Image credit
This was always going to be a big month, with results from clinical trials of 2 vaccines, as well as 3 new clinical trials on the starting blocks. This brings the number of mucosal Covid vaccines that have reached clinical trial to 36, and the number of pancoronavirus vaccines going into trials to 8. There were more preclinical reports than average as well.
Then, on October 30 when this update was close to being ready, a new coronavirus vaccine tracker was released – more on that below. Though this tracker is not comprehensive, there was a lot to dig through. In the end, I found several preclinical reports for additional vaccines, bringing the total of those for this update to 26.
That all made for a very long post! Some highlights: A pancoronavirus version of a vaccine that has already reached rollout in some countries is heading for a clinical trial in Australia. Two new trials for mucosal vaccines are starting in the US, including a vaccine reaching phase 2. Several more mucosal vaccines showed they could reduce transmission in preclinical studies, and several vaccines were shown to be particularly durable in preclinical studies. Plus, a shelf-stable version of a mucosal vaccine needing no refrigeration was developed.
As usual, I have the post broken down into 3 categories of next-generation vaccines (definitions below). Each section ends with an overview of vaccines in the category – and each has a link to skip over that straight to the next news section. I have added a postscript, listing the trials (de-)funded by US Project NextGen.
ICYMI:
- An introduction to self-amplifying mRNA, plus my compendium on getting ready for more mRNA fear-mongering.
- Check out my May 2024 post, “When will we get a sterilizing Covid vaccine?”
- New vaccine tracker
- Mucosal vaccine news
- Durable or “variant-proof” vaccine news
- Pancoronavirus vaccine news
- Addendum 1: List of authorized vaccines (with countries)
- Addendum 2: Table of mucosal vaccines in clinical trials
- Addendum 3: Table of pancoronavirus vaccines with preclinical results
- Addendum 4: Definitions of vaccine types
- Postscript: US Project NextGen funded trials
New vaccine tracker
On October 30, a wide-ranging coronavirus vaccine tracker was released by CIDRAP, the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy in the US, and CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations). The CVR – Coronavirus Vaccines R&D Roadmap Initiative – includes a resources hub, and tracking in 2 major areas. One is for R&D progress, tracking publications and developments in a range of scientific, manufacturing, and policies.
The other is called the Coronavirus Vaccine Technology Landscape, and it gathers scientific literature on vaccines in 3 categories: Broadly protective vaccines (the category I call pancoronavirus vaccines), MERS vaccines, and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. It’s a very valuable resource on many fronts, but the coverage of vaccines in the areas I track (non-MERS) is very patchy. A quick way to see that is in the number of Covid vaccines approved: They list 15. The Wikipedia list has fallen way out of date, and it has 41.
This is not surprising. A major part of why I kept going with tracking when others stopped was that I knew it would be inordinately difficult to catch up on developments if you hadn’t been digging hard in real time. It’s a difficult field to monitor, in large part because so many publications aren’t using standard nomenclature prominently in titles and abstracts, so they don’t show up on simple broad searches. On top of that, many developers aren’t citing their previous studies, or only doing so selectively, so when you find a report, you don’t have a quick way to find the whole chain of research.
I’m very pleased to have another place to find things I’ve missed, but unfortunately, it doesn’t make my project redundant, at least for now. I combed through the CIDRAP lists looking for pancoronavirus vaccines and mucosal ones. It was very time-consuming, so I didn’t worry about checking if there are any non-nextgen vaccines that I’ve missed.
There are differences between our databases other than coverage. We have different conventions for names of vaccines and developers. That may seem strange, but these are actually quite difficult. Vaccines are often given no names in early reports, and names change along the way, sometimes more than once. (CIDRAP is giving them names, for example, whether the developers are naming them or not.)
Their definition of broadly protective vaccines is wider than mine, too. For example, in this post I mentioned a recent publication on a vaccine for coronaviruses that cause common colds, but I didn’t include it as a pancoronavirus vaccine because it doesn’t target SARS-CoV-2. It fits the CIDRAP scope, though, because it is aimed at multiple coronaviruses.
Another example: The CIDRAP database lists ARVAC-CG as a broadly protective coronavirus vaccine, and I don’t. This vaccine was approved for use as a booster in Argentina in October 2023. In May this year, the developers reported on research in mice showing that the bivalent vaccine induced neutralizing antibodies against a wide range of Covid variants, as well as the original SARS, suggesting it could provide wider immunity and be the basis for developing a pancoronavirus vaccine. (All records for that vaccine in my collection here.) Thinking through why I don’t believe this is enough to call it a pancoronavirus vaccine led me to refine the definition I include in this post. This is the same situation as BK Bioscience was in with SKYCovione, but they indicated they would go on to develop a pancoronavirus version as a result – I classify that new version as a pancoronavirus vaccine, but not the currently authorized version.
I can’t see a way you can sign up to hear about updates to the CIDRAP. To be on the safe side, I’ve downloaded the current vaccine database as a backup way to check for updates in future.
While I’m down in the weeds on this, I think PubMed had an issue with new records in the last week of October (see my post on this here). They have been doing an extraordinary job in the face of government shutdown, so it’s not surprising. To be on the safe side, I went to my plan B: A simple search on Open Alex,* and additional Google searches.
* Title: vaccine AND SARS-Cov-2 NOT hesitan&
Mucosal vaccine news
This month, another mucosal vaccine is heading into clinical trial, bringing the total to 36. However, one of the phase 1 trials was terminated, with 2 reports of results posted. In addition, a vaccine has moved into a phase 2 trial. There are also some results from a phase 1 trial for an intranasal “variant-proof” vaccine in the section below.
In addition, there are 10 preclinical reports, with 6 from the last month, and 4 earlier reports I had missed. They are listed in reverse chronological order below. There are another 5 preclinical reports for mucosal vaccines in the sections below: 2 in the “variant-proof” section, and another 3 in the pancoronavirus section.
Also relevant to people interested in mucosal immunity is a preclinical report from the University of Edinburgh. The researchers report on the results of intranasal administration of interferon at the time of intramuscular Covid vaccination.
Finally, a correction to something in my last update. I reported that COVCHIM-02, a human challenge study testing a version of Omicron BA.5 in the UK, had finished recruiting at the end of August based on the study’s trial register entry. However, a recent social media post showed the trial is still recruiting in London and Oxford.
New clinical trials starting in the US for 2 mucosal vaccine boosters
- Phase 1 trial for a fusion protein vaccine from the NIAID (USA): This vaccine is called Boost-2867, and I couldn’t find any information on it beyond the registration of a new phase 1 trial. It is described as an IgG-Fc-RBD fusion protein vaccine. The vaccine will be tested as a booster dose in each of 3 forms in varying doses: Injected with and without adjuvant, and intranasal (without adjuvant). The plan is to recruit 140 participants at 6 sites in the US, which have not yet been listed. (The trial contact person listed in the registration is in Seattle.)
- Phase 2a trial for the intranasal viral vector vaccine from Castlevax (USA): The Castlevax is the Newcastle virus-based vaccine developed at Icahn Mt Sinai, that is also the basis of vaccines rolled out in several countries. It was one of the vaccines originally funded by US Project NextGen for a large phase 2b “mini-efficacy” trial. The developers have now registered a phase 2a trial for 200 previously vaccinated participants who have at least one underlying condition that puts them at risk of severe Covid outcomes. The trial is recruiting now, with 2 locations currently listed (in Colorado and Massachusetts). Contact details here. The company announced that the first participant has been dosed.
Results released for a discontinued trial in Germany
This is an inhaled viral vector vaccine (based on MVA) developed by the German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF) and IDT Biologika. A year ago, SK Bioscience acquired a controlling stake in IDT Biologika. The phase 1 trial register entry states that the trial was discontinued because of difficulties recruiting participants. It was only a few participants short of its intended target (23 of 30).
A pair of reports of results have just been released, here and here. Neither report discusses the reasons for ending the trial. Both reports describe neutralizing antibody results that fell short of those in preclinical studies. The first paper raises the possibility that this was a result of species-related differences, because the preclinical studies involved intranasal administration and the trial in people used an inhaled version, or because of a lower ratio of dose to body weight (especially as intramuscular administration led to a stronger immune response).
(All records in my collection for this vaccine here.)
Preclinical results for mucosal vaccines
- Oral version of the inhaled viral vector vaccine from Cansino Biologics (China): Convidecia Air, the marketing name for the inhaled version of Ad5-nCoV, is one of the mucosal Covid vaccines that have been rolled out: The injected vaccine was introduced early in the pandemic. (All records on this vaccine here.) This preclinical report describes an oral delivery platform developed for this vaccine. It was tested in mice, who were vaccinated either with injected Ad5-nCoV, or the oral version. The mice were studied up to 250 days. Both versions of the vaccine induced similar peak immune responses, but the intramuscular vaccination waned and the effects of the oral version were more durable.
- Inhaled viral vector vaccine, Aerovax, from McMaster University (Canada): This vaccine is based on ChAd, and it is in phase 2 trial. (All records on this vaccine here.) This new report describes the development of a vacuum-dried version of the vaccine. After being on the shelf for 44 weeks, it was compared to fresh vaccine in mice, and there was no difference in efficacy.
- Intranasal version of the Oxford/AstraZeneca viral vector vaccine, from the University of Oxford (UK): This is the first report for this version of the vaccine (based on ChAd). The developers studied whether an intranasal booster after primary intramuscular vaccination improved results. It was tested in mice and hamsters, including a Covid challenge test in hamsters. The developers concluded that the mucosal booster provided better protection.
- Inhalable viral vector vaccine from Mie University (Japan): This is the first report for this vaccine, which is based on parainfluenza virus type 2 (hPIV2). It was tested in mice, with intratracheal administration, including a challenge test with the Delta variant. Almost all the control mice died in the challenge test, while almost all the vaccinated mice survived.
- Intranasal pediatric viral vector vaccine from the NIH’s NIAID (USA): This vaccine is in a phase 1 trial. The new preclinical report is the 5th for the vaccine, which is a bivalent vaccine against Covid and parainfluenza. (All records here.) The developers describe tests in hamsters of co-administration of 2 vectors, including an Omicron (BA.5) challenge 5 months after vaccination. They found an increase in breadth of immune response. The vaccine protected hamsters from infection in the challenge test.
- Intranasal protein subunit vaccine from Tulane University and Baylor College of Medicine (USA): This is the first report of a mucosal version of the vaccine developed by Baylor College of Medicine, and marketed in India as Corbevax. (All records on that vaccine here.) A regimen of an injected dose followed by intranasal booster was tested in mice, including an Omicron challenge (XBB.1.5). The regimen protected the mice from death and serious illness, and virus was cleared from the nasal passage by 3 days. Intranasal booster induced greater mucosal immune response.
- Intranasal live attenuated vaccine from the University of Madison-Wisconsin and the University of Tokyo (USA, Japan): This is the first report for this vaccine. It was tested in mice and hamsters. Tests included a one- or two-dose regimen, and as a booster after mRNA primary vaccination, and including Delta and Omicron XBB challenge tests in hamsters. Safety concerns for live attenuated viruses will be further studied.
- Intranasal protein subunit vaccine from Mahidol University and Navamindradhiraj University (Thailand): This is the first report for this vaccine. It is a bivalent vaccine, incorporating components of the first strain of SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron (BA.1). It was tested in mice with 4 doses, including 3-day challenge tests with the same strains of SARS-CoV-2 included in the vaccine. The developers concluded that vaccination prevented virus spreading beyond the respiratory tract.
- Intranasal protein subunit vaccine from National Tsing Hua University and Adimmune Corporation (Taiwan): There have been 2 preclinical reports for this vaccine, which is adjuvanted with a fused enterotoxin subunit, raising additional safety issues to address. The first describes tests in mice and hamsters, including a comparison with the Moderna mRNA vaccine. The second describes tests of the vaccine as a booster in mice after mRNA vaccination. Immune responses were comparable to an mRNA booster up to 35 weeks.
Skip ahead to next news category
Mucosal Covid vaccine overview
- 5 mucosal vaccines are currently authorized for use, at least 1 in each of 6 countries. None have been authorized by a drug regulatory agency designated stringent, or listed, by WHO. However, each has been authorized by a regulator which has transitional WHO listing for vaccines.
- 36 mucosal vaccines have reached clinical trial, although some of the vaccines are no longer in development. The vaccines that have entered clinical trials are tracked in a table below. They are mostly viral vector vaccines.
- In addition to the 5 authorized mucosal vaccines, 6 have reached phase 2 trials, and another 2 have reached phase 2/3 trial.
Durable or “variant-proof” vaccines
This month, there are the first phase 1 results for an intranasal “variant-proof” vaccine from China. That report includes preclinical results. I added another 3 preclinical reports in this category from October, as well as another earlier report I had missed, and they are listed in reverse chronological order below.
Preclinical plus clinical results for an intranasal protein subunit vaccine from Fudan University and the Wuhan Institute of Virology (China)
This is the 4th preclinical report for the intranasal vaccine, with the first results from a phase 1 trial. The vaccine is based on 3 protein subunits from Covid variants, a Delta strain and 2 Gamma strains.
The preclinical results include tests in mice, comparing the vaccine with adjuvant only. Blood tests showed signs of immune response to a range of variants including Omicron, as well as to original SARS. The developers tested signs of immune response at 13 months, concluding that protection is long-lived. They also confirmed that protection is durable with an Omicron BA.1 challenge up to 10 months after a booster dose.
The developers also report on results for the first 10 people vaccinated: 4 volunteers received doses in a safety study, and 6 were then recruited for a phase 1 trial. The rate of adverse reactions was low. The participants showed signs of immune response to both Covid and the original SARS. Although there was a major Covid wave at the time of the study, none of the participants showed signs of infection in tests. At tests done 13.5 weeks after the second dose of vaccine, there was no reduction in immune response in blood or saliva.
(All records for this vaccine here.)
Other preclinical reports
- Protein subunit vaccines from the National Institute of Health (Korea): This is the first report for this trio of vaccines targeting components of several Covid variants. They were tested in mice, including challenge tests with the original strain and Omicron (XBB1.5). The vaccines could induce neutralizing antibodies against a range of variants. Vaccine targeting the S2 protein provided more protection.
- Self-amplifying and circular mRNA vaccines from the National Capital Region Biotech Science Cluster (India): This is the first report I’ve seen for this group of vaccines. The vaccines were tested in mice, including a Covid challenge test. The circular mRNA vaccine provided more protection against variants, and was more stable at 4 degrees than the self-amplifying mRNA.
- DNA and mRNA vaccines from the University of Ottawa (Canada): This is the 3rd report for these vaccines. The developers describe durability testing in mice and hamsters comparing their DNA and mRNA vaccines, including an Omicron challenge in hamsters 3 weeks and 6 months post-vaccination. There was a marked decline in both protection and signs of immune response for the mRNA vaccine, but not the DNA vaccine. (All records here.)
- Intranasal protein subunit vaccine from Sichuan University (China): This is the 5th report for this vaccine. An intranasal booster dose of this vaccine was tested in mice. All mice had 2 doses of mRNA vaccine. Those receiving the intranasal booster had stronger and broader signs of immune response. (All records here.)
Skip ahead to next news category
Durable or “variant-proof” vaccine overview
Note: This is a rather vague category, including vaccines that aim to be more durable. I’m not sure how many can be classified as aiming to be “variant-proof”.
Authorized vaccine:
There is 1 authorized vaccine in this category, and it has been authorized by a drug regulatory authority designated by WHO has stringent, and tested against an mRNA vaccine (Kostaive):
- LUNAR-COV19 (USA), trade name Kostaive: This self-amplifying mRNA vaccine was authorized in Japan in November 2023, with rollout in October 2024. It was also authorized for Europe in February 2025. Application for authorization in the UK planned next.
Pancoronavirus vaccine news
Another new pancoronavirus vaccine is going into clinical trial in Australia: It will be the 8th. I added 6 preclinical reports from the last month, plus 5 that I missed previously. They are listed in reverse chronological order below.
In other news, there was a preclinical report of tests in mice of an mRNA vaccine against common cold coronaviruses. These are embecoviruses, which are betacoronaviruses. The vaccine was developed at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard (USA). I haven’t included it in my collection as the developers have yet to test it on coronaviruses other than those causing common colds. There was also an report of a test of a viral vector Covid vaccine against a common cold coronavirus. Also relevant to pancoronavirus vaccine development is a preclinical report on sarbecovirus antibodies from Scripps Research.
SK Bioscience’s universal sarbecovirus protein subunit vaccine heading into clinical trial in Australia
SK Bioscience is the South Korean pharmaceutical company that rolled out SKYCovione internationally. SKYCovione is a protein subunit vaccine developed originally by the University of Washington. (Records on that vaccine, originally called GBP510, here.) After earlier preclinical testing of GBP510 to assess its potential against other sarbecoviruses, the company began work on a sarbecovirus-targeted GBP511. In October, the company reported that they are seeking regulator approval in Australia to run a phase 1/2 trial for GBP511, to include approximately 500 participants. Results would be anticipated in 2028.
Other preclinical reports
- Protein subunit vaccine from University College London (UK): This is the first report for this vaccine. The vaccine combines protein subunits from SARS, several variants of SARS-CoV-2, and MERS, including zoonotic components, and it’s called Zoonotic Recombinant SARS-CoV (ZRS). Several component vaccines as well as the combination version were tested in mice, as well as adjuvants. Except for the MERS-combination, the vaccines induced immune responses to SARS-CoV-2, including to variants not included in the vaccine. Only the version containing MERS showed a response to MERS. The developers concluded larger sample sizes and tests of different adjuvants are needed to develop the combined vaccine.
- Self-amplifying mRNA vaccine with a protein subunit booster from Tiba Biotech (USA): This is the first report for this vaccine. This pair of vaccines target 2 variants of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS. Several versions of the regimen were tested in mice and hamsters, with the samRNA-prime and protein subunit booster induced the strongest and most durable immune responses, including to Covid variants not included in the vaccines.
- Intranasal protein subunit vaccine from the University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wuhan YZY Biopharma (China): There have been several reports for earlier versions in this vaccine development program (here). This is the first report for a mucosal pancoronavirus version. The vaccine includes components from SARS, several variants of SARS-CoV-2, MERS, and seasonal human coronaviruses. They were tested in mice and hamsters in various combinations, in injected and intranasal forms. Including Omicron challenge tests in mice and hamsters, and a transmission experiment (co-housing vaccinated and unvaccinated hamsters). Immune responses were tested up to 48 weeks. The developers concluded that the vaccine could protect against infection and illness.
- Nanoparticle mosaic 8b vaccine from Rockefeller University (USA): This is the first report for this vaccine. One version of the vaccine contained a Covid variant only, while another contained a mosaic of nanoparticles from 8 sarbecoviruses. They were tested in mice compared with the Moderna mRNA vaccine. The mosaic 8b vaccine induced similar neutralizing antibodies to the mRNA vaccine, but an increased breadth and potency of memory antibodies.
- Nanoparticle mosaic vaccine from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (USA): This is the first report for this vaccine. The developers are investigating the possibility of vaccinating against Covid and emerging Covid variants plus the endemic human coronaviruses that cause common seasonal respiratory infections (including colds). They developed 3 versions of a vaccine (single, mosaic 3, and mosaic 5), and tested them in mice. The developers concluded that the mosaic vaccines were highly immunogenic against vaccine-matched and mismatched coronaviruses, including the original SARS.
- Mosaic 8b nanoparticle vaccine from California Institute of Technology (Caltech) (USA) and Ingenza (UK): This is the 7th report for this vaccine, which was released in preprint in June – I included it in my June post. The developers used atomic layer deposition (ALD) in the vaccine, and tested in mice. They concluded it increased the breadth of response. Still no word on whether the manufacturing complexities for this vaccine have been resolved, enabling it to go into clinical trial. (All records here.)
- Protein subunit vaccine from Duke University (USA): This vaccine is in a phase 1 trial in the US – recruitment began in July this year, despite the termination of US government funding. This is the 5th preclinical report for the vaccine, which has been tested in primates and non-primates. The latest paper reports on tests in mice analyzing immune responses to a range of coronaviruses, including the JN.1 Covid variant and a bat coronavirus. The developers concluded that the vaccine could protect against a range of sarbecoviruses. (All records on the vaccine here.)
- Nanoparticle vaccine from the University of Washington and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (USA): This is the first preclinical report for this vaccine, which was developed from the same group as SK Bioscience’s GBP510. This vaccine is based on components of Omicron (BA.5), the original SARS, and a bat coronavirus, with or without the first strain of Covid. It was tested in mice and monkeys, either as primary vaccination or as a booster after Moderna’s mRNA vaccine, including testing for signs of immune response to a range of coronaviruses, and challenge tests with Omicron (XBB.1.5) and a bat coronavirus. The developers concluded that their multivalent vaccine provides protection against a range of sarbecoviruses.
- Intranasal mRNA vaccine from Georgia State University and University of Iowa (USA): This is the 3rd report for this vaccine, and the first to test an intranasal version. The vaccine includes components of the first Covid strain, Omicron (XBB.1.5), and MERS. The multivalent version as well as single component versions were tested in mice, including challenge tests with XBB.1.5 and MERS. The multivalent vaccine provided cross-protection against both viruses, while the individual components did not provide protection against mismatched viruses. (All records here.)
- DNA vaccine from the University of Leiden and Immunetune BV (Netherlands): This is the first report for this vaccine. Two versions including antigens shared across sarbecoviruses were tested in mice, including a Covid challenge test (in 2023). The vaccine provided partial protection.
- Intranasal live attenuated vaccine from the University of Hong Kong (China): This is the first report for this vaccine. It was tested in mice and hamsters, including a challenge and transmission (co-housing) test in hamsters. The developers report that the vaccine provided protection against the Covid version in the vaccine, as well as Delta and Omicron variants and the original SARS.
Pancoronavirus vaccine overview
A table below this post keeps track of vaccines I’ve added to this category so far that have publicly available preclinical results. Of these vaccines, 8 have reached phase 1 clinical trials, and 1 has reached phase 2, with some results for 3 of them marked *:
- * CoronaTcP (Gylden Pharma, UK/US) – protein subunit. (Note: This vaccine was previously called PepGNP-SARSCov2, and the manufacturer was previously called Emergex.)
- DIOSynVax (Cambridge University spin-off, UK) – mRNA.
- Duke University (USA) – protein subunit.
- INSERM/Ennodc (formerly LinkInVax) (France) – protein subunit.
- Osivax (France) – protein subunit.
- SK Bioscience (South Korea) – protein subunit (trial pending).
- * VBI Vaccines (Canada) – eVLP. [This company announced bankruptcy in late 2024.]
- * Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR, USA) – protein subunit.
Addendum 1: List of authorized next generation Covid vaccines (with countries)
There are 7 next-generation Covid vaccines authorized in 7 countries. Only one has been approved by drug regulatory agencies designated stringent, or listed, by WHO – in bold; the others have all been approved in at least one country by a drug regulator WHO has listed with transitional status for vaccines. I’ve listed the vaccines in 2 categories, in order of date of first authorization (or initial approval).
Mucosal:
- Razi-Cov Pars (Iran), intranasal protein subunit vaccine: Iran (October 2021).
- Sputnik (Russia), intranasal viral vector vaccine: Russia (April 2022).
- Convidecia (China), inhaled viral vector vaccine: China (September 2022), Morocco (November 2022), Indonesia (March 2023).
- iNCOVACC (USA/India), intranasal viral vector vaccine: India (September 2022).
- Pneucolin (China), intranasal viral vector vaccine: China (December 2022).
Durable or “variant-proof”:
- Gemcovac (India), self-amplifying mRNA vaccine: India (June 2022).
- Kostaive (LUNAR-COV19) (USA), self-amplifying mRNA vaccine: Japan (November 2023), European Union (February 2025).
Addendum 2: Table of mucosal vaccines in clinical trials
* Indicates new entry since previous update post.
Note: Where there is a link to “All records” for a vaccine, that’s in my public Zotero collection for the vaccine, and it may include non-mucosal studies for that vaccine. Notes on that collection are here. For details on how I track Covid vaccine progress to maintain that collection, see my background post.
| Vaccine, type, manufacturer | Mucosal version(s) | Phase 1 to 2 clinical trials | Phase 3+ trial(s) | Phase 3+ efficacy or immunogenicity results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACM-001 Protein subunit ACM Biolabs (Singapore/Switzerland) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Results (press release only) | ||
| Ad5-nCoV (Convidecia Air) Viral vector (adenovirus) CanSino (China) | Inhaled through the mouth using a nebulizer. | Phase 1. Results. Phase 1/2. Results (plus second later preprint). Phase 2 (aged 6-17 years). | 10,420 people in China (Phase 3). Results. 1,350 people (Phase 3). 540 people, in Malaysia (Phase 3). 904 people in China (Phase 4). 360 people (Phase 4). 451 people (Phase 4). Results. 10,000 people in China (Phase 4). Results for 4,089 in the Ad5-nCoV arms. (Previously in preprint.) | 904 people: Comparison after 2-dose course of inactivated vax: Convidecia injection vs inhaled, protein subunit, or CoronaVac booster (Phase 4 results). Both injected & inhaled Convidecia had stronger impact on signs of immunity than the others; response after inhaled version was slower but longer-lasting than injected (which peaked then declined from day 14), better for Omicron though not as good for original virus. No measure of mucosal immunity used. 539 people (Malaysia): Signs of serum immune response were lower for inhaled Convidecia than for injected BNT/Pfizer vax at 14 days, but grew for Convidecia to similar levels. Mucosal immune response (SIgA) was greater for Convidecia; the rate of adverse reactions was lower. 451 people: Comparison of different versions adapted for variant, including a bivalent version. Booster of inhaled Convidecia after previous vaccination with inactivated vaccine. Signs of immune response to Omicron were higher for the bivalent vaccine, though lower for the original SARS-CoV-2 strain. 4,089 people, plus a 2,008 un-randomized unboosted control group: 450 people: Convidecia showed less antibodies and higher mucosal signs of immunity than an mRNA vaccine. Waning at 6 months was similar for both. |
| Ad5-S Viral vector (adenovirus) State Key Laboratory for Infectious Disease/Guangzhou Enbao Biomedical Technology Co (China) | Intranasal. | Infection prevention study. | ||
| AdCOVID Viral vector (adenovirus) AltImmune (USA) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Results – press release only. Discontinued after phase 1. | ||
| AdS+N Viral vector (adenovirus) ImmunityBio (USA) | Intranasal, oral capsule, or sublingual. | Phase 1 (oral). Phase 1 (sublingual). | ||
| AeroVax (Ad5-triCoV) Viral vector (adenovirus) McMaster University/Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Canada) | Aerosol. | Phase 1 (& ChAd-triCoV/Mac). Results. Phase 2. | ||
| Avacc 10 Protein subunit Intravacc (Netherlands) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Results (press release only) | ||
| bacTRL-Spike-1 Live attenuated Symvivo (Canada) | Oral. | Phase 1. | ||
| BBV154 (iNCOVACC) Viral vector (adenovirus) Bharat Biotech (India) This vaccine is ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Small amount of data from these trials in the drug product information. | In India, 2-dose course of BBV154 vs 2-dose course of injected Covaxin inactivated vaccine (Phase 3 – and here). Results (previously in preprint). See also the drug product information. | 2,971 previously unvaxed people were assigned for the intranasal iNCOVACC, 161 for injected Covaxin. This trial did not aim to assess disease outcomes. It took place during the first Omicron wave. Signs of immune response were higher for iNCOVACC than Covaxin. Adverse events rate very low (5% local and 3% systemic) – lower than for comparison group. 875 previously vaxed people were boosted with iNCOVACC, Covaxin (inactivated vax) or Covishield (AstraZeneca viral vector vax). Not large enough to detect a difference in immune response. Lower rate of adverse reactions than Covishield. |
| B/HPIV3/S-6P Viral vector (parainfluenza) NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) (USA) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Fully recruited by early July 2024. | ||
| * Boost-2867 Fusion protein NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) (USA) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. | ||
| BV-AdCoV-1 Viral vector (adenovirus) Wuhan BravoVax | Inhaled through the mouth using a nebulizer. | Phase 1. | ||
| ChAdOx1 Viral vector (adenovirus) Oxford University (UK) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. | ||
| CoV2-OGEN1 Protein subunit US Specialty Formulations/VaxForm (USA) | Oral. | Phase 1. (Fully recruited, final dose in November 2022.) Press release stating successful (without data) and progressing to phase 2 trial. | ||
| COVI-VAC Live attenuated Codagenix (USA, with the Serum Institute of India) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Press release in 2021 stating successful (without data) and progressing to phase 2/3. Preliminary results (conference abstract in 2021) and in a 2022 press release. Results in 2023 (press release only). Phase 1 (booster). | Phase 2/3, as part of the WHO Solidarity Trial for Vaccines in Mali, Colombia, Kenya, Philippines, Sierra Leone. Fully recruited by July 2024. (Protocol.) | |
| CVXGA1-001 Viral vector (parainfluenza) CyanVac/Blue Lake Biotech (USA) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Results (formerly in press release only). Phase 2. Results (press release only). Phase 2b. | ||
| dNS1-RBD (Pneucolin) Viral vector (influenza) Beijing Wantai BioPharm (China) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Phase 2. Joint results. Phase 1 (age 3-17). Results. | 30,990 participants in Colombia, Philippines, South Africa, Vietnam. Results (previously in preprint.) 5,400 participants in Ghana (Phase 3). | Comparison of 2 doses of intranasal vaccine 14 days apart, with placebo control, during circulation of Omicron. Included >13,000 previously unvaccinated people. Efficacy shown 90 days after 2nd dose. There was some decline at 180 days. Efficacy against symptomatic Covid: Efficacy against severe Covid: Efficacy against hospitalization: Adverse events were very low – similar to placebo. Less than 8% of people had a runny and/or blocked nose or sore throat. |
| FINCoVac Viral vector (adenovirus) Rokote Laboratories (Finland) | Intranasal. | Phase 1, 2nd registry record. | ||
| GAM-COVID-VAC (rAd26-S – Sputnik Light) Viral vector (adenovirus) Gamaleya Research Institute (Russia) | Intranasal. | Phase 1/2. | 7,000 participants in Russia (Phase 3 or phase 2/3 – not clear). | |
| GLS-5301 DNA GeneOne Life Science (South Korea) | Intranasal. | Phase 1. Results. | ||
| LVT001 Protein subunit LovalTech (France) | Intranasal. | Phase 1/2. | ||
| Mambisa Protein subunit Centre for Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology (CIGB) (Cuba) | Intranasal drops. | Phase 1/2. | ||
| MPV/S-2P Viral vector (murine pneumonia) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) | Intranasal drops. | Phase 1. | ||
| MV-014-212 Viral vector (RSV) Meissa Vaccines (USA) | Intranasal drops or spray. | Phase 1. Results (press release). | This vaccine is in limbo because of the company’s financial difficulties. | |
| MVA-SARS-2ST Viral vector (MVA) German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF)/IDT Biologika | Inhalation. | Phase 1 * terminated because of difficulty recruiting. * Results, results. | This vaccine’s trial was terminated. | |
| NB2155 Viral vector (Adenovirus 5) Guangzhou Medical University/ Guangzhou National Laboratory | Intranasal. | Phase 1. | ||
| CVAX-01 Viral vector (Newcastle Disease Virus) Castlevax/Icahn Mt Sinai | Intranasal. |
Recent PostsTrendingRelated ArticlesStay InformedGet the best articles every day for FREE. Cancel anytime.
|
