Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39082740›Full record

ArticleEmerging microbes & infections2024

Comparative immunogenicity of monovalent and bivalent adenovirus vaccines carrying spikes of early and late SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Hengchun Li, Chenchen Yang, Li Yin, Wenming Liu, Zhengyuan Zhang, Bo Liu, Xinxin Sun, Wenhao Liu, Zihan Lin, Zijian Liu and 8 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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.

Hengchun LiState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Chenchen YangState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Li YinState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangdong Laboratory of Computational Biomedicine, Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Wenming LiuState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangdong Laboratory of Computational Biomedicine, Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Zhengyuan ZhangState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangdong Laboratory of Computational Biomedicine, Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Bo LiuGuangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Xinxin SunGuangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Wenhao LiuSchool of Life Sciences, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Zihan LinState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangdong Laboratory of Computational Biomedicine, Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Zijian LiuState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangdong Laboratory of Computational Biomedicine, Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Ping HeGuangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Ying FengGuangzhou National Laboratory, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Chunhua WangGuangzhou nBiomed Ltd., Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Wei WangGuangzhou Bio-island Laboratory, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Suhua GuanGuangzhou nBiomed Ltd., Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Qian WangState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Ling ChenState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-1485-1626
Pingchao LiState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangdong Laboratory of Computational Biomedicine, Guangzhou Institutes of Biomedicine and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0001-5046-0855

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The continuous emergence of highly immune-evasive SARS-CoV-2 variants has challenged vaccine efficacy. A vaccine that can provide broad protection is desirable. We evaluated the immunogenicity of a series of monovalent and bivalent adenovirus-vectored vaccines containing the spikes of Wildtype (WT), Beta, Delta, Omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.2.13, BA.3, BA.5, BQ.1.1, and XBB. Vaccination in mice using monovalent vaccines elicited the highest neutralizing titers against each self-matched strain, but against other variants were reduced 2- to 73-fold. A bivalent vaccine consisting of WT and BA.5 broadened the neutralizing breadth against pre-Omicron and Omicron subvariants except XBB. Among bivalent vaccines based on the strains before the emergence of XBB, a bivalent vaccine consisting of BA.2 and BA.5 elicited the most potent neutralizing antibodies against Omicron subvariants, including XBB. In mice primed with injected WT vaccine, intranasal booster with a bivalent vaccine containing XBB and BA.5 could elicit broad serum and respiratory mucosal neutralizing antibodies against all late Omicron subvariants, including XBB. In mice that had been sequentially vaccinated with WT and BA.5, intranasal booster with a monovalent XBB vaccine elicited greater serum and mucosal XBB neutralizing antibodies than bivalent vaccines containing XBB. Both monovalent and bivalent XBB vaccines induced neutralizing antibodies against EG.5. Unlike the antibody response, which is highly variant-specific, mice receiving either monovalent or bivalent vaccines elicited comparable T-cell responses against all variants. Furthermore, intranasal but not intramuscular booster induced antigen-specific lung resident T cells. This study provides insights into the design of the COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination strategies.

Indexed as

Adenovirus VaccinesAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesMice, Inbred BALB CSARS-CoV-2Spike Glycoprotein, CoronavirusAdenoviridaeAnimalsFemaleHumansImmunogenicity, VaccineMiceVaccinationAdenovirus VaccinesAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19 VaccinesSpike Glycoprotein, Coronavirusspike protein, SARS-CoV-2Adenovirusbivalent vaccineCOVID-19immunogenicitylung tissue-resident T cellsmonovalent vaccinemucosal neutralizing antibodiesOmicron

Identifiers

PMID39082740
PMCPMC11334748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.