MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310088457 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abo1827

Structural and biochemical characteristics of mRNA nanoparticles determine anti–SARS-CoV-2 humoral and cellular immune responses

2022· article· en· W4310088457 on OpenAlexaff
Yingying Shi, Jiaxin Huang, Yu Liu, Jing Liu, Xuemeng Guo, Jianhua Li, Liming Gong, Xin Zhou, Guofeng Cheng, Yunqing Qiu, Jian You, Yan Lou

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsMicropharma (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmune systemHumoral immunityCellular immunityImmunityImmunologyBiologyLysosomeCoronavirusVirologyCell biologyChemistryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineDiseaseBiochemistryInfectious disease (medical specialty)Enzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic underlines the urgent need for effective mRNA vaccines. However, current understanding of the immunological outcomes of mRNA vaccines formulated under different nanoplatforms is insufficient. Here, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 receptor binding domain mRNA delivered via lipid nanoparticle (LNP), cationic nanoemulsion (CNE), and cationic liposome (Lipo) was constructed. Results demonstrated that the structural and biochemical characteristics of nanoparticles shaped their tissue dissemination, cellular uptake, and intracellular trafficking, which eventually determined the activation of antiviral humoral and cellular immunity. Specifically, LNP was mainly internalized by myocyte and subsequently circumvented lysosome degradation, giving rise to humoral-biased immune responses. Meanwhile, CNE and Lipo induced cellular-preferred immunity, which was respectively attributed to the better lysosomal escape in dendritic cells and the superior biodistribution in secondary lymphoid organs. Overall, this study may guide the design and clinical use of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207