Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38280035›Full record

ArticleApplied microbiology and biotechnology2024

Caveats of chimpanzee ChAdOx1 adenovirus-vectored vaccines to boost anti-SARS-CoV-2 protective immunity in mice.

Jacquelynne Cervantes-Torres, Carlos Cabello-Gutiérrez, Dolores-Adriana Ayón-Núñez, Gloria Soldevila, Roxana Olguin-Alor, Georgina Diaz, Gonzalo Acero, René Segura-Velázquez, Leonor Huerta, Isabel Gracia-Mora and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

18 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jacquelynne Cervantes-TorresSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Carlos Cabello-GutiérrezInstituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias "Ismael Cosío Villegas", Calzada de Tlalpan 4502, Belisario Domínguez Secc. 16, Tlalpan, 14080, Mexico City, CDMX, Mexico.
Dolores-Adriana Ayón-NúñezSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Gloria SoldevilaBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Roxana Olguin-AlorBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Georgina DiazBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Gonzalo AceroBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
René Segura-VelázquezSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Leonor HuertaBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Isabel Gracia-MoraUnidad de Experimentación Preclínica, Facultad de Química, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Laura CobosSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Mayra Pérez-TapiaUnidad de Desarrollo e Investigación en Bioterapeúticos (UDIBI), Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, 11340, Mexico City, Mexico.
Juan C AlmagroUnidad de Desarrollo e Investigación en Bioterapeúticos (UDIBI), Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, 11340, Mexico City, Mexico.
Francisco Suárez-GüemesSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Raúl J BobesBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Gladis FragosoBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico.
Edda SciuttoBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico. edda@unam.mx.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5608-5355
Juan Pedro LacletteBiomedical Research Institute, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Coyoacán, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico. laclette@iibiomedicas.unam.mx.
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México · MXInstituto Politécnico Nacional · MXInstituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias · MX

Funding

UNAM Instituto de Investigaciones Biomedicas PROVACADIUNAM Programa de Apoyo a Proyectos de Investigacion e Innovacion Tecnologica IV201020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several COVID-19 vaccines use adenovirus vectors to deliver the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein. Immunization with these vaccines promotes immunity against the S protein, but against also the adenovirus itself. This could interfere with the entry of the vaccine into the cell, reducing its efficacy. Herein, we evaluate the efficiency of an adenovirus-vectored vaccine (chimpanzee ChAdOx1 adenovirus, AZD1222) in boosting the specific immunity compared to that induced by a recombinant receptor-binding domain (RBD)-based vaccine without viral vector. Mice immunized with the AZD1222 human vaccine were given a booster 6 months later, with either the homologous vaccine or a recombinant vaccine based on RBD of the delta variant, which was prevalent at the start of this study. A significant increase in anti-RBD antibody levels was observed in rRBD-boosted mice (31-61%) compared to those receiving two doses of AZD1222 (0%). Significantly higher rates of PepMix™- or RBD-elicited proliferation were also observed in IFNγ-producing CD4 and CD8 cells from mice boosted with one or two doses of RBD, respectively. The lower efficiency of the ChAdOx1-S vaccine in boosting specific immunity could be the result of a pre-existing anti-vector immunity, induced by increased levels of anti-adenovirus antibodies found both in mice and humans. Taken together, these results point to the importance of avoiding the recurrent use of the same adenovirus vector in individuals with immunity and memory against them. It also illustrates the disadvantages of ChAdOx1 adenovirus-vectored vaccine with respect to recombinant protein vaccines, which can be used without restriction in vaccine-booster programs. KEY POINTS: • ChAdOx1 adenovirus vaccine (AZD1222) may not be effective in boosting anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity • A recombinant RBD protein vaccine is effective in boosting anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity in mice • Antibodies elicited by the rRBD-delta vaccine persisted for up to 3 months in mice.

Indexed as

Adenovirus VaccinesCOVID-19VaccinesAdenoviridaeAnimalsAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansMicePan troglodytesSARS-CoV-2VaccinationAdenovirus VaccinesAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesCellular immunityCOVID-19Neutralizing antibodiesReceptor-binding domain (RBD)

Identifiers

PMID38280035
PMCPMC10821985
OpenAlexW4391281862

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.