Mucosal SARS-CoV-2 S1 adenovirus-based vaccine elicits robust systemic and mucosal immunity and protects against disease in animals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized the importance and need for accessible safe, effective, and versatile vaccine platforms. While approved SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been instrumental in saving lives and reducing healthcare and economic burdens, the induction of mucosal immunity remains an unmet need. Here, we engineered and evaluated a non-replicating adenovirus 5 (rAd5)-based vaccine expressing the SARS-CoV-2 S1 subunit (rAd5-SARS2-S1). We assessed the immunogenicity, durability, and protective efficacy of intramuscular (IM) and intranasal (IN) administration of rAd5-SARS2-S1 in mice and Syrian hamsters. Two IM or IN doses of rAd5-SARS2-S1 elicited robust and sustained Th1-skewed S1-specific serum IgG, neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) against several SARS-CoV-2 variants and systemic antigen-specific memory T cell responses in mice. Additionally, IN vaccination induced potent and long-lasting mucosal S1-specific IgG, IgA, and nAbs and pulmonary memory T cells. Importantly, while IM vaccine significantly ameliorated disease severity in hamsters by reducing viral burden, lung pathology, and, to some extent, weight loss, IN immunization significantly reduced viral replication and provided superior protection against disease and weight loss. Together, our study demonstrates that the rAd5-SARS2-S1 vaccine is immunogenic in both mice and hamsters when administered intramuscularly or intranasally, with IN administration providing better protection. These findings suggest that IN delivery of rAd5-SARS2-S1 could be a promising approach for inducing mucosal and systemic immunity, offering enhanced protection against SARS-CoV-2 and emerging variants. IMPORTANCE: This publication presents an assessment of the immune response and effectiveness of a vaccine containing genetically modified non-replicating recombinant that expresses the S1 subunit protein of SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a comparative analysis of the immune response potency, durability, and protective effectiveness of this vaccine using intramuscular (IM) and intranasal (IN) inoculation in mice and Syrian hamsters. Our findings indicate that both vaccinations were effective in stimulating strong and long-lasting immune responses, both locally and across the body, when administered through either IM or IN methods. Crucially, our study demonstrated that the IN vaccination outperformed the IM vaccine by effectively and significantly suppressing the multiplication of the virus in the lungs and nasal turbinates. Additionally, the IN vaccine provided protection against disease-related weight loss and lung damage in the animals. This work showcases the potential of intranasal administration as a viable method to stimulate both mucosal and systemic immunity. This technique provides improved defense against SARS-CoV-2 and maybe additional variations.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".