Trial reportClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2026
Safety and Immunogenicity of a Fourth Dose of Omicron BA.1-Adapted BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults 18-55 Years Old.
Trial report in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04955626 (A PHASE 3 MASTER PROTOCOL TO EVALUATE ADDITIONAL DOSE), which is not on this 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.
A phase 3 master protocol to evaluate additional dose(s) of bnt162b2 in healthy individuals previously vaccinated with bnt162b2
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Immunogenicity, Tolerability, and Safety of BA.1-Adapted BNT162b2 Vaccine in 18- to 55-Year-Olds Previously Vaccinated with BNT162b2 or Who Were COVID-19 Vaccine-Naive.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEmergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 sublineages warrants the use of sequence-adapted vaccines to provide protection against coronavirus disease 2019.
methodsIn this phase 3 trial, adults 18‒55 years old who had previously received three 30 μg doses of BNT162b2 vaccine were randomized to receive a 60 or 30 μg dose of bivalent Omicron BA.1‒adapted BNT162b2 comprising equal amounts of ancestral and monovalent messenger RNA BA.1 (bivalent BA.1) or a 60 μg dose of monovalent Omicron BA.1‒adapted BNT162b2 (monovalent BA.1). Safety (local reactions, systemic events, adverse events [AEs], and serious AEs) was the primary objective. Exploratory analyses assessed immune responses against Omicron BA.1, BA.4, and BA.5 subvariants and ancestral strain.
resultsAmong the 1054 randomized participants who received monovalent BA.1 or bivalent BA.1, frequencies of local reactions, systemic events, and AEs were slightly higher with 60 µg monovalent BA.1 than either bivalent BA.1 dose level. One month after vaccination, bivalent BA.1 (30 and 60 μg) and monovalent BA.1 (60 μg) induced substantial neutralizing responses against Omicron BA.1 (50% neutralizing titer geometric mean fold rises [GMFRs], 15.4 [95% CI 12.4-19.2], 17.1 [13.7-21.4], and 24.6 [19.3-31.4], respectively) and ancestral strain (GMFRs, 6.2 [5.1-7.6], 7.3 [6.0-8.9], and 7.0 [5.7-8.7], respectively). In a smaller (n = 30/treatment arm) sentinel cohort, all study vaccines modestly neutralized Omicron BA.4 and BA.5.
conclusionsBivalent and monovalent BA.1‒adapted vaccines had a safety profile similar to the original BNT162b2 30 μg and induced substantial neutralizing responses against Omicron BA.1 and ancestral strains. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04955626.
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.