Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38307868›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

An intranasal live-attenuated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine limits virus transmission.

Julia M Adler, Ricardo Martin Vidal, Christine Langner, Daria Vladimirova, Azza Abdelgawad, Daniela Kunecova, Xiaoyuan Lin, Geraldine Nouailles, Anne Voss, Sandra Kunder and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Julia M AdlerInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8147-0351
Ricardo Martin VidalInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9670-5640
Christine LangnerInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7311-3477
Daria VladimirovaInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Azza AbdelgawadInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Daniela KunecovaInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Xiaoyuan LinInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3361-0126
Geraldine NouaillesDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Respiratory Medicine and Critical Care, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1973-3119
Anne VossInstitut für Tierpathologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sandra KunderInstitut für Tierpathologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5023-8397
Achim D GruberInstitut für Tierpathologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4502-0393
Haibo WuSchool of Life Sciences, Chongqing University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5961-2947
Nikolaus OsterriederInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Dusan KunecInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jakob TrimpertInstitut für Virologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany. jakob.trimpert@fu-berlin.de.ORCID 0000-0003-1616-0810
Freie Universität Berlin · DEChongqing University · CNHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation) SFB-TR84 Z01b
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of effective SARS-CoV-2 vaccines has been essential to control COVID-19, but significant challenges remain. One problem is intramuscular administration, which does not induce robust mucosal immune responses in the upper airways-the primary site of infection and virus shedding. Here we compare the efficacy of a mucosal, replication-competent yet fully attenuated virus vaccine, sCPD9-ΔFCS, and the monovalent mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1 and Omicron BA.5 in two scenarios. Firstly, we assessed the protective efficacy of the vaccines by exposing vaccinated male Syrian hamsters to infected counterparts. Secondly, we evaluated transmission of the challenge virus from vaccinated and subsequently challenged male hamsters to naïve contacts. Our findings demonstrate that the live-attenuated vaccine (LAV) sCPD9-ΔFCS significantly outperformed the mRNA vaccine in preventing virus transmission in both scenarios. Our results provide evidence for the advantages of locally administered LAVs over intramuscularly administered mRNA vaccines in preventing infection and reducing virus transmission.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAnimalsAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralBNT162 VaccineCricetinaeHumansMaleMesocricetusmRNA VaccinesSARS-CoV-2Antibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralBNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 VaccinesmRNA Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID38307868
PMCPMC10837132
OpenAlexW4391474129

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.