Back

Systems Vaccinology Reveals Distinct Immune Signatures of Inhaled and Intramuscular SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Humans

Riemann, L.; Hammerschmidt, S.; Gutierrez Jauregui, R.; Odak, I.; Barros Martins, J.; Hassan, A.; Weskamm, L. M.; Mayer, L.; Kraehling, V.; Friedrichsen, M.; Ravens, I.; Ristenpart, J.; Schimrock, A.; Hansen, G.; Falk, C.; Becker, S.; Volz, A.; Sutter, G.; Hohlfeld, J.; Addo, M. M.; Foerster, R.

2025-10-15 allergy and immunology
10.1101/2025.10.14.25337996 medRxiv
Show abstract

Mucosal vaccines may reduce both infection and transmission by engaging local immunity, yet the immunological pathways they activate in humans remain poorly defined. Here, we present a comprehensive systems vaccinology analysis of a Modified Vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA)-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate tested in two distinct phase 1 clinical trials as a booster vaccination with either inhaled or intramuscular delivery, and benchmarked findings against published mRNA vaccine data. Longitudinal multi-omics profiling of peripheral blood and bronchoalveolar lavage revealed that inhaled vaccination induces a distinct immunological signature, characterized by effector CD8+ T cell enrichment in the respiratory tract with minimal systemic perturbation. Inhaled delivery elicited limited systemic antibody responses, yet cellular immunity was comparable to that induced by intramuscular vaccination. Transcriptional profiling uncovered shared innate and proliferative programs across both delivery routes, with temporal decoupling of gene programs associated with humoral versus cellular immunity. Machine learning identified a robust early blood transcriptional signature predictive of antibody production. These findings offer a compelling molecular rationale for mucosal vaccine strategies and highlight actionable targets for optimizing mucosal vaccines. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05226390, NCT04895449.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.