Review



omics data split accuracy precision recall f1 measure auc rna m ethylation cv  (Omics Data Automation)

 
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 86

    Structured Review

    Omics Data Automation omics data split accuracy precision recall f1 measure auc rna m ethylation cv
    Omics Data Split Accuracy Precision Recall F1 Measure Auc Rna M Ethylation Cv, supplied by Omics Data Automation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/accuracy+auc+cv+f1+measure+methylation+precision+recall+rna+split/pm41818290-332-2-0
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    omics data split accuracy precision recall f1 measure auc rna m ethylation cv - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    86/100 stars

    Images

    Related Articles

    Methylation:

    Article Title: Interpretable integration of unpaired multi-omics for Alzheimer's diagnosis via cross-modal transformer reconstruction.
    Article Snippet: .. Omics Data Split Accuracy Precision Recall F1-measure AUC RNA+Methylation CV 0.9571 0.9749 0.9582 0.9664 0.9883 Test 0.9736 0.9788 0.9803 0.9796 0.9910 RNA CV 0.9100 0.9345 0.9192 0.9267 0.9637 Test 0.9357 0.9655 0.9333 0.9492 0.9622 Methylation CV 0.5577 0.5802 0.6014 0.5580 0.6007 Test 0.4138 0.4615 0.3750 0.4138 0.5288 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014074.t003 PLOS Computational Biology | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014074 March 12, 2026 20 / 23 It can be observed that removing the AE resulted in slight reductions in all evaluation metrics, both in cross-validation (CV) and test sets. ..



    Similar Products

    96
    Danaher Inc optima analytical ultracentrifuge
    Optima Analytical Ultracentrifuge, supplied by Danaher Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/Optima+AUC/pm42875965-69-12-15
    Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    optima analytical ultracentrifuge - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    96/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    96
    Danaher Inc optima auc analytical ultracentrifuge
    Optima Auc Analytical Ultracentrifuge, supplied by Danaher Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/Optima+AUC/pm42827260-492-7-11
    Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    optima auc analytical ultracentrifuge - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    96/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    86
    Takeda squares discriminant analysis fdr false discovery rate roc receiver operating characteristic auc area
    Squares Discriminant Analysis Fdr False Discovery Rate Roc Receiver Operating Characteristic Auc Area, supplied by Takeda, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/anion+organic+transporters/pm42123168-194-79-107
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    squares discriminant analysis fdr false discovery rate roc receiver operating characteristic auc area - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    99
    GraphPad Software Inc curve auc
    Curve Auc, supplied by GraphPad Software Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/Prism+8/10__1016_slash_j__matdes__2026__116198-325-4-9
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    curve auc - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    96
    Danaher Inc ultracentrifuge
    Ultracentrifuge, supplied by Danaher Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/Optima+AUC/10__1016_slash_j__foodhyd__2026__112870-71-6-9
    Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    ultracentrifuge - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    96/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    86
    Garmin Ltd model accuracy sensitivity specificity auc f1 score elastic net garminonly
    Model Accuracy Sensitivity Specificity Auc F1 Score Elastic Net Garminonly, supplied by Garmin Ltd, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/model/pm41933099-85-12-11
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    model accuracy sensitivity specificity auc f1 score elastic net garminonly - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    86
    Charite Research Organisation nr ar model auc roc q cadd
    Nr Ar Model Auc Roc Q Cadd, supplied by Charite Research Organisation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/ar+auc+cadd+model+nr+q+roc/pm41865083-174-8-25
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    nr ar model auc roc q cadd - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    86
    Moderna intact mrna auc
    A) Three cohort of human subjects were recruited who received either Moderna, Pfizer, or <t>mRNA-RBD</t> vaccination. B) Serial blood samples were collected before and after vaccination and analyzed by ddPCR, mass spectrometry and ELISA to quantify vaccine mRNA, ionizable lipid, and antibody response (anti-PEG and anti-spike), respectively.
    Intact Mrna Auc, supplied by Moderna, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/exposure+intact+mrna/med_rxiv__64898__2026__03__13__26348310-225-0-6
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    intact mrna auc - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    99
    STATA Corporation auc values
    A) Three cohort of human subjects were recruited who received either Moderna, Pfizer, or <t>mRNA-RBD</t> vaccination. B) Serial blood samples were collected before and after vaccination and analyzed by ddPCR, mass spectrometry and ELISA to quantify vaccine mRNA, ionizable lipid, and antibody response (anti-PEG and anti-spike), respectively.
    Auc Values, supplied by STATA Corporation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/STATA+14%2E0/pm41832435-6-20-13
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    auc values - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    86
    Omics Data Automation omics data split accuracy precision recall f1 measure auc rna m ethylation cv
    A) Three cohort of human subjects were recruited who received either Moderna, Pfizer, or <t>mRNA-RBD</t> vaccination. B) Serial blood samples were collected before and after vaccination and analyzed by ddPCR, mass spectrometry and ELISA to quantify vaccine mRNA, ionizable lipid, and antibody response (anti-PEG and anti-spike), respectively.
    Omics Data Split Accuracy Precision Recall F1 Measure Auc Rna M Ethylation Cv, supplied by Omics Data Automation, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/auc/accuracy+auc+cv+f1+measure+methylation+precision+recall+rna+split/pm41818290-332-2-0
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    omics data split accuracy precision recall f1 measure auc rna m ethylation cv - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    A) Three cohort of human subjects were recruited who received either Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD vaccination. B) Serial blood samples were collected before and after vaccination and analyzed by ddPCR, mass spectrometry and ELISA to quantify vaccine mRNA, ionizable lipid, and antibody response (anti-PEG and anti-spike), respectively.

    Journal: medRxiv

    Article Title: In Vivo Blood Kinetics and Transcript Integrity of Three mRNA–Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccines in Humans

    doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.26348310

    Figure Lengend Snippet: A) Three cohort of human subjects were recruited who received either Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD vaccination. B) Serial blood samples were collected before and after vaccination and analyzed by ddPCR, mass spectrometry and ELISA to quantify vaccine mRNA, ionizable lipid, and antibody response (anti-PEG and anti-spike), respectively.

    Article Snippet: Intact mRNA AUC was compared between Moderna and Pfizer ( ) using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in GraphPad Prism 10.

    Techniques: Mass Spectrometry, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay

    Comparison of in vivo vaccine mRNA kinetics in human blood following three types of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination (Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD). (A–C) Longitudinal vaccine mRNA concentrations (copies µL −1 ) in human blood from seven cohorts receiving either (A) Moderna bivalent ancestral + BA.1, bivalent ancestral + BA.5, or monovalent XBB.1.5; (B) Pfizer; or (C) mRNA-RBD at 10, 20, or 50 µg doses. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ; dashed line) was determined from linear standard curves (Figure S1D–G). In panel A, two the lower limits of quantifications (LLOQs) are shown: 0.4 copies µL −1 for Moderna XBB.1.5 (dark blue dashed line) and 0.93 copies µL −1 for Moderna bivalent vaccines (light blue dashed line). Undetected samples (0 copies μL −1 ) were plotted with open symbols. (D–G) Comparison of (D) mRNA concentration at day 6–7 post-vaccination, (E) post-peak mRNA decay rates, (F) post-peak area under the curve (AUC) of mRNA kinetics in blood, and (G) averaged mRNA kinetics across donors among the three vaccine types. In (D–F), each dot represents one participant, and the horizontal line indicates the median. In (G), averaged mRNA kinetics are shown as mean predictions from the best-fit linear model, with shaded regions indicating the 95% confidence interval bounds. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn’s multiple comparisons in (D, F) and the likelihood ratio test in (E).

    Journal: medRxiv

    Article Title: In Vivo Blood Kinetics and Transcript Integrity of Three mRNA–Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccines in Humans

    doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.26348310

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of in vivo vaccine mRNA kinetics in human blood following three types of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination (Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD). (A–C) Longitudinal vaccine mRNA concentrations (copies µL −1 ) in human blood from seven cohorts receiving either (A) Moderna bivalent ancestral + BA.1, bivalent ancestral + BA.5, or monovalent XBB.1.5; (B) Pfizer; or (C) mRNA-RBD at 10, 20, or 50 µg doses. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ; dashed line) was determined from linear standard curves (Figure S1D–G). In panel A, two the lower limits of quantifications (LLOQs) are shown: 0.4 copies µL −1 for Moderna XBB.1.5 (dark blue dashed line) and 0.93 copies µL −1 for Moderna bivalent vaccines (light blue dashed line). Undetected samples (0 copies μL −1 ) were plotted with open symbols. (D–G) Comparison of (D) mRNA concentration at day 6–7 post-vaccination, (E) post-peak mRNA decay rates, (F) post-peak area under the curve (AUC) of mRNA kinetics in blood, and (G) averaged mRNA kinetics across donors among the three vaccine types. In (D–F), each dot represents one participant, and the horizontal line indicates the median. In (G), averaged mRNA kinetics are shown as mean predictions from the best-fit linear model, with shaded regions indicating the 95% confidence interval bounds. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn’s multiple comparisons in (D, F) and the likelihood ratio test in (E).

    Article Snippet: Intact mRNA AUC was compared between Moderna and Pfizer ( ) using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in GraphPad Prism 10.

    Techniques: Comparison, In Vivo, Vaccines, Concentration Assay

    Comparison of in vivo ionizable lipid kinetics in human blood following Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD vaccination. (A–C) Longitudinal ionizable lipid concentrations (ng mL −1 ) in human blood from seven cohorts who received either (A) Moderna bivalent ancestral + BA.1, bivalent ancestral + BA.5, or monovalent XBB.1.5 (formulated with SM-102); (B) Pfizer (formulated with ALC-0315); or (C) mRNA-RBD (formulated with Dlin-MC3-DMA) vaccination at 10, 20, or 50 µg doses. (D–G) Comparison of (D) ionizable lipid concentration at day 6–7 post-vaccination, (E) post-peak ionizable lipid decay rates, (F) post-peak AUC of ionizable lipid kinetics in blood, and (G) averaged ionizable lipid kinetics across donors among the three vaccine types. In (D–F), each dot represents one participant, and the horizontal line indicates the median. In (G), averaged ionizable lipid kinetics are shown as mean predictions from the best-fit linear model, with shaded regions indicating the 95% confidence interval bounds. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn’s multiple comparisons in (D, F) and the likelihood ratio test in (E).

    Journal: medRxiv

    Article Title: In Vivo Blood Kinetics and Transcript Integrity of Three mRNA–Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccines in Humans

    doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.26348310

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of in vivo ionizable lipid kinetics in human blood following Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD vaccination. (A–C) Longitudinal ionizable lipid concentrations (ng mL −1 ) in human blood from seven cohorts who received either (A) Moderna bivalent ancestral + BA.1, bivalent ancestral + BA.5, or monovalent XBB.1.5 (formulated with SM-102); (B) Pfizer (formulated with ALC-0315); or (C) mRNA-RBD (formulated with Dlin-MC3-DMA) vaccination at 10, 20, or 50 µg doses. (D–G) Comparison of (D) ionizable lipid concentration at day 6–7 post-vaccination, (E) post-peak ionizable lipid decay rates, (F) post-peak AUC of ionizable lipid kinetics in blood, and (G) averaged ionizable lipid kinetics across donors among the three vaccine types. In (D–F), each dot represents one participant, and the horizontal line indicates the median. In (G), averaged ionizable lipid kinetics are shown as mean predictions from the best-fit linear model, with shaded regions indicating the 95% confidence interval bounds. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn’s multiple comparisons in (D, F) and the likelihood ratio test in (E).

    Article Snippet: Intact mRNA AUC was compared between Moderna and Pfizer ( ) using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in GraphPad Prism 10.

    Techniques: Comparison, In Vivo, Concentration Assay

    Comparison of in vivo vaccine mRNA integrity in human blood between Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. (A,B) Longitudinal vaccine mRNA integrity in human blood from four cohorts who received either (A) Moderna bivalent ancestral + BA.1, bivalent ancestral + BA.5, or monovalent XBB.1.5 or (B) Pfizer vaccination. (C,D) Longitudinal intact vaccine mRNA concentration (copies µL −1 ) in human blood from the four cohorts. The LLOQ (shown as a dashed line) was determined based on the linear standard curves of vaccine mRNA (Figure S1D–F). In panel C, two LLOQs are shown: 0.4 copies µL −1 for Moderna XBB.1.5 (dark blue dashed line) and 0.93 copies µL −1 for Moderna bivalent vaccines (light blue dashed line). Undetected samples (0 copies μL −1 ) were plotted with open symbols. (E–G) Comparison of (E) post-peak intact mRNA decay rates, (F) post-peak AUC of intact mRNA kinetics in blood, and (G) averaged intact mRNA kinetics across donors between the two vaccine types. In (E,F), each dot represents one participant, and the horizontal line indicates the median. In (G), averaged intact mRNA kinetics are shown as mean predictions from the best-fit linear model, with shaded regions indicating the 95% confidence interval bounds. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in (F) and the likelihood ratio test in (E).

    Journal: medRxiv

    Article Title: In Vivo Blood Kinetics and Transcript Integrity of Three mRNA–Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccines in Humans

    doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.26348310

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of in vivo vaccine mRNA integrity in human blood between Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. (A,B) Longitudinal vaccine mRNA integrity in human blood from four cohorts who received either (A) Moderna bivalent ancestral + BA.1, bivalent ancestral + BA.5, or monovalent XBB.1.5 or (B) Pfizer vaccination. (C,D) Longitudinal intact vaccine mRNA concentration (copies µL −1 ) in human blood from the four cohorts. The LLOQ (shown as a dashed line) was determined based on the linear standard curves of vaccine mRNA (Figure S1D–F). In panel C, two LLOQs are shown: 0.4 copies µL −1 for Moderna XBB.1.5 (dark blue dashed line) and 0.93 copies µL −1 for Moderna bivalent vaccines (light blue dashed line). Undetected samples (0 copies μL −1 ) were plotted with open symbols. (E–G) Comparison of (E) post-peak intact mRNA decay rates, (F) post-peak AUC of intact mRNA kinetics in blood, and (G) averaged intact mRNA kinetics across donors between the two vaccine types. In (E,F), each dot represents one participant, and the horizontal line indicates the median. In (G), averaged intact mRNA kinetics are shown as mean predictions from the best-fit linear model, with shaded regions indicating the 95% confidence interval bounds. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in (F) and the likelihood ratio test in (E).

    Article Snippet: Intact mRNA AUC was compared between Moderna and Pfizer ( ) using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in GraphPad Prism 10.

    Techniques: Comparison, In Vivo, Vaccines, Concentration Assay, MANN-WHITNEY

    Comparison of in vivo decay kinetics of vaccine mRNA and ionizable lipids in human blood following Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD vaccination. (A) Best-fit decay slopes of total mRNA, intact mRNA, and ionizable lipids across the three vaccines. The response at the peak time point for each parameter was normalized to 100%, and the percentage change over time illustrates the decline estimated from the best-fit linear model. (B) Half-life of total mRNA, intact mRNA, and ionizable lipids from the three vaccines, shown as the mean with upper and lower bound of 95% confidence intervals calculated across multiple donors in each cohort.

    Journal: medRxiv

    Article Title: In Vivo Blood Kinetics and Transcript Integrity of Three mRNA–Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccines in Humans

    doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.26348310

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of in vivo decay kinetics of vaccine mRNA and ionizable lipids in human blood following Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD vaccination. (A) Best-fit decay slopes of total mRNA, intact mRNA, and ionizable lipids across the three vaccines. The response at the peak time point for each parameter was normalized to 100%, and the percentage change over time illustrates the decline estimated from the best-fit linear model. (B) Half-life of total mRNA, intact mRNA, and ionizable lipids from the three vaccines, shown as the mean with upper and lower bound of 95% confidence intervals calculated across multiple donors in each cohort.

    Article Snippet: Intact mRNA AUC was compared between Moderna and Pfizer ( ) using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in GraphPad Prism 10.

    Techniques: Comparison, In Vivo, Vaccines

    Comparison of anti-PEG antibody levels in human blood before and after Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD vaccination. (A,B) Comparison of plasma anti-PEG IgG and IgM endpoint titers before vaccination (Pre-Vax) and after vaccination (Post-Vax) for the three vaccine types. (C,D) Cross-comparison of fold changes (Post-Vax/Pre-Vax) in anti-PEG IgG and IgM endpoint titers among the three vaccine types. In (C,D), each dot represents one participant, and the horizontal line indicates the mean. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test in (A,B) and the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn’s multiple comparisons in (C,D).

    Journal: medRxiv

    Article Title: In Vivo Blood Kinetics and Transcript Integrity of Three mRNA–Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccines in Humans

    doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.26348310

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of anti-PEG antibody levels in human blood before and after Moderna, Pfizer, or mRNA-RBD vaccination. (A,B) Comparison of plasma anti-PEG IgG and IgM endpoint titers before vaccination (Pre-Vax) and after vaccination (Post-Vax) for the three vaccine types. (C,D) Cross-comparison of fold changes (Post-Vax/Pre-Vax) in anti-PEG IgG and IgM endpoint titers among the three vaccine types. In (C,D), each dot represents one participant, and the horizontal line indicates the mean. Statistical analysis was performed using the nonparametric Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test in (A,B) and the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn’s multiple comparisons in (C,D).

    Article Snippet: Intact mRNA AUC was compared between Moderna and Pfizer ( ) using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in GraphPad Prism 10.

    Techniques: Comparison, Clinical Proteomics

    In vivo degradation patterns of Moderna vaccine mRNA in human blood evaluated using ten two-primer fragments in a duplex PCR assay. (A) Schematic illustration of the ten two-primer fragments, each targeting two regions of the Moderna vaccine mRNA sequence in the duplex ddPCR assay to assess degradation patterns of vaccine mRNA. (B) Vaccine mRNA integrity in plasma from six subjects at days 1, 4, and 7 post-Moderna vaccination (three subjects received the bivalent ancestral + BA.1 vaccine and three received the bivalent ancestral + BA.5 vaccine) assessed using the ten fragments. (C) Comparison of mRNA integrity across the ten fragments in plasma samples (day 1 post-vaccination), neat Moderna vaccine, and synthetic Moderna vaccine mRNA. (D,E) Spearman correlation analysis between mRNA integrity in plasma at day 1 post-vaccination and mRNA integrity in (D) neat Moderna vaccine or (E) synthetic Moderna vaccine mRNA. (F,G) Comparison of intact mRNA decay rates across (F) the ten fragments or (G) the six subjects. (H) Best-fit decay slopes of intact mRNA across six donors, with each data point representing the average decay rate calculated from ten individual fragments. For each donor, decay rates were estimated separately for each fragment, and the mean of these ten fragment-specific rates was used to represent the donor-level decay slope. As the decay slopes of donors 2 and 5 overlap, the curve of donor 5 was plotted with higher thickness than that of donor 2 to improve readability. In (C,F), mRNA integrity (%) and decay rates in plasma samples are shown as the mean with upper and lower bound of 95% confidence intervals calculated across six donors.

    Journal: medRxiv

    Article Title: In Vivo Blood Kinetics and Transcript Integrity of Three mRNA–Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccines in Humans

    doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.26348310

    Figure Lengend Snippet: In vivo degradation patterns of Moderna vaccine mRNA in human blood evaluated using ten two-primer fragments in a duplex PCR assay. (A) Schematic illustration of the ten two-primer fragments, each targeting two regions of the Moderna vaccine mRNA sequence in the duplex ddPCR assay to assess degradation patterns of vaccine mRNA. (B) Vaccine mRNA integrity in plasma from six subjects at days 1, 4, and 7 post-Moderna vaccination (three subjects received the bivalent ancestral + BA.1 vaccine and three received the bivalent ancestral + BA.5 vaccine) assessed using the ten fragments. (C) Comparison of mRNA integrity across the ten fragments in plasma samples (day 1 post-vaccination), neat Moderna vaccine, and synthetic Moderna vaccine mRNA. (D,E) Spearman correlation analysis between mRNA integrity in plasma at day 1 post-vaccination and mRNA integrity in (D) neat Moderna vaccine or (E) synthetic Moderna vaccine mRNA. (F,G) Comparison of intact mRNA decay rates across (F) the ten fragments or (G) the six subjects. (H) Best-fit decay slopes of intact mRNA across six donors, with each data point representing the average decay rate calculated from ten individual fragments. For each donor, decay rates were estimated separately for each fragment, and the mean of these ten fragment-specific rates was used to represent the donor-level decay slope. As the decay slopes of donors 2 and 5 overlap, the curve of donor 5 was plotted with higher thickness than that of donor 2 to improve readability. In (C,F), mRNA integrity (%) and decay rates in plasma samples are shown as the mean with upper and lower bound of 95% confidence intervals calculated across six donors.

    Article Snippet: Intact mRNA AUC was compared between Moderna and Pfizer ( ) using the nonparametric Mann−Whitney U test in GraphPad Prism 10.

    Techniques: In Vivo, Sequencing, Clinical Proteomics, Comparison