Immune Memory Response After a Booster Injection of mRNA-1273 for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)
Open accessAbstract
Rising breakthrough infections of coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in previously immunized individuals has raised concerns for a booster to combat suspected waning immunity and new variants. Participants immunized 6-8 months earlier with a primary series of two doses of 50 or 100 µg of mRNA-1273 were administered a booster injection of 50 µg of mRNA-1273. Neutralizing antibody levels against wild-type virus and the Delta variant at one month after the booster were 1.7-fold and 2.1-fold higher, respectively, than those 28 days post primary series second injection indicating an immune memory response. The reactogenicity after the booster dose was similar to that after the second dose in the primary series of two doses of mRNA-1273 (50 or 100 µg) with no serious adverse events reported in the one-month follow-up period. These results demonstrate that a booster injection of mRNA-1273 in previously immunized individuals stimulated an immune response greater than the primary vaccination series.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
Similar immune responses were observed among adolescents aged 12 to 17 after mRNA-1273.
“with similar immune responses among adolescents aged 12 to 17.410,412–414”
From Advances in COVID-19 mRNA vaccine development (2022) · cites this paper as [414]
In a phase III clinical trial involving 30,420 people aged 18 or older, two doses of 100 μg mRNA-1273 with a 28-day interval had vaccine efficacy of 94.1%.
“In a phase III clinical trial involving 30,420 people, participants aged 18 or older were given two doses of 100 μg of mRNA-1273 with a 28-day interval, and vaccine efficacy was 94.1% (Table 5)”
From Advances in COVID-19 mRNA vaccine development (2022) · cites this paper as [414]
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 56 · Cited by 105
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- [15]Yang W. & Shaman J. SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics in South Africa and epidemiological characteristics of the Omicron variant. Preprint at https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.19.21268073v1 (2021). · DOI
- [20]Lewnard, J. A. et al. Clinical outcomes among patients infected with Omicron (B.1.1.529) SARS-CoV-2 variant in Southern California. Preprint at https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.11.22269045v1 (2022). · DOI
- [22]Wilhelm, A. et al. Reduced neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. Preprint at https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.07.21267432v4 (2021). · DOI
- [28]Lusvarghi, S. et al. SARS-CoV-2 Omicron neutralization by therapeutic antibodies, convalescent sera, and post-mRNA vaccine booster. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.22.473880v2 (2021). · DOI
- [39]Chu, L. et al. Immune memory response after a booster injection of mRNA-1273 for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Preprint at https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.29.21264089v1 (2021). · DOI
- Authors
- Chu, L., Montefiori, D., Huang, W., Nestorova, B., Chang, Y., Carfi, A., Edwards, D. K., Oestreicher, J., Legault, H., Girard, B., Pajon, R., Miller, J. M., Das, R., Leav, B., & McPhee, R.
- Affiliations
- Benchmark Research (United States) (US)
- Duke University (US)
- Moderna Therapeutics (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- McPhee, Roderick
- ORCID
- Venue
- Nature Medicine
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2021-10-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1042-1049
- ISSN
- 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9117133
- OpenAlex
- W4220654690
- Cited by
- 105
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 11.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Nature Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- medRxiv (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Moderna
- Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (75A50120C00034)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immune responses and vaccinations
- Keywords
- SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 vaccines, mRNA-1273, booster vaccination, immunogenicity, neutralizing antibodies, Delta variant, antibody waning, seroconversion, anti-spike IgG, vaccine safety, adverse events, memory B cells, non-inferiority, breakthrough infection
- MeSH terms
- Immunogenicity, Vaccine, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 Vaccines, 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273, Adult, Antibodies, Viral, Humans, Immunity
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
