MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414320863 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.17.25335983

Monkeypox virus-neutralising antibodies detected against Clade Ib and Clade IIb in healthy individuals following MVA-BN vaccination

2025· preprint· en· W4414320863 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Victoria Sheridan, Craig W. Duffy, Jake Dunning, Lance Turtle, Julian A. Hiscox, Krishanthi Subramaniam

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean and Developing Countries Clinical Trials PartnershipLiverpool John Moores UniversityMcMaster University
KeywordsCladeMonkeypoxSubcladeVirusAntibodyVaccinationImmunity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Recently, a novel subclade of mpox virus (MPXV), clade Ib, has emerged in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Modified vaccinia Ankara—Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN) is a third-generation smallpox vaccine that is authorised and in use as a vaccine against mpox. MVA-BN provides approximately 78% protection against disease to Clade IIb MPXV, but there are no data for Clade Ib. We used a plaque reduction neutralisation assay (PRNT) with MPXV clinical isolates from Clade Ib and IIb to investigate immunity in vaccinated health care workers. Here we show that a two-dose regimen of MVA-BN can induce MPXV-neutralising antibodies against both clades, with higher responses to Clade IIb than Clade Ib. KEY POINTS Vaccination with MVA-BN generates antibodies that can neutralise MPXV Clade Ib and IIb. Despite the small sample size paired analysis across the vaccine recipients demonstrate higher neutralisation to Clade IIb than Ib.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207