PreprintCited by 18SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Researchvaccines and immunoinformatics approachesAnimal Virus Infections Studies

Optimised non-coding regions of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine CV2CoV improves homogeneous and heterogenous neutralising antibody responses

Open access
Roth, Nicole, Schön, Jacob, Hoffmann, Donata, Thran, Moritz, Thess, Andreas, Mueller, Stefan O., Petsch, Benjamin, Rauch, Susanne·2021·bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)

Abstract

More than two years after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, 33 COVID-19 vaccines, based on different platforms, have been approved in 197 countries. Novel variants that are less efficiently neutralised by antibodies raised against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 are circulating, highlighting the need to adapt vaccination strategies. Here, we compare the immunogenicity of a first-generation mRNA vaccine candidate, CVnCoV, with a second-generation mRNA vaccine candidate, CV2CoV, in rats. Higher levels of spike (S) protein expression were observed in cell culture with CV2CoV mRNA than with CVnCoV mRNA. Vaccination with CV2CoV also induced higher titres of virus neutralising antibodies with accelerated kinetics in rats compared with CVnCoV. Significant cross-neutralization of the SARS-CoV-2 variants, Alpha (B.1.1.7), Beta (B.1.351), and the ‘mink’ variant (B1.1.298) that were circulating at the time in early 2021 was also demonstrated. In addition, CV2CoV induced higher levels of antibodies at lower doses than CVnCoV, suggesting that dose-sparing could be possible with the next generation SARS-CoV-2 vaccine which could improve worldwide vaccine supply.

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 · 10.1101/2021.05.13.443734

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • CV2CoV is a second-generation mRNA vaccine containing non-modified nucleosides but with optimized non-coding regions and enhanced antigen expression.

    “CV2CoV is a second-generation mRNA vaccine containing non-modified nucleosides but with optimized non-coding regions and enhanced antigen expression.”
  • CV2CoV has previously been shown to lead to higher antigen expression than CVnCoV in cell culture.

    “CV2CoV has previously been shown to lead to higher antigen expression than CVnCoV in cell culture3.”
  • CV2CoV has different non-coding regions flanking the open reading frame, which have previously been shown to improve transgene expression and protection against SARS-CoV-2 in ACE2-transgenic mice.

    “CV2CoV has been engineered with different non-coding regions flanking the open reading frame, which have previously been shown to improve transgene expression3 and protection against SARS-CoV-2 in ACE2-transgenic mice2.”

    From Optimization of non-coding regions for a non-modified mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (2022) · cites this paper as [3]

    The citation to this paper is attached to the claim of protection against SARS-CoV-2 in ACE2-transgenic mice. Sections 2.3–2.4 describe experiments in Wistar rats, and the Introduction mentions protective efficacy in non-human primates; no passage found reports protection in ACE2-transgenic mice. The paper does describe different non-coding regions and increased protein expression, but those are not the protection claim attached to this citation. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • CureVac further engineered the UTRs of the mRNA and showed a superior immunological profile in preclinical tests.

    “However, CureVac further engineered the UTRs of the mRNA and showed a superior immunological profile in preclinical tests,136,137”

    From COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: Platforms and current developments (2022) · cites this paper as [137]

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
Roth, N., Schön, J., Hoffmann, D., Thran, M., Thess, A., Mueller, S. O., Petsch, B., & Rauch, S.
Affiliations
  • CureVac (Germany) (DE)
  • Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut (DE)
Corresponding author
Petsch, Benjamin
Venue
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2021-05-13
OpenAlex
W3162846174
Cited by
18
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01KI20703, SARS-CoV-2)
  • Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft
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
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Virus Infections Studies
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, mRNA vaccines, neutralizing antibodies, cross-neutralization, SARS-CoV-2 variants, Alpha variant, Beta variant, dose sparing, vaccine immunogenicity, rats

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