ReviewGenes2022
mRNA Vaccines: Why Is the Biology of Retroposition Ignored?
Review in Genes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- RNA-based cancer vaccines: mechanisms, clinical progress, and translational challenges.Immunologic research · 2025Review
- Virotherapy as Gene Deliver for Anti-Cancer Therapy: A Review Article.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Review
- Positron Emission Tomography-Based Pharmacokinetics of mRNA-Lipid Nanoparticles: A Study Quantifying the ApoE and Macrophage Contribution.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2025Article
- The Role of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein in Long-term Damage of Tissues and Organs, the Underestimated Role of Retrotransposons and Stem Cells, a Working Hypothesis.Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2025Review
- Current status of next-generation vaccines against mpox virus: a scoping review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Toxicologic Pathology Forum: mRNA Vaccine Safety-Separating Fact From Fiction.Toxicologic pathology · 2024Article
- Comprehensive Impurity Profiling of mRNA: Evaluating Current Technologies and Advanced Analytical Techniques.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Nucleic acid cancer vaccines targeting tumor related angiogenesis. Could mRNA vaccines constitute a game changer?Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- The mRNA-LNP vaccines - the good, the bad and the ugly?Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- 'Spikeopathy': COVID-19 Spike Protein Is Pathogenic, from Both Virus and Vaccine mRNA.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Precision-engineering of subunit vaccine particles for prevention of infectious diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- Article
- Understanding the Pharmacology of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Playing Dice with the Spike?International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Review
- Nucleic Acids as Biotools at the Interface between Chemistry and Nanomedicine in the COVID-19 Era.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Understanding the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Lockdowns and Social Isolation on Sleep Quality.Nature and science of sleep · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The major advantage of mRNA vaccines over more conventional approaches is their potential for rapid development and large-scale deployment in pandemic situations. In the current COVID-19 crisis, two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been conditionally approved and broadly applied, while others are still in clinical trials. However, there is no previous experience with the use of mRNA vaccines on a large scale in the general population. This warrants a careful evaluation of mRNA vaccine safety properties by considering all available knowledge about mRNA molecular biology and evolution. Here, I discuss the pervasive claim that mRNA-based vaccines cannot alter genomes. Surprisingly, this notion is widely stated in the mRNA vaccine literature but never supported by referencing any primary scientific papers that would specifically address this question. This discrepancy becomes even more puzzling if one considers previous work on the molecular and evolutionary aspects of retroposition in murine and human populations that clearly documents the frequent integration of mRNA molecules into genomes, including clinical contexts. By performing basic comparisons, I show that the sequence features of mRNA vaccines meet all known requirements for retroposition using L1 elements-the most abundant autonomously active retrotransposons in the human genome. In fact, many factors associated with mRNA vaccines increase the possibility of their L1-mediated retroposition. I conclude that is unfounded to a priori assume that mRNA-based therapeutics do not impact genomes and that the route to genome integration of vaccine mRNAs via endogenous L1 retroelements is easily conceivable. This implies that we urgently need experimental studies that would rigorously test for the potential retroposition of vaccine mRNAs. At present, the insertional mutagenesis safety of mRNA-based vaccines should be considered unresolved.
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.