Cited by 532SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Researchvaccines and immunoinformatics approachesSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing

Elicitation of Potent Neutralizing Antibody Responses by Designed Protein Nanoparticle Vaccines for SARS-CoV-2

Open access
Walls, Alexandra C., Fiala, Brooke, Schäfer, Alexandra, Wrenn, Samuel, Pham, Minh N., Murphy, Michael, Tse, Longping V., Shehata, Laila +34 more·2020·Cell

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

A safe, effective, and scalable vaccine is needed to halt the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We describe the structure-based design of self-assembling protein nanoparticle immunogens that elicit potent and protective antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 in mice. The nanoparticle vaccines display 60 SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domains (RBDs) in a highly immunogenic array and induce neutralizing antibody titers 10-fold higher than the prefusion-stabilized spike despite a 5-fold lower dose. Antibodies elicited by the RBD nanoparticles target multiple distinct epitopes, suggesting they may not be easily susceptible to escape mutations, and exhibit a lower binding:neutralizing ratio than convalescent human sera, which may minimize the risk of vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease. The high yield and stability of the assembled nanoparticles suggest that manufacture of the nanoparticle vaccines will be highly scalable. These results highlight the utility of robust antigen display platforms and have launched cGMP manufacturing efforts to advance the SARS-CoV-2-RBD nanoparticle vaccine into the clinic.

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.cell.2020.10.043

Cites

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?

  • Neutralising antibody titres appeared highly correlated with vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 rechallenge in non-human primates, and there was no correlation between T cell responses and protection.

    “Neutralising antibody titres appeared to be highly correlated with vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 rechallenge in non-human primates, and importantly, there was no correlation between T cell responses (as measured by ELISpot) and protection38.”

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 124 · Cited by 532

Authors
Walls, A. C., Fiala, B., Schäfer, A., Wrenn, S., Pham, M. N., Murphy, M., Tse, L. V., Shehata, L., O’Connor, M. A., Chen, C., Navarro, M. J., Miranda, M. C., Pettie, D., Ravichandran, R., Kraft, J. C., Ogohara, C., Palser, A., Chalk, S., Lee, E.-C., Guerriero, K., Kepl, E., Chow, C. M., Sydeman, C., Hodge, E. A., Brown, B., Fuller, J. T., Dinnon, K. H., Gralinski, L. E., Leist, S. R., Gully, K. L., Lewis, T. B., Guttman, M., Chu, H. Y., Lee, K. K., Fuller, D. H., Baric, R. S., Kellam, P., Carter, L., Pepper, M., Sheahan, T. P., Veesler, D., & King, N. P.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Kymab (United Kingdom) (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Veesler, David
  • King, Neil P.
Venue
Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
183
Issue
5
Pages
1367-1382.e17
ISSN
0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3094860119
Cited by
532
References
124
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 73 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 115 · 2021: 134 · 2020: 20
FWCI
11.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › vaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus vaccines, spike protein receptor-binding domain, neutralizing antibodies, epitope diversity, cGMP production, structure-based vaccine design

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