doses of sclamp vaccine elicited similar neutralisation titres, irrespective of dose: two 5 μg doses (GMT 228, 95% CI 146-356), two 15 μg doses (230, 170-312), and two 45 μg doses (239, 187-307).
interpretationThis first-in-human trial shows that a subunit vaccine comprising mammalian cell culture-derived, MF59-adjuvanted, molecular clamp-stabilised recombinant spike protein elicits strong immune responses with a promising safety profile. However, the glycoprotein 41 peptide present in the clamp created HIV diagnostic assay interference, a possible barrier to widespread use highlighting the criticality of potential non-spike directed immunogenicity during vaccine development. Studies are ongoing with alternative molecular clamp trimerisation domains to ameliorate this response.
fundingCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Health and Medical Research Council, Queensland Government, and further philanthropic sources listed in the acknowledgments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.