ArticleiScience2023
Antiviral efficacy against and replicative fitness of an XBB.1.9.1 clinical isolate.
Article in iScience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extra gene coding capacity of SARS-CoV-2 provides a virus engineering platform for in vitro and in vivo applications.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- SARS-CoV-2 variants: biology, pathogenicity, immunity and control.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026Review
- Role of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19 in patients with hematologic malignancy-A narrative review and expert opinion.European journal of clinical investigation · 2025Review
- Immune Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Variants WT and XBB.1.9: Assessing Vulnerabilities and Preparedness.Vaccines · 2025Article
- A Phase 2a, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Human Challenge Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Molnupiravir in Healthy Participants Inoculated with Respiratory Syncytial Virus.Pulmonary therapy · 2025Article
- Drug susceptibility and the potential for drug-resistant SARS-CoV-2 emergence in immunocompromised animals.iScience · 2024Article
- Comprehensive Review of COVID-19: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Advancement in Diagnostic and Detection Techniques, and Post-Pandemic Treatment Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Generation of recombinant viruses directly from clinical specimens of COVID-19 patients.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- COVID-19 therapeutics.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The emergence and spread of new SARS-CoV-2 variants with mutations in the spike protein, such as the XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.9.1 sublineages, raise concerns about the efficacy of current COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). In this study, none of the mAbs we tested neutralized XBB.1.9.1 or XBB.1.5, even at the highest concentration used. We also found that the bivalent mRNA vaccine could enhance humoral immunity against XBB.1.9.1, but that XBB.1.9.1 and XBB.1.5 still evaded humoral immunity induced by vaccination or infection. Moreover, the susceptibility of XBB.1.9.1 to remdesivir, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir, and ensitrelvir was similar to that of the ancestral strain and the XBB.1.5 isolate
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.