Cited by 157RNA Interference and Gene DeliveryImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms

Strategies for controlling the innate immune activity of conventional and self-amplifying mRNA therapeutics: Getting the message across

Open access
Minnaert, An-Katrien, Vanluchene, Helena, Verbeke, Rein, Lentacker, Ine, De Smedt, Stefaan C., Raemdonck, Koen, Sanders, Niek N., Remaut, Katrien·2021·Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

Abstract

The recent approval of messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines to combat the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic highlights the potential of both conventional mRNA and self-amplifying mRNA (saRNA) as a flexible immunotherapy platform to treat infectious diseases. Besides the antigen it encodes, mRNA itself has an immune-stimulating activity that can contribute to vaccine efficacy. This self-adjuvant effect, however, will interfere with mRNA translation and may influence the desired therapeutic outcome. To further exploit its potential as a versatile therapeutic platform, it will be crucial to control mRNA's innate immune-stimulating properties. In this regard, we describe the mechanisms behind the innate immune recognition of mRNA and provide an extensive overview of strategies to control its innate immune-stimulating activity. These strategies range from modifications to the mRNA backbone itself, optimization of production and purification processes to the combination with innate immune inhibitors. Furthermore, we discuss the delicate balance of the self-adjuvant effect in mRNA vaccination strategies, which can be both beneficial and detrimental to the therapeutic outcome.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.addr.2021.113900

Cites

250 of 252 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The current understanding of the field is that incorporating modified NTPs into saRNA abrogates downstream efficacy.

    “However, the current understanding of the field is that incorporating modified NTPs into saRNA abrogates downstream efficacy, as reported by multiple independent groups5,19–28.”

    From Complete substitution with modified nucleotides in self-amplifying RNA suppresses the interferon response and increases potency (2025) · cites this paper as [5]

    The ‘Modifications to the mRNA backbone itself’ section says modified nucleosides are expected to impair saRNA self-replication, and the Conclusions say nucleoside modification is not tolerated if saRNA functionality is to be retained (page numbers unavailable). The paper does not establish that modified NTPs abrogate downstream efficacy or report that this result was demonstrated by multiple independent groups. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • saRNAs use an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase from an alphavirus and conserved sequence elements at the 5′ and 3′ ends for replication, leading to robust and durable expression of encoded protein cargo.

    “saRNAs use an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase from an alphavirus and the corresponding conserved sequence elements at the 5′ and 3′ ends for replication, leading to robust and durable expression of encoded protein cargo5–7.”

    From Complete substitution with modified nucleotides in self-amplifying RNA suppresses the interferon response and increases potency (2025) · cites this paper as [5]

    The “Self-amplifying mRNA” section says most saRNAs are alphavirus-based, identifies nsP4 as an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, and reports higher, longer-lasting protein expression from self-replication. It describes 5′ and 3′ UTRs and replication promoters, but does not identify conserved sequence elements at both ends as required for replication. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The early and intense type I IFN response induced by saRNA detection hinders replication and antigen expression.

    “The early and intense type I IFN response induced by saRNA detection hinders replication and antigen expression, similar to unmodified mRNA5,13–15.”

    From Complete substitution with modified nucleotides in self-amplifying RNA suppresses the interferon response and increases potency (2025) · cites this paper as [5]

    In “Type I IFN-mediated effects: Beneficial or detrimental for mRNA vaccines?” (page unavailable), the review reports that an early, robust type I IFN response to a saRNA vaccine in mice negatively affected initial antigen expression. It does not establish in that passage that the response hindered saRNA replication; the “Innate immunity stimulation” section describes antiviral mechanisms generally, without making that specific link. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 253 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Minnaert, A.-K., Vanluchene, H., Verbeke, R., Lentacker, I., De Smedt, S. C., Raemdonck, K., Sanders, N. N., & Remaut, K.
Affiliations
Ghent University (BE)
Corresponding author
Remaut, Katrien
Venue
Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-09
Volume
176
Pages
113900
ISSN
0169-409X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3187029494
Cited by
157
References
253
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 5
FWCI
2.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • European Commission (HORIZON2020, 810685)
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (1S28420N, 11A6320N)
  • Universiteit Gent
  • Vlaamse regering (BOF20/PDO/041, 11A6320N)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Interference and Gene Delivery
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Keywords
mRNA therapeutics, self-amplifying mRNA, innate immunity, mRNA vaccines, mRNA translation, immunotherapy, COVID-19 vaccines
MeSH terms
COVID-19, mRNA Vaccines, Animals, Gene Amplification, Humans, Immunity, Innate, Immunotherapy, RNA, Messenger, Vaccines, Synthetic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review