Comparative evaluation of two severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) vaccine candidates in mice challenged with SARS coronavirus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two different severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) vaccine strategies were evaluated for their ability to protect against live SARS coronavirus (CoV) challenge in a murine model of infection. A whole killed (inactivated by beta-propiolactone) SARS-CoV vaccine and a combination of two adenovirus-based vectors, one expressing the nucleocapsid (N) and the other expressing the spike (S) protein (collectively designated Ad S/N), were evaluated for the induction of serum neutralizing antibodies and cellular immune responses and their ability to protect against pulmonary SARS-CoV replication. The whole killed virus (WKV) vaccine given subcutaneously to 129S6/SvEv mice was more effective than the Ad S/N vaccine administered either intranasally or intramuscularly in inhibiting SARS-CoV replication in the murine respiratory tract. This protective ability of the WKV vaccine correlated with the induction of high serum neutralizing-antibody titres, but not with cellular immune responses as measured by gamma interferon secretion by mouse splenocytes. Titres of serum neutralizing antibodies induced by the Ad S/N vaccine administered intranasally or intramuscularly were significantly lower than those induced by the WKV vaccine. However, Ad S/N administered intranasally, but not intramuscularly, significantly limited SARS-CoV replication in the lungs. Among the vaccine groups, SARS-CoV-specific IgA was found only in the sera of mice immunized intranasally with Ad S/N, suggesting that mucosal immunity may play a role in protection for the intranasal Ad S/N delivery system. Finally, the sera of vaccinated mice contained antibodies to S, further suggesting a role for this protein in conferring protective immunity against SARS-CoV infection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".