ArticleScientific reports2024
COMPARING vaccine manufacturing technologies recombinant DNA vs in vitro transcribed (IVT) mRNA.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- IntegratedMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2026Article
- Article
- mRNA vaccines for HBV: Mechanisms, preclinical advances, and therapeutic clinical progress.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2026Review
- Varicella Zoster Virus Infection: Clinical Features, Molecular Pathogenesis, Treatment, and Prevention.MedComm · 2026Review
- Yeast-Based Vaccine Platforms: Applications and Key Insights from the COVID-19 Era.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- A binary self-amplifying expression platform enabling lipid nanoparticle-free vaccines and nanomedicines.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Advancements and challenges in next-generation mRNA vaccine manufacturing systems.Clinical and experimental vaccine research · 2025Review
- mRNA Vaccine Technology Beyond COVID-19.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Beyond the Pandemic Era: Recent Advances and Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines Against Emerging Variants of Concern.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Enhancing Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Generation via Microfluidic Mechanoporation and Lipid Nanoparticles.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vaccine manufacturing fosters the prevention, control, and eradication of infectious diseases. Recombinant DNA and in vitro (IVT) mRNA vaccine manufacturing technologies were enforced to combat the recent pandemic. Despite the impact of these technologies, there exists no scientific announcement that compares them. Digital Shadows are employed in this study to simulate each technology, investigating root cause deviations, technical merits, and liabilities, evaluating cost scenarios. Under this lens we provide an unbiased, advanced comparative technoeconomic study, one that determines which of these manufacturing platforms are suited for the two types of vaccines considered (monoclonal antibodies or antigens). We find recombinant DNA technology to exhibit higher Profitability Index due to lower capital and starting material requirements, pertaining to lower Minimum Selling Price per Dose values, delivering products of established quality. However, the potency of the mRNA, the streamlined and scalable synthetic processes involved and the raw material availability, facilitate faster market penetration and product flexibility, constituting these vaccines preferable whenever short product development cycles become a necessity.
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.