ArticleInternational journal of biological sciences2022
Cross-variant protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in hamsters immunized with monovalent and bivalent inactivated vaccines.
Article in International journal of biological sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Altered infectivity, cell-cell fusion, and immune evasion of SARS-CoV-2 BA.3.2 and LP.8.1 variants.Journal of virology · 2026Article
- Review
- An inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine based on a Vero cell culture-adapted high-titer virus confers cross-protection in small animals.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Monovalent vaccination with inactivated SARS-CoV-2 BA.5 protects hamsters against Omicron but not non-Omicron variants.NPJ vaccines · 2023Article
- Enhancing Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Immunity by Genetic Delivery of Enveloped Virus-like Particles Displaying SARS-CoV-2 Spikes.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Immunogenicity and protection of a variant nanoparticle vaccine that confers broad neutralization against SARS-CoV-2 variants.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Do We Really Need Omicron Spike-Based Updated COVID-19 Vaccines? Evidence and Pipeline.Viruses · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid development and successful use of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 might hold the key to curb the ongoing pandemic of COVID-19. Emergence of vaccine-evasive SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) has posed a new challenge to vaccine design and development. One urgent need is to determine what types of variant-specific and bivalent vaccines should be developed. Here, we compared homotypic and heterotypic protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection of hamsters with monovalent and bivalent whole-virion inactivated vaccines derived from representative VOCs. In addition to the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan strain, Delta (B.1.617.2; δ) and Theta (P.3; θ) variants were used in vaccine preparation. Additional VOCs including Omicron (B.1.1.529) and Alpha (B.1.1.7) variants were employed in the challenge experiment. Consistent with previous findings, Omicron variant exhibited the highest degree of immune evasion, rendering all different forms of inactivated vaccines substantially less efficacious. Notably, monovalent and bivalent Delta variant-specific inactivated vaccines provided optimal protection against challenge with Delta variant. Yet, some cross-variant protection against Omicron and Alpha variants was seen with all monovalent and bivalent inactivated vaccines tested. Taken together, our findings support the notion that an optimal next-generation inactivated vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 should contain the predominant VOC in circulation. Further investigations are underway to test whether a bivalent vaccine for Delta and Omicron variants can serve this purpose.
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.