ArticleResearch square2024
Immunogenicity and efficacy of XBB.1.5 rS vaccine against EG.5.1 variant of SARS-CoV-2 in Syrian hamsters.
Article in Research square, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The continued emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants necessitates updating COVID-19 vaccines to match circulating strains. The immunogenicity and efficacy of these vaccines must be tested in pre-clinical animal models. In Syrian hamsters, we measured the humoral and cellular immune response after immunization with the nanoparticle recombinant Spike (S) protein-based COVID-19 vaccine (Novavax, Inc.). We also compared the efficacy of the updated monovalent XBB.1.5 variant vaccine to previous COVID-19 vaccines for the induction of XBB.1.5 and EG.5.1 neutralizing antibodies and protection against a challenge with the EG.5.1 variant of SARS-CoV-2. Immunization induced high levels of spike-specific serum IgG and IgA antibodies, S-specific IgG and IgA antibody secreting cells, and antigen specific CD4 + T-cells. The XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.16 vaccines, but not the Prototype vaccine, induced high levels of neutralizing antibodies against XBB.1.5 and EG.5.1 variants of SARS-CoV-2. Upon challenge with the Omicron EG.5.1 variant, the XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.16 vaccines reduced the virus load in the lungs, nasal turbinates, trachea and nasal washes. The bivalent vaccine continued to offer protection in the trachea and lungs, but protection was reduced in the upper airways. In contrast, the monovalent Prototype vaccine no longer offered good protection, and breakthrough infections were observed in all animals and tissues. Thus, the protein-based XBB.1.5 vaccine is immunogenic and can protect against the Omicron EG.5.1 variant in the Syrian hamster model.
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.