ArticleScientific reports2025
Epitope mapping of SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein using naturally-acquired immune responses to develop monoclonal antibodies.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
COVID-19 vaccination strategies are already available almost worldwide. However, it is also crucial to develop new therapeutic approaches, especially for vulnerable populations that may not fully respond to vaccination, such as the immunocompromised. In this project, we predicted 25 B-cell epitopes in silico in the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) protein and screened these against serum and plasma samples from 509 COVID-19 convalescent patients. The aim was to identify those epitopes with the highest IgG reactivity to produce monoclonal antibodies against them for COVID-19 treatment. We implemented Brewpitopes, a computational pipeline based on B-cell epitope prediction tools, such as BepiPred v2.0 and Discotope v2.0, and a series of antibody-epitope accessibility filters. We mapped the SARS-CoV-2 S protein epitopes most likely to be recognised by human neutralizing antibodies. Linear and structural epitope predictions were included and were further refined considering accessibility factors influencing their binding to antibodies like glycosylation status, localization in the viral membrane and accessibility on the 3D-surface of S. Blood samples were collected from 509 COVID-19 patients prospectively recruited 35 days after symptoms initiation, positive RT-qPCR or hospital/ICU discharge. Presence of IgG against SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed by lateral flow immunoassays. Epitopes immunogenicity was tested through the analysis of IgG levels and seropositivity in the convalescent serum and plasma samples and 126 pre-pandemic negative controls by Luminex to identify those with the highest reactivity. The seropositivity cut-offs for each epitope were calculated using a set of 126 pre-pandemic samples as negative controls (NC). Twenty-five SARS-CoV-2 S epitopes were predicted in silico as potentially the most immunogenic. These were synthesized and tested in a multiplex immunoassay against sera/plasmas from convalescent COVID-19 patients (5.7% asymptomatic, 35.6% mild, 13.8% moderate, 23% severe and 22% unknown because of anonymous donation). Among the 25 epitopes tested, 3 exhibited significantly higher IgG reactivity compared to the rest. The proportion of seropositive patients towards these 3 epitopes, based on median fluorescence intensity (MFI or Log
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.