Cited by 642Influenza Virus Research StudiesRNA Interference and Gene DeliverySARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research

Preclinical and clinical demonstration of immunogenicity by mRNA vaccines against H10N8 and H7N9 influenza viruses

Open access
Bahl, Kapil, Senn, Joe J., Yuzhakov, Olga, Bulychev, Alex, Brito, Luis A., Hassett, Kimberly J., Laska, Michael E., Smith, Mike +6 more·2017·Molecular Therapy

Abstract

Recently, the World Health Organization confirmed 120 new human cases of avian H7N9 influenza in China resulting in 37 deaths, highlighting the concern for a potential pandemic and the need for an effective, safe, and high-speed vaccine production platform. Production speed and scale of mRNA-based vaccines make them ideally suited to impede potential pandemic threats. Here we show that lipid nanoparticle (LNP)-formulated, modified mRNA vaccines, encoding hemagglutinin (HA) proteins of H10N8 (A/Jiangxi-Donghu/346/2013) or H7N9 (A/Anhui/1/2013), generated rapid and robust immune responses in mice, ferrets, and nonhuman primates, as measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) assays. A single dose of H7N9 mRNA protected mice from a lethal challenge and reduced lung viral titers in ferrets. Interim results from a first-in-human, escalating-dose, phase 1 H10N8 study show very high seroconversion rates, demonstrating robust prophylactic immunity in humans. Adverse events (AEs) were mild or moderate with only a few severe and no serious events. These data show that LNP-formulated, modified mRNA vaccines can induce protective immunogenicity with acceptable tolerability profiles.

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.ymthe.2017.03.035

Cites

55 of 55 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?

  • Induction of protective immune responses against two different influenza strains could be demonstrated after intramuscular administration in non-human primates and humans using LNP-formulated mRNA vaccines based on chemically modified nucleosides.

    “Meanwhile, induction of protective immune responses against two different influenza strains could be demonstrated also after i.m. administration in NHPs and humans, again using LNP-formulated mRNA vaccines based on chemically modified nucleosides.15”

    From Unmodified mRNA in LNPs constitutes a competitive technology for prophylactic vaccines (2017) · cites this paper as [15]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Recent studies using chemically modified mRNA revealed protective efficacy of LNP-formulated mRNA vaccines for Zika virus after i.m. administration in mice or i.d. administration in NHPs, and immunogenicity for influenza HA strains H10N8 and H7N9 after i.m. administration in NHPs and humans.

    “Recent studies using chemically modified mRNA revealed protective efficacy of LNP-formulated mRNA vaccines for Zika virus after i.m. administration in mice or i.d. administration in NHPs, as well as immunogenicity for influenza HA of the strains H10N8 and H7N9 after i.m. administration in NHPs and humans.12–15”

    From Unmodified mRNA in LNPs constitutes a competitive technology for prophylactic vaccines (2017) · cites this paper as [15]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Chemically modified nucleosides have been used in recent publications to reach sufficient antigen expression.

    “In recent publications chemically modified nucleosides were used to reach sufficient antigen expression,12–15 which is in contrast to our proprietary mRNA technology, which employs sequence optimization and selected untranslated regions (UTRs) to achieve high antigen expression.16”
  • The expression pattern was similar to results from other LNP formulations.

    “which was similar to the results from other LNP formulations (Bahl et al., 2017; Pardi et al., 2015).”

    From A thermostable mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 (2020) · cites this paper as Bahl et al., 2017

  • Another 20 years later, mRNA vaccines against infectious disease were investigated in phase I proof-of-concept clinical trials.

    “Another 20 years later, mRNA vaccines against infectious disease were investigated in phase I, proof-of-concept, clinical trials.23,24”

    From COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: Platforms and current developments (2022) · cites this paper as [24]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bahl, K., Senn, J. J., Yuzhakov, O., Bulychev, A., Brito, L. A., Hassett, K. J., Laska, M. E., Smith, M., Almarsson, Ö., Thompson, J., Ribeiro, A. (., Watson, M., Zaks, T., & Ciaramella, G.
Affiliations
Moderna Therapeutics (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Ciaramella, Giuseppe
Venue
Molecular Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-06
Volume
25
Issue
6
Pages
1316-1327
ISSN
1525-0016 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2609075891
Cited by
642
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 54 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 107 · 2021: 113 · 2020: 78 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 19 · 2014: 1
FWCI
39.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2022-08-03)
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Therapy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Influenza Virus Research Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Interference and Gene Delivery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Keywords
mRNA vaccines, H7N9 avian influenza, lipid nanoparticle formulation, modified mRNA, hemagglutinin, immunogenicity, vaccine safety, hemagglutination inhibition, microneutralization, ferrets, non-human primates, pandemic influenza preparedness, seroconversion
MeSH terms
Animals, Antibodies, Viral, Cell Line, Disease Models, Animal, Female, Ferrets, Humans, Immunization, Immunization Schedule, Influenza Vaccines, Macaca fascicularis, Male, Orthomyxoviridae Infections, Protamines, RNA, Messenger, RNA, Viral, Tissue Distribution, Gene Expression, Mice, Influenza A Virus, H7N9 Subtype, Influenza A Virus, H10N8 Subtype

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