Trial reportEmerging microbes & infections2024
Human monoclonal antibody F61 nasal spray effectively protected high-risk populations from SARS-CoV-2 variants during the COVID-19 pandemic from late 2022 to early 2023 in China.
Trial report in Emerging microbes & infections, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Colostrum from MERS-CoV seropositive camels for MERS prophylaxis and SARS-CoV-2 infection, a placebo controlled randomized trial.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Intranasal monoclonal antibodies do not prevent respiratory infection in a randomized, controlled experimental infection trial.npj drug discovery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Following the national dynamic zero-COVID strategy adjustment, the utilization of broad-spectrum nasal neutralizing antibodies may offer an alternative approach to controlling the outbreak of Omicron variants between late 2022 and early 2023 in China. This study involved an investigator-initiated trial (IIT) to assess the pharmacokinetic, safety and efficacy of the F61 nasal spray. A total of 2,008 participants were randomly assigned to receive F61 nasal spray (24 mg/0.8 mL/dose) or normal saline (0.8 mL/dose) and 1336 completed the follow-up in the IIT. Minimal absorption of F61 antibody into the bloodstream was detected in individuals receiving F61 nasal spray for seven consecutive days. No treatment-emergent adverse reactions of grade 3 severity or higher were reported. In the one-dose cohort, the 7-day cumulative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was 79.0% in the F61 group and 82.6% in the placebo group, whereas, in the multiple-dose (once daily for 7 consecutive days) cohort, the rates were 6.55% in the F61 group and 23.83% in the placebo group. The laboratory-confirmed efficacy of F61 was 3.78% (-3.74%-10.75%) in the one-dose cohort and 72.19% (57.33%-81.87%) in the multiple-dose cohort. In the real-world study, 60,225 volunteers in four different regions were administered the F61 nasal spray based on the subject's wishes, over 90% efficacy rate was observed against different Omicron variants. The F61 nasal spray, with its favourable safety profile, could be a promising prophylactic monoclonal antibody against SARS-CoV-2 VOCs.
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.