Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37735471›Full record

ArticleNature communications2023

mRNA vaccine quality analysis using RNA sequencing.

Helen M Gunter, Senel Idrisoglu, Swati Singh, Dae Jong Han, Emily Ariens, Jonathan R Peters, Ted Wong, Seth W Cheetham, Jun Xu, Subash Kumar Rai and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Cold-adapted RNA polymerase fromProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. IVT-free, chemically synthesized protein-encoding RNA oligonucleotides for rapid production of personalized cancer vaccines.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Helen M Gunter *Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Senel Idrisoglu *Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Swati SinghAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Dae Jong HanBASE facility, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Emily AriensBASE facility, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Jonathan R PetersBASE facility, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Ted WongGarvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Seth W CheethamAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6428-3175
Jun XuGenome Innovation Hub, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2262-9999
Subash Kumar RaiGenome Innovation Hub, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3694-5586
Robert FeldmanCOVID19 Vaccine Corporation Limited (CVC), Auckland, New Zealand.
Andy HerbertCOVID19 Vaccine Corporation Limited (CVC), Auckland, New Zealand.
Esteban MarcellinAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3173-7956
Romain TropeeBASE facility, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Trent MunroAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1987-2020
Tim R MercerAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. t.mercer@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8780-894X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The success of mRNA vaccines has been realised, in part, by advances in manufacturing that enabled billions of doses to be produced at sufficient quality and safety. However, mRNA vaccines must be rigorously analysed to measure their integrity and detect contaminants that reduce their effectiveness and induce side-effects. Currently, mRNA vaccines and therapies are analysed using a range of time-consuming and costly methods. Here we describe a streamlined method to analyse mRNA vaccines and therapies using long-read nanopore sequencing. Compared to other industry-standard techniques, VAX-seq can comprehensively measure key mRNA vaccine quality attributes, including sequence, length, integrity, and purity. We also show how direct RNA sequencing can analyse mRNA chemistry, including the detection of nucleoside modifications. To support this approach, we provide supporting software to automatically report on mRNA and plasmid template quality and integrity. Given these advantages, we anticipate that RNA sequencing methods, such as VAX-seq, will become central to the development and manufacture of mRNA drugs.

Indexed as

CommercemRNA VaccinesRNA, MessengerSequence Analysis, RNAmRNA VaccinesRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID37735471
PMCPMC10514319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.