Next Article in Journal
Utility of IL-6 in the Diagnosis, Treatment and Prognosis of COVID-19 Patients: A Longitudinal Study
Previous Article in Journal
Healthcare Worker Study Cohort to Determine the Level and Durability of Cellular and Humoral Immune Responses after Two Doses of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination
Previous Article in Special Issue
Influenza Vaccination among Multiple Sclerosis Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Vaccines
Volume 10
Issue 11
10.3390/vaccines10111785
vaccines-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Mapping Potential Vaccine Candidates Predicted by VaxiJen for Different Viral Pathogens between 2017–2021—A Scoping Review

by
Zakia Salod
* and
Ozayr Mahomed
Discipline of Public Health Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4051, South Africa
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vaccines 2022, 10(11), 1785; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10111785
Submission received: 1 September 2022 / Revised: 16 October 2022 / Accepted: 18 October 2022 / Published: 24 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Vaccination and Public Health)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Reverse vaccinology (RV) is a promising alternative to traditional vaccinology. RV focuses on in silico methods to identify antigens or potential vaccine candidates (PVCs) from a pathogen’s proteome. Researchers use VaxiJen, the most well-known RV tool, to predict PVCs for various pathogens. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of PVCs predicted by VaxiJen for different viruses between 2017 and 2021 using Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. We used the term ‘vaxijen’ to search PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, and ProQuest One Academic. The protocol was registered at the Open Science Framework (OSF). We identified articles on this topic, charted them, and discussed the key findings. The database searches yielded 1033 articles, of which 275 were eligible. Most studies focused on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), published between 2020 and 2021. Only a few articles (8/275; 2.9%) conducted experimental validations to confirm the predictions as vaccine candidates, with 2.2% (6/275) articles mentioning recombinant protein expression. Researchers commonly targeted parts of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein, with the frequently predicted epitopes as PVCs being major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I T cell epitopes WTAGAAAYY, RQIAPGQTG, IAIVMVTIM, and B cell epitope IAPGQTGKIADY, among others. The findings of this review are promising for the development of novel vaccines. We recommend that vaccinologists use these findings as a guide to performing experimental validation for various viruses, with SARS-CoV-2 as a priority, because better vaccines are needed, especially to stay ahead of the emergence of new variants. If successful, these vaccines could provide broader protection than traditional vaccines.

1. Introduction

Vaccines have been one of the most pivotal achievements in the history of public health. The elimination of smallpox in 1980 and the near-eradication of polio have been two of the most significant achievements of immunization in the last two centuries [1,2]. Globally, vaccination saves over 386 million life years and 96 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) each year, preventing approximately six million deaths [3]. Hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, measles, mumps, pneumococcal pneumonia, polio, rabies, rubella, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and smallpox are among the illnesses for which vaccines are currently available [4]. However, there is a need for more efficient vaccines for these diseases. Furthermore, despite the achievements in vaccinations, many infectious diseases worldwide, such as dengue fever, hepatitis C, and herpes, are still lacking vaccines [4].
Most of the currently available vaccines were developed using a traditional vaccinology approach. Conventional vaccinology employs two methods: (i) whole pathogen vaccines (live-attenuated and inactivated), in which the relevant protective antigens are unknown; and (ii) subunit vaccines, which primarily focus on protective antigens recognized during infection [5]. However, this vaccine development strategy is (i) time-consuming, taking 5–15 years; (ii) high-risk because the pathogen must be grown in a laboratory to identify the components suitable for vaccine development; and (iii) limited to antigens expressed in vitro [6]. Reverse vaccinology (RV) can overcome these constraints, allowing for the development of more effective and innovative vaccines [6].
RV is a promising vaccine development technique focused on identifying a subset of promising antigens from pathogen proteomes through computational analysis as the first step in developing protein subunit vaccines [6]. After this first step in identifying antigens in RV, similar to conventional vaccinology, the antigens require validation in vitro and in vivo using experimental assays to confirm their protective potential. RV was first used in 2000 to identify novel antigens for developing a vaccine, Bexsero®, against meningococcus B [6,7]. This task was previously considered impossible by conventional vaccinology [6,7]. Bexsero® received approval from the European Medicines Agency in 2013 and the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015 [8,9]. Recently, Bexsero® reduced the disease incidence by 74% in the United Kingdom and 91% in Italy [8,9]. The last two decades have seen the production of RV vaccines based on the proteome of bacterial and viral species [10]. Notably, a ribonucleic acid (RNA) vaccine against a potentially pandemic avian influenza A (H7N9) virus was created within a week in 2013 using RV that utilized the protein sequence from public databases [11]. Since the success of Bexsero®, many researchers have published specialized bioinformatics tools for vaccine design, known as RV prediction tools [12,13,14,15].
RV prediction tools [12,13,14,15] analyze a pathogen’s proteome to identify a group of proteins that are likely antigens as the first step toward vaccine development [6]. The predicted antigens are also known as potential vaccine candidates (PVCs). The RV approach is superior to traditional vaccinology because RV is (i) fast and efficient, taking 1–2 years; (ii) safe because the pathogen does not need to be cultured in a laboratory; and (iii) all conceivable PVCs, including those not expressed in vitro, can be identified [6]. However, one limitation of RV is that it cannot identify non-protein antigens such as polysaccharide antigens [6]. Potential antigens based on a pathogen’s protein sequences, including B and T cell epitopes in immunoinformatics [16,17,18], can be predicted using RV prediction tools. RV tools are available as standalone computer software or through online portals such as VaxiJen.
VaxiJen was the first RV website launched in 2007 [19,20,21] and is now the most widely used RV prediction tool, with the VaxiJen paper having 1480 citations in Google Scholar as of October 7, 2022. This tool predicts PVCs using an alignment-independent approach in which protein sequences are transformed into uniform equal-length vectors by auto-cross covariance (ACC). VaxiJen can predict PVCs for bacteria, viruses, tumors, parasites, and fungi. For each of these pathogen categories, five different models (with accuracies ranging between 70–89%) were created using five different datasets. The graphical interface for these five models is VaxiJen. To utilize VaxiJen, a user must first (i) enter the protein sequence(s) of a pathogen; (ii) select the appropriate pathogen type (one of the five listed above); (iii) set the desired threshold (the default is 0.5); and (iv) click the ‘submit’ button. The relevant model then runs in the background, and the output displays in VaxiJen: either ‘probable antigen’ for an antigen (PVC) or ‘probable non-antigen’ for a non-antigen (not-PVC). Any protein with an antigen probability exceeding a certain threshold qualifies as PVC. It is noteworthy that some articles citing VaxiJen for antigen prediction also reported that the resultant designed subunit vaccine protected against disease in mice [22,23,24].
From 2007 up to 2017, more than 140 researchers used VaxiJen to predict PVCs for various infectious diseases, culminating in a narrative review in 2017 [18]. However, to our knowledge, no review covered studies focused on using VaxiJen for predicting PVCs between 2017 and 2021. This review is important because the predicted PVCs can help vaccine researchers (i) design and develop a vaccine, (ii) experimentally test whether the vaccine induces protective immune responses in recipients, and (iii) identify research gaps. The objective of this study was to map the PVCs predicted by VaxiJen for various viral pathogens between 2017 and 2021.

2. Materials and Methods

This study is a systematic scoping review of the literature reporting on PVCs predicted by VaxiJen for different viral pathogens between 2017 and 2021. The scoping review approach was chosen because (i) it could provide a broader picture of the topic of interest (viral PVCs discovered) that may generally serve as a precursor to systematic reviews [25]; (ii) this study did not focus on a clinical question, which would be more appropriate for a systematic review, whereas the scoping review focused on mapping the evidence relating to PVCs of different viruses [25]; and (iii) it could identify research gaps [25]. We wrote a protocol for this scoping review, which was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 checklist [26,27]. We registered this protocol with the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform registries on February 17, 2022 (registration link: https://osf.io/ht8wr). A summary of the methods used in this scoping review is provided below.
This scoping review employed the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley [28], which was later enhanced by Levac et al. [29] and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) [30]. As shown in Figure 1, this framework is composed of five fundamental successive stages: (i) identifying the research question, (ii) identifying the relevant studies, (iii) study selection, (iv) charting the data, and (v) collating, summarizing and reporting the results. These stages are discussed below within the context of the present scoping review.
The abovementioned framework was used in conjunction with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) proposed by Tricco et al. [31] PRISMA-ScR provides a reporting guideline containing 20 essential items and two optional items that should be included in scoping reviews [31]. This guideline also facilitates methodological transparency and acceptance of research findings [31]. Our completed PRISMA-ScR checklist for the present scoping review is provided in Supplementary Table S2.

2.1. Stage (i): Identifying the Research Question

Arksey and O’Malley [28] recommended that a wide approach should be maintained when phrasing the scoping review question to increase the breadth of coverage. Therefore, the broad question for this scoping review was as follows:
What has been reported in the literature regarding potential vaccine candidates predicted by VaxiJen for different viral pathogens between 2017 and 2021?
This study utilized the population-concept-context (PCC) mnemonic, as recommended by the JBI [30], to identify the main elements of the research question (Table 1). This guidance from the PCC ensured that the study selection was in line with the aforementioned research question. The PCC mnemonic is a less restrictive substitute for the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) mnemonic suggested for systematic reviews.

2.2. Stage (ii): Identifying the Relevant Studies

We conducted a search on December 23, 2021 with the search term ‘vaxijen’ in the following electronic databases: (i) PubMed [32], (ii) Scopus [33], (iii) Web of Science [34], (iv) EBSCOhost [35], and (v) ProQuest One Academic [36] (see Supplementary Table S1 for the search strategy per database). The databases listed above are both accessible and relevant to public health, allowing us to compile a comprehensive sample of the relevant literature. The eligibility criteria (inclusion and exclusion) are listed in Table 2. Initially, we planned to identify the relevant studies using a three-step approach: (i) searching the abovementioned databases, (ii) reviewing the reference lists of the included papers from the database searches to find any additional studies not found by the database searches, and (iii) hand-searching key journals to discover potentially appropriate articles that may have been missed during database and reference list searches. Notably, (i) was required, whereas (ii) and (iii) would only be undertaken if the search results from (i) were insufficient in scope and breadth. Since we found many studies in the database searches, we decided to omit the optional reference lists and journal searches.

2.3. Stage (iii): Study Selection

The search results from the databases were exported as a .nbib file from PubMed and as .ris files in the remaining databases. These five exported files were uploaded to Rayyan [37,38], an open-source review management software that deduplicated the articles. Rayyan supports .nbib and .ris file formats and was chosen to deduplicate articles because it has the maximum sensitivity for reference deduplication [39]. After deduplication, the remaining publications were examined in Rayyan by title and abstract (and, if necessary, by browsing the full text of an article) to identify whether the research met the inclusion requirements. The full texts of the selected articles were downloaded, screened for eligibility (Table 2), and included in this review. If we could not locate the complete text of an article online, we contacted the author(s) to obtain the full text. The screening process was guided by the main elements of this study’s research question (Table 1). ZS performed the initial screening of the articles in Rayyan, including adding reasons for exclusion in the ‘notes’ field. ZS also conducted full-text screening, and OM performed a quality assessment on 10% of the included papers.

2.4. Stage (iv): Charting the Data

The fourth step involved charting the data of the selected articles from stage (iii). The charting process included synthesizing and interpreting qualitative data by sifting and sorting materials using key categories and themes [28]. Arksey and O’Malley [28] suggested that the charting approach must take a broader view and that a common analytical framework should be applied to all selected studies. Therefore, a descriptive-analytical method was employed in this scoping review [28]. To this end, ZS developed a data-charting form in Microsoft Excel, which was reviewed by OM. Initially, we planned to have the following fields in the form: (i) ‘pathogen’ (name of different viruses), (ii) ‘year’ (of publication), (iii) ‘reference’, (iv) ‘key findings’ (relating to the scoping review question), and (v) ‘experimentally validated?’. However, we decided to rename ‘reference’ to ‘authors’ as it was more appropriate and clearer, include a ‘title’ field for the articles’ titles, and for studies that conducted experimental validations (‘experimentally validated?’ equals ‘Yes’), include a summary of these findings in a field called ‘experimentally validated findings’, or ‘N/A’ otherwise. ‘Experimentally validated’ referred to the verification that the vaccine-induced immune response was also directed against the native antigen. We entered the charted data into this final data-charting form and included the following fields: (i) ‘pathogen’, (ii) ‘year’, (iii) ‘authors’, (iv) ‘title’, (v) ‘key findings’, (vi) ‘experimentally validated?’, and (vii) ‘experimentally validated findings’.

2.5. Stage (v): Collating, Summarizing and Reporting the Results

The PRISMA flow diagram [40] was used to show the number of sources of evidence screened, evaluated for eligibility, and included in stage (iii) of the review. We employed the following three distinct stages suggested by Levac et al. [29] to present our results rigorously: (i) analyzing the data, (ii) reporting the results, and (iii) applying meaning to the results. First, based on the research objective, the research question, and Table 1 of this study, the number of papers identified by (i) year (of publication) and (ii) pathogen (the names of different viruses) was provided in a line graph and table (with fields ‘pathogen’ and ‘number of publications’), respectively. Second, to achieve the scoping review’s research question and objective, a table (data-charting form) was employed to display the results from the charted data in step (iv) in an ordered manner. Finally, the significance of the study’s findings was discussed considering research, policy, and practice (experimental validation) to aid us in formulating recommendations.

2.6. Ethics and Permission

This study relied solely on secondary data and did not include patient data. Therefore, ethical approval was not required for this review. Nonetheless, this study was part of a larger research project submitted for ethical consideration to the Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (BREC) of the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) in Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The BREC granted an exemption from ethics review for this project on March 31, 2022.

3. Results

3.1. Search Results

Database searches yielded 1033 results (50 in PubMed, 663 in Scopus, 60 in Web of Science, 37 in EBSCOhost, and 223 in ProQuest One Academic). After duplicates were removed, 729 distinct articles were screened based on their title and abstract (and, if necessary, by browsing through the full text of an article). After this screening, we attempted to retrieve 294 articles. We found the full text of 284 papers, 275 of which were eligible for inclusion (Figure 2).

3.2. Quantitative Overview of Articles Included in This Scoping Review

3.2.1. Analysis of Publications by Year of Publication

The number of studies focusing on using VaxiJen to predict PVCs for various viruses increased exponentially between 2017 and 2021 (Figure 3). From 2017 to 2019, the number of publications gradually increased to 20% (55/275). In 2020–2021, there was an 80% increase, with a further 220 articles published. The number of studies peaked in 2021, with 118/275 papers accounting for 42.9% of the total publications.

3.2.2. Analysis of Publications by Pathogen

The 275 papers included in this study were divided into 64 pathogen (virus) categories based on the article titles. Nearly half of the articles (n = 121; 44%) focused on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Human papillomavirus (HPV) (n = 9; 3.2%) was the second most common, followed by hepatitis C virus (n = 8; 2.9%) and Zika virus (ZIKV) (n = 8; 2.9%) tying for third place (Table 3).

3.3. What Has Been Reported in the Literature Regarding Potential Vaccine Candidates Predicted by VaxiJen for Different Viral Pathogens between 2017 and 2021?

As seen in the additional ‘experimentally validated?’ field included in Supplementary Table S3, only 2.9% (8/275) of the papers (‘experimentally validated?’ = ‘Yes’) conducted experimental validations of the PVCs they found predicted by VaxiJen, with 2.2% (6/275) articles mentioning recombinant protein expression [127,166,214,240,276,287]. These validations confirmed the predictions as subunit vaccine candidates, and those studies that demonstrated expression of the recombinant protein used the vectors Escherichia coli (E. coli) [127,166,214,240,287] and baculovirus [276]. Of the 275 articles, the following findings were the most notable for each of the top three viral pathogens. Seventy-one out of one hundred and twenty-one papers on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) focused on the spike (S) protein. Researchers have either studied the S protein exclusively or studied the S protein along with other SARS-CoV-2 proteins to identify PVCs. Numerous antigenic (as determined by VaxiJen) T and B cell epitopes from the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 have been predicted to be PVCs. Most predicted epitopes from the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 included major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I T cell epitopes WTAGAAAYY [89,130,136,143,147], RQIAPGQTG [43,63,92], IAIVMVTIM [43,92,146], and B cell epitope IAPGQTGKIADY [43,63,92].
Two of the 71 SARS-CoV-2 S-protein studies confirmed predictions experimentally [78,127]. The predicted T cell peptide STQDLFLPFFSNVTWFHAIHVS from the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 was antigenic in the first study, with a VaxiJen antigenicity score of 0.5545 (above the threshold of 0.4) [78]. This T cell peptide induced a robust immune response in mice with Th1-Th17 pro-inflammatory features and strong stimulation of cells involved in antibody and anti-viral cytokine production [78]. In the second study, a multivalent vaccine was developed using seven cytotoxic T cell (CTL) epitopes in the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the S protein, three in the heptad repeat domain (HR) of the S protein, ten in the membrane (M) protein, and four epitopes in non-structural protein 13 (NSP13) of SARS-CoV-2 [127]. Additionally, the vaccine included three helper T cell (HTL) epitopes in the RBD of S protein, three in the HR of S protein, six in M, and four epitopes in NSP13 of SARS-CoV-2 [127]. VaxiJen was used to predict the antigenicity of these proteins. The vaccine candidate was safe and elicited strong antigen-specific antibody titers in mice [127].
The two major structural capsid proteins, L1 and L2, of human papillomavirus (HPV) received the most attention. Several B and T cell epitopes from HPV were discovered using predictive tools (including VaxiJen) [165,166,167,168,169,170], but they have yet to be tested experimentally. However, one of the HPV studies demonstrated in vivo that combining eight antigenic epitopes for CTL and HTL from L1 and L2 of HPV into a universal vaccine induced protective immunity in mice (~66.67% tumor-free mice; p < 0.05) [166].
Hepatitis C virus-based studies designed multi-epitope vaccines concentrating mainly on three viral proteins (core, NS5A, and NS5B), with antigenicity determined using VaxiJen [174,175,177,178,179,180]. One PVC included nine CTL epitopes and three HTL epitopes using the core protein of Hepatitis C virus [180]. This vaccine construct was highly antigenic, with a VaxiJen antigenicity score of 0.9882% [180]. However, studies investigating PVCs for hepatitis C virus lacked experimental validation and confirmation for their predictions.
The Zika virus (ZIKV) envelope (E) protein was the primary target of vaccine design included in five of the eight ZIKV papers [184,185,187,188,189]. One study found that the YRIMLSVHG epitope from the ZIKV E protein was the most promising for inducing a T cell immune response [184]. Another study identified ETLHGTVTV and ENSKMMLELDPPFGD as the most antigenic MHC class I and MHC class II T cell epitopes, respectively, on the ZIKV E protein [189,316]. VaxiJen confirmed that the E protein and its predicted epitopes of ZIKV were antigenic at a threshold of 0.4%. As in hepatitis C virus studies investigating PVCs, the researchers did not perform experimental validations to confirm their predictive findings in ZIKV articles.
In addition to the three studies mentioned above that experimentally validated the PVCs for the top three viral pathogens, the results of five other papers that performed experiments to confirm the predictive findings for the other viruses were as follows. A conserved epitope region (Asp348-Phe369) was discovered on the hexon capsid proteins of the fowl adenovirus of serotype 4 (FAdV-4) [287]. Asp348-Phe369 achieved an antigenicity score of 0.9293 by VaxiJen [287]. Through insertion of Asp348-Phe369 from FAdV-4 into the core protein of the hepatitis B virus, a virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine was created [287]. Compared to the commercially available vaccine (50% protection) [317], the VLP vaccine provided better protection (up to 90%) against challenge in chickens [287]. Another article reported a Crimean–Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) vaccine composed of 24 epitopes (B and T cell) from the structural nucleoprotein and glycoprotein proteins of the CCHF virus [234]. These epitopes of CCHF were immunogenic (VaxiJen score above 0.4 default threshold) [234]. The novel CCHF B cell epitopes discovered in this study were validated with CCHF goat, sheep, and bovine IgG positive and negative sera, indicating that the vaccine candidate was immunogenic against CCHF [234].
An in silico study identified 23 B cell epitopes, 13 HTL epitopes, and 15 CTL epitopes in enteroviruses EV-A71, CV-A6, CV-A10, CV-A16, CV-B3 protein sequences [214]. The multivalent, multiepitope subunit vaccine constructed based on these enteroviruses epitopes was antigenic, according to VaxiJen [214]. In vitro neutralization assay experiments with three enteroviruses (EV-A71, CV-A16, CV-B3) confirmed the immunogenicity of this vaccine [214]. This experiment demonstrated that the vaccine could protect against infection with various enteroviruses [214].
Researchers predicted and confirmed the sequences GKNIGQDRDPTGVEPGDHLKERSALSYGNTLDLNSLDID and PIAGSLSGNPVNRD as linear B cell epitopes on Seoul orthohantavirus nucleoprotein (SHNP) [240]. BALB/c mice were immunized with recombinant protein as part of the validation [240].
Another paper predicted that the surface-exposed regions of the norovirus (NoV) GII.4 capsid protein contains five antigenic B cell epitopes (P2A-E) [276]. VaxiJen scores ranging from 0.582 to 1.358 confirmed the antigenicity of the NoV B cell epitopes [276]. These B cell epitopes were tested as synthetic peptides in wild-type mice [276]. The blocking rates in mice indicated that the predicted epitopes P2B (blocking rate: 68%), P2C (blocking rate: 55%), and P2D (blocking rate: 28%) could be used as blockade epitopes in the development of broadly reactive vaccines against NoV GII.4 [276].

4. Discussion

This scoping review provides an overview of the PVCs predicted by VaxiJen for various viral pathogens between 2017 and 2021. This review included 275 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Publications have increased between 2017 and 2021, with most of these 275 articles appearing between 2020 and 2021 and peaking in 2021. The research primarily focused on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), targeting the S protein of the virus. Although VaxiJen was used to predict the antigenicity of the PVCs for various viruses in 275 publications, as with most computational studies of real-world problems, only a few papers (8/275; 2.9%) performed experimental validations, confirming the VaxiJen predictions as vaccine candidates, with 2.2% (6/275) articles mentioning recombinant protein expression.
Nearly half of the studies included in this review focused on SARS-CoV-2 infection. SARS-CoV-2 is the agent responsible for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the worst modern-day global pandemic, first reported in China in 2019. As expected, the number of studies included in this review dramatically increased between 2020–2021, coinciding with the SARS-CoV-2-related articles published during this time. There has also been an exponential growth of various COVID-19 vaccine studies, as there are currently 172 vaccines in clinical development and 199 vaccines in pre-clinical (phases 1-4) development as of October 4, 2022 [318]. The two most well-known COVID-19 vaccines developed using the traditional vaccinology (inactivated) method are (i) COVAXIN® from Bharat Biotech [319] and (ii) CoronaVac® from Sinovac [320,321,322]. Some prominent COVID-19 vaccines based on other vaccine technologies and focused on the spike (S) protein include (i) vector-based vaccines from Oxford/AstraZeneca [323] and Johnson & Johnson [324] and (ii) messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech [325] and Moderna [318,326].
One of the main reasons for the ongoing global COVID-19 public health crisis is the emergence and spread of various SARS-CoV-2 variants caused by virus mutations [327]. Similar to some of the current COVID-19 vaccine-based studies [318,323,324,325,326,328], the SARS-CoV-2 articles included in this review primarily targeted the virus’s S protein. The former concentrated on the full-length S protein. Using the full-length S protein to create vaccines is one of the reasons for the current COVID-19 vaccine immune escape, as different viral variants circulate owing to mutations that occur primarily in this protein [329,330]. Meanwhile, the SARS-CoV-2 studies included in this review provided numerous novel results of antigenic (as defined by VaxiJen) and conserved B and T cell epitopes derived from the S protein while other studies designed vaccines based on the S protein and various other structural and non-structural SARS-CoV-2 proteins, such as M and NSP13. These findings provided valuable insights into the development of effective vaccines to combat SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, as evidenced by some articles that conducted successful experimental validations to confirm the predictions [78,127]. These SARS-CoV-2 vaccines with multiple antigenic B and T cell epitopes may be more effective than the currently licensed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines that focus on the entire S protein.
In addition to VaxiJen’s antigen predictions, the in silico studies in this review included several other investigations that have advantages for vaccine design. These vaccines were less likely to cause autoimmunity. Essentially, with RV-based vaccines, sequences in pathogen-derived antigens that are too similar to human protein sequences could selectively be avoided [331]. The vaccine constructs could cover large populations, target immune responses to specific epitopes or antigens, and be able to shape B and T cell specificities in a controlled manner. The construct could still be effective even if there are virus mutations because the vaccine candidate includes several conserved epitopes from different parts of viral protein(s). RV-based vaccines are efficient and cost-effective [262]. However, although these findings in this review are encouraging for developing novel vaccines, more in vitro studies, in vivo studies, and clinical trials are needed to confirm the predictions as subunit vaccine candidates.
This study has several implications for real-world subunit vaccine development. Vaccinologists may use the review findings to conduct experimental validations that confirm the safety and efficacy of the predictions. This review is timely given the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-related insights discovered. The results shown in Supplementary Table S3 may be presented to vaccinologists, relevant policymakers, and funders to acquaint them with the promise of these findings for designing vaccines.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the second review to focus on VaxiJen’s PVC predictions. In 2017, VaxiJen’s authors conducted a 10-year (2007–2017) narrative review that chartered VaxiJen’s applications on bacterial, viral, parasitic, fungal, and tumor predictions [16]. On the other hand, the present scoping review focused on papers published between 2017 and 2021 to fill a gap in the literature based solely on viruses.
This review had the following limitations. First, we limited our search to English-only papers, excluding gray literature, with initial title and abstract screening completed by a single reviewer (ZS) and independent verification of extracted data completed only for a random subset of studies. However, given that we used a broad search term to search the five databases and the large number of studies included in the final review, we believe that the risk of inappropriate exclusions and significant changes to our conclusions was low. Second, although VaxiJen can predict PVCs for viruses, bacteria, fungi, parasites, and tumors [18], this review concentrated solely on viruses. These limitations resulted from the limited resources of the project.

5. Conclusions

This study is the first review of PVCs predicted by the VaxiJen RV tool for various viruses between 2017 and 2021. Most of the studies included in this scoping review focused on SARS-CoV-2 and were published between 2020 and 2021. Only a few papers (8/275; 2.9%) supplemented in silico PVC predictions with experimental validations to confirm the predictions as vaccine candidates, with 2.2% (6/275) articles mentioning recombinant protein expression. Given the ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic and the need for effective vaccines in the face of various viral mutations, vaccinologists may use epitope-based PVCs predictions of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein (and epitopes from S protein, together with other proteins) from the articles in this study to guide vaccine creation. In addition to carrying out experimental validations for these vaccine candidates, if successful, these vaccines may provide broader protection, target immune responses to specific epitopes or antigens of the virus, as well as several other advantages over conventional vaccines. Vaccine researchers should prioritize SARS-CoV-2 findings identified in this review because better vaccines are needed, especially to stay ahead of new variants. Researchers should also perform experimental validation for other virus studies from this review. Future research should chart VaxiJen’s applications in predicting PVCs for bacteria, fungi, parasites, and tumors, as well as viral-based articles, beginning in 2022. Future work should include non-English papers in the study if the necessary resources are available for translation, as well as gray literature.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/vaccines10111785/s1: Table S1: Search strategy per database; Table S2: PRISMA-ScR checklist; Table S3: Included studies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Z.S.; methodology, Z.S.; software, Z.S.; validation, O.M.; formal analysis, Z.S.; investigation, Z.S.; resources, Z.S. and O.M.; data curation, Z.S.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.S.; writing—review and editing, Z.S. and O.M.; visualization, Z.S.; supervision, O.M.; project administration, Z.S.; funding acquisition, Z.S. and O.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa (grant number 130187) and College of Health Sciences (CHS) of the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) in Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, grant number N/A. The APC was funded by Dr. Ozayr Mahomed.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. World Health Organization. The Global Eradication of Smallpox: Final Report of the Global Commission for the Certification of Smallpox Eradication, Geneva, December 1979; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  2. Morens, D.M.; Fauci, A.S. Emerging pandemic diseases: How we got to COVID-19. Cell 2020, 182, 1077–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ehreth, J. The global value of vaccination. Vaccine 2003, 21, 596–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Koff, W.C.; Burton, D.R.; Johnson, P.R.; Walker, B.D.; King, C.R.; Nabel, G.J.; Ahmed, R.; Bhan, M.K.; Plotkin, S.A. Accelerating next-generation vaccine development for global disease prevention. Science 2013, 340, 1232910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Rappuoli, R.; Del Giudice, G. Identification of vaccine targets. In Vaccines: From Concept to Clinic; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1999; pp. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  6. Rappuoli, R. Reverse vaccinology. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2000, 3, 445–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pizza, M.; Scarlato, V.; Masignani, V.; Giuliani, M.M.; Arico, B.; Comanducci, M.; Jennings, G.T.; Baldi, L.; Bartolini, E.; Capecchi, B. Identification of vaccine candidates against serogroup B meningococcus by whole-genome sequencing. Science 2000, 287, 1816–1820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ladhani, S.N.; Andrews, N.; Parikh, S.R.; Campbell, H.; White, J.; Edelstein, M.; Bai, X.; Lucidarme, J.; Borrow, R.; Ramsay, M.E. Vaccination of infants with meningococcal group B vaccine (4CMenB) in England. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Azzari, C.; Moriondo, M.; Nieddu, F.; Guarnieri, V.; Lodi, L.; Canessa, C.; Indolfi, G.; Giovannini, M.; Napoletano, G.; Russo, F. Effectiveness and impact of the 4CMenB vaccine against group B meningococcal disease in two Italian regions using different vaccination schedules: A five-year retrospective observational study (2014–2018). Vaccines 2020, 8, 469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Rappuoli, R.; De Gregorio, E.; Del Giudice, G.; Phogat, S.; Pecetta, S.; Pizza, M.; Hanon, E. Vaccinology in the post−COVID-19 era. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2020368118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hekele, A.; Bertholet, S.; Archer, J.; Gibson, D.G.; Palladino, G.; Brito, L.A.; Otten, G.R.; Brazzoli, M.; Buccato, S.; Bonci, A. Rapidly produced SAM® vaccine against H7N9 influenza is immunogenic in mice. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 2013, 2, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Dalsass, M.; Brozzi, A.; Medini, D.; Rappuoli, R. Comparison of open-source reverse vaccinology programs for bacterial vaccine antigen discovery. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Rahman, M.S.; Rahman, M.K.; Saha, S.; Kaykobad, M.; Rahman, M.S. Antigenic: An improved prediction model of protective antigens. Artif. Intell. Med. 2019, 94, 28–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Magnan, C.N.; Zeller, M.; Kayala, M.A.; Vigil, A.; Randall, A.; Felgner, P.L.; Baldi, P. High-throughput prediction of protein antigenicity using protein microarray data. Bioinformatics 2010, 26, 2936–2943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Ong, E.; Wang, H.; Wong, M.U.; Seetharaman, M.; Valdez, N.; He, Y. Vaxign-ML: Supervised machine learning reverse vaccinology model for improved prediction of bacterial protective antigens. Bioinformatics 2020, 36, 3185–3191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Vivona, S.; Gardy, J.L.; Ramachandran, S.; Brinkman, F.S.; Raghava, G.P.; Flower, D.R.; Filippini, F. Computer-aided biotechnology: From immuno-informatics to reverse vaccinology. Trends Biotechnol. 2008, 26, 190–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Tomar, N.; De, R.K. Immunoinformatics: A brief review. Immunoinformatics 2014, 1184, 23–55. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zaharieva, N.; Dimitrov, I.; Flower, D.; Doytchinova, I. Immunogenicity prediction by VaxiJen: A ten year overview. J. Proteom. Bioinform. 2017, 10, 298–310. [Google Scholar]
  19. Doytchinova, I.A.; Flower, D.R. VaxiJen. Available online: http://www.ddg-pharmfac.net/vaxijen/VaxiJen/VaxiJen.html (accessed on 11 March 2022).
  20. Doytchinova, I.A.; Flower, D.R. VaxiJen: A server for prediction of protective antigens, tumour antigens and subunit vaccines. BMC Bioinform. 2007, 8, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Doytchinova, I.A.; Flower, D.R. Bioinformatic approach for identifying parasite and fungal candidate subunit vaccines. Open Vaccine J. 2008, 1, 22–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Foroutan, M.; Ghaffarifar, F.; Sharifi, Z.; Dalimi, A. Vaccination with a novel multi-epitope ROP8 DNA vaccine against acute Toxoplasma gondii infection induces strong B and T cell responses in mice. Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2020, 69, 101413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Majidiani, H.; Dalimi, A.; Ghaffarifar, F.; Pirestani, M. Multi-epitope vaccine expressed in Leishmania tarentolae confers protective immunity to Toxoplasma gondii in BALB/c mice. Microb. Pathog. 2021, 155, 104925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gupta, S.; Mohan, S.; Somani, V.K.; Aggarwal, S.; Bhatnagar, R. Simultaneous immunization with Omp25 and L7/L12 provides protection against brucellosis in mice. Pathogens 2020, 9, 152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Munn, Z.; Peters, M.D.; Stern, C.; Tufanaru, C.; McArthur, A.; Aromataris, E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2018, 18, 143. [Google Scholar]
  26. Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. BMC Syst. Rev. 2015, 4, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Shamseer, L.; Moher, D.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: Elaboration and explanation. BMJ 2015, 349, g7647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Arksey, H.; O’Malley, L. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2005, 8, 19–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Levac, D.; Colquhoun, H.; O’Brien, K.K. Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implement. Sci. 2010, 5, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Peters, M.D.J.; Godfrey, C.M.; McInerney, P.; Soares, C.B.; Khalil, H.; Parker, D. The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2015: Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews; The Joanna Briggs Institute: Adelaide, Australia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  31. Tricco, A.C.; Lillie, E.; Zarin, W.; O’Brien, K.K.; Colquhoun, H.; Levac, D.; Moher, D.; Peters, M.D.; Horsley, T.; Weeks, L. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Ann. Intern. Med. 2018, 169, 467–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). PubMed. Available online: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ (accessed on 13 November 2021).
  33. Elsevier. Scopus. Available online: https://www.scopus.com/ (accessed on 11 March 2022).
  34. Clarivate Analytics. Web of Science. Available online: https://www.webofknowledge.com/ (accessed on 13 November 2021).
  35. EBSCO Information Services. EBSCOhost. Available online: https://www.ebsco.com/products/ebscohost-research-platform (accessed on 13 November 2021).
  36. Power, B.E. ProQuest. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/ (accessed on 13 November 2021).
  37. Ouzzani, M.; Hammady, H.; Fedorowicz, Z.; Elmagarmid, A. Rayyan. Available online: https://rayyan.qcri.org/ (accessed on 13 November 2021).
  38. Ouzzani, M.; Hammady, H.; Fedorowicz, Z.; Elmagarmid, A. Rayyan—A web and mobile app for systematic reviews. BMC Syst. Rev. 2016, 5, 210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. McKeown, S.; Mir, Z.M. Considerations for conducting systematic reviews: Evaluating the performance of different methods for de-duplicating references. Syst. Rev. 2021, 10, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Abdelmageed, M.I.; Abdelmoneim, A.H.; Mustafa, M.I.; Elfadol, N.M.; Murshed, N.S.; Shantier, S.W.; Makhawi, A.M. Design of a Multiepitope-Based Peptide Vaccine against the e Protein of Human COVID-19: An Immunoinformatics Approach. BioMed Res. Int. 2020, 2020, 2683286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Abraham, P.K.; Srihansa, T.; Krupanidhi, S.; Ayyagari, V.; Venkateswarulu, T. Design of multi-epitope vaccine candidate against SARS-CoV-2: A in-silico study. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 3793–3801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Ahammad, I.; Lira, S.S. Designing a novel mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: An immunoinformatics approach. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 162, 820–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Akhand, M.R.N.; Azim, K.F.; Hoque, S.F.; Moli, M.A.; Joy, B.D.; Akter, H.; Afif, I.K.; Ahmed, N.; Hasan, M. Genome based evolutionary lineage of SARS-CoV-2 towards the development of novel chimeric vaccine. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2020, 85, 104517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Anand, R.; Biswal, S.; Bhatt, R.; Tiwary, B. Computational perspectives revealed prospective vaccine candidates from five structural proteins of novel SARS corona virus 2019 (SARS-CoV-2). PeerJ 2020, 8, e9855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ashik, A.I.; Hasan, M.; Tasnim, A.T.; Chowdhury, M.B.; Hossain, T.; Ahmed, S. An immunoinformatics study on the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 revealing potential epitopes as vaccine candidates. Heliyon 2020, 6, e04865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Banerjee, A.; Santra, D.; Maiti, S. Energetics and IC50 based epitope screening in SARS CoV-2 (COVID 19) spike protein by immunoinformatic analysis implicating for a suitable vaccine development. J. Transl. Med. 2020, 18, 281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Banerjee, S.; Majumder, K.; Gutierrez, G.J.; Gupta, D.; Mittal, B. Immuno-Informatics Approach for Multi-Epitope Vaccine Designing against SARS-CoV-2; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  49. Baruah, V.; Bose, S. Immunoinformatics-aided identification of T cell and B cell epitopes in the surface glycoprotein of 2019-nCoV. J. Med. Virol. 2020, 92, 495–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Behbahani, M. In Silico Design of Novel Multi-Epitope Recombinant Vaccine Based on Coronavirus Surface Glycoprotein; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  51. Behmard, E.; Soleymani, B.; Najafi, A.; Barzegari, E. Immunoinformatic Design of a COVID-19 Subunit Vaccine Using Entire Structural Immunogenic Epitopes of SARS-CoV-2; Research Square: Durham, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  52. Bhattacharya, M.; Sharma, A.R.; Mallick, B.; Sharma, G.; Lee, S.-S.; Chakraborty, C. Immunoinformatics approach to understand molecular interaction between multi-epitopic regions of SARS-CoV-2 spike-protein with TLR4/MD-2 complex. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2020, 85, 104587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Bhattacharya, M.; Sharma, A.R.; Patra, P.; Ghosh, P.; Sharma, G.; Patra, B.C.; Lee, S.-S.; Chakraborty, C. Development of epitope-based peptide vaccine against novel coronavirus 2019 (SARS-COV-2): Immunoinformatics approach. J. Med. Virol. 2020, 92, 618–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Can, H.; Köseoğlu, A.E.; Erkunt, A.S.; Mervenur, G.; Döşkaya, M.; Karakavuk, M.; Yüksel, G.A.; Ün, C. In silico discovery of antigenic proteins and epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 for the development of a vaccine or a diagnostic approach for COVID-19. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 22387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Chen, H.-Z.; Tang, L.-L.; Yu, X.-L.; Zhou, J.; Chang, Y.-F.; Wu, X. Bioinformatics analysis of epitope-based vaccine design against the novel SARS-CoV-2. Infect. Dis. Poverty 2020, 9, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Chukwudozie, O.S.; Chukwuanukwu, R.C.; Iroanya, O.O.; Eze, D.M.; Duru, V.C.; Dele-Alimi, T.O.; Kehinde, B.D.; Bankole, T.T.; Obi, P.C.; Okinedo, E.U.; et al. Attenuated Subcomponent Vaccine Design Targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Phosphoprotein RNA Binding Domain: In Silico Analysis. J. Immunol. Res. 2020, 2020, 2837670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Corral-Lugo, A.; López-Siles, M.; López, D.; McConnell, M.J.; Martin-Galiano, A.J. Identification and Analysis of Unstructured, Linear B-Cell Epitopes in SARS-CoV-2 Virion Proteins for Vaccine Development. Vaccines 2020, 8, 397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Crooke, S.N.; Ovsyannikova, I.G.; Kennedy, R.B.; Poland, G.A. Immunoinformatic identification of B cell and T cell epitopes in the SARS-CoV-2 proteome. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 14179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Dai, Y.; Chen, H.; Zhuang, S.; Feng, X.; Fang, Y.; Tang, H.; Dai, R.; Tang, L.; Liu, J.; Ma, T.; et al. Immunodominant regions prediction of nucleocapsid protein for SARS-CoV-2 early diagnosis: A bioinformatics and immunoinformatics study. Pathog. Glob. Health 2020, 114, 463–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Dong, R.; Chu, Z.; Yu, F.; Zha, Y. Contriving Multi-Epitope Subunit of Vaccine for COVID-19: Immunoinformatics Approaches. Front. Immunol. 2020, 11, 1784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Gupta, A.K.; Khan, M.S.; Choudhury, S.; Mukhopadhyay, A.; Rastogi, A.; Thakur, A.; Kumari, P.; Kaur, M.; Saini, C.; Sapehia, V.; et al. CoronaVR: A Computational Resource and Analysis of Epitopes and Therapeutics for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 1858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Dar, H.A.; Waheed, Y.; Najmi, M.H.; Ismail, S.; Hetta, H.F.; Ali, A.; Khalid, M.; Diotti, R.A. Multiepitope Subunit Vaccine Design against COVID-19 Based on the Spike Protein of SARS-CoV-2: An In Silico Analysis. J. Immunol. Res. 2020, 2020, 8893483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Hasan, M.; Shihab, M.M.R.; Islam, M.A. Prediction of b-cell and t-cell epitopes in the spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 in bangladesh: An in-silico approach. J. Adv. Biotechnol. Exp. Ther. 2020, 3, 49–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hasanain, A.O.; Ahjel, S.W.; Humadi, S.S. Towards the Design of Multiepitope-Based Peptide Vaccine Candidate against SARS-CoV-2; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  65. He, J.; Huang, F.; Zhang, J.; Chen, Q.; Zheng, Z.; Zhou, Q.; Chen, D.; Jiao, L.; Chen, J. Vaccine design based on 16 epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. J. Med. Virol. 2020, 93, 2115–2131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Herrera, L.R.M. Immuno informatics approach in designing a novel vaccine using epitopes from all the structural proteins of SARS-CoV-2. Biomed. Pharmacol. J. 2020, 13, 1845–1862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ismail, S.; Ahmad, S.; Azam, S.S. Immunoinformatics characterization of SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein for prioritization of epitope based multivalent peptide vaccine. J. Mol. Liq. 2020, 314, 113612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Jain, N.; Shankar, U.; Majee, P.; Kumar, A. Scrutinizing the SARS-CoV-2 Protein Information for the Designing an Effective Vaccine Encompassing Both the T-Cell and B-Cell Epitopes; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  69. Jakhar, R.; Kaushik, S.; Gakhar, S.K. 3CL hydrolase-based multiepitope peptide vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 using immunoinformatics. J. Med. Virol. 2020, 92, 2114–2123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Jakhar, R.; Gakhar, S.K.; Detolla, L. An Immunoinformatics Study to Predict Epitopes in the Envelope Protein of SARS-CoV-2. Can. J. Infect. Dis. Med. Microbiol. 2020, 2020, 7079356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Joshi, A.; Joshi, B.C.; Mannan, M.A.-U.; Kaushik, V. Epitope based vaccine prediction for SARS-COV-2 by deploying immuno-informatics approach. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2020, 19, 100338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Kar, T.; Narsaria, U.; Basak, S.; Debashrito, D.; Castiglione, F.; Mueller, D.M.; Srivastava, A.P. A candidate multi-epitope vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 10895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Kumar, A.; Kumar, P.; Saumya, K.U.; Kapuganti, S.K.; Bhardwaj, T.; Giri, R. Exploring the SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins for multi-epitope vaccine development: An in-silico approach. Expert Rev. Vaccines 2020, 19, 887–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Kumar, N.; Sood, D.; Chandra, R. Design and optimization of a subunit vaccine targeting COVID-19 molecular shreds using an immunoinformatics framework. RSC Adv. 2020, 10, 35856–35872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Lin, L.; Ting, S.; Yufei, H.; Wendong, L.; Yubo, F.; Jing, Z. Epitope-based peptide vaccines predicted against novel coronavirus disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. Virus Res. 2020, 288, 198082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Mahapatra, S.R.; Sahoo, S.; Dehury, B.; Raina, V.; Patro, S.; Misra, N.; Suar, M. Designing an efficient multi-epitope vaccine displaying interactions with diverse HLA molecules for an efficient humoral and cellular immune response to prevent COVID-19 infection. Expert Rev. Vaccines 2020, 19, 871–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Marchan, J. Conserved HLA binding peptides from five non-structural proteins of SARS-CoV-2—An in silico glance. Hum. Immunol. 2020, 81, 588–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Martínez, L.; Malaina, I.; Salcines, D.; Terán, H.; Alegre, S.; Fuente, I.D.L.; Lopez, E.G.; Vinyals, G.O.; Álvarez, C. First Computational Design of COVID-19 Coronavirus Vaccine Using Lambda Superstrings; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  79. Martin, W.R.; Cheng, F. A rational design of a multi-epitope vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 which accounts for the glycan shield of the spike glycoprotein. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 40, 7099–7113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Mitra, D.; Pandey, J.; Jain, A.; Swaroop, S. In silico design of multi-epitope-based peptide vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 using its spike protein. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2020, 40, 5189–5202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Tahir Ul Qamar, M.; Shahid, F.; Aslam, S.; Ashfaq, U.A.; Aslam, S.; Fatima, I.; Fareed, M.M.; Zohaib, A.; Chen, L.L. Reverse vaccinology assisted designing of multiepitope-based subunit vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. Infect. Dis. Poverty 2020, 9, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Tahir Ul Qamar, M.; Rehman, A.; Ashfaq, U.A.; Qasim, M.; Zhu, X.; Fatima, I.; Shahid, F.; Chen, L.-L. Designing of a Next Generation Multiepitope Based Vaccine (MEV) against SARS-COV-2: Immunoinformatics and In Silico Approaches; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  83. Mukherjee, S.; Tworowski, D.; Detroja, R.; Mukherjee, S.B.; Frenkel-Morgenstern, M. Immunoinformatics and structural analysis for identification of immunodominant epitopes in SARS-CoV-2 as potential vaccine targets. Vaccines 2020, 8, 290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Naz, A.; Shahid, F.; Butt, T.T.; Awan, F.M.; Ali, A.; Malik, A. Designing Multi-Epitope Vaccines to Combat Emerging Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) by Employing Immuno-Informatics Approach. Front. Immunol. 2020, 11, 1663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Oladipo, E.K.; Ajayi, A.F.; Ariyo, O.E.; Onile, S.O.; Jimah, E.M.; Ezediuno, L.O.; Adebayo, O.I.; Adebayo, E.T.; Odeyemi, A.N.; Oyeleke, M.O.; et al. Exploration of surface glycoprotein to design multi-epitope vaccine for the prevention of Covid-19. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2020, 21, 100438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Panda, P.K.; Arul, M.N.; Patel, P.; Verma, S.K.; Luo, W.; Rubahn, H.-G.; Mishra, Y.K.; Suar, M.; Ahuja, R. Structure-based drug designing and immunoinformatics approach for SARS-CoV-2. Sci. Adv. 2020, 6, eabb8097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Rahman, M.S.; Hoque, M.N.; Islam, M.R.; Akter, S.; Rubayet-Ul-Alam, A.S.M.; Siddique, M.A.; Saha, O.; Rahaman, M.M.; Sultana, M.; Hossain, M.A. Epitope-Based Chimeric Peptide Vaccine Design against S, M and E Proteins of SARS-CoV-2 Etiologic Agent of Global Pandemic COVID-19: An In Silico Approach; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  88. Rahman, N.; Ali, F.; Basharat, Z.; Shehroz, M.; Khan, M.K.; Jeandet, P.; Nepovimova, E.; Kuca, K.; Khan, H. Vaccine Design from the Ensemble of Surface Glycoprotein Epitopes of SARS-CoV-2: An Immunoinformatics Approach. Vaccines 2020, 8, 423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Rakib, A.; Sami, S.A.; Mimi, N.J.; Chowdhury, M.M.; Eva, T.A.; Nainu, F.; Paul, A.; Shahriar, A.; Tareq, A.M.; Emon, N.U.; et al. Immunoinformatics-guided design of an epitope-based vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 spike glycoprotein. Comput. Biol. Med. 2020, 124, 103967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Rakib, A.; Sami, S.A.; Islam, M.A.; Ahmed, S.; Faiz, F.B.; Khanam, B.H.; Marma, K.K.S.; Rahman, M.; Uddin, M.M.N.; Nainu, F.; et al. Epitope-Based Immunoinformatics Approach on Nucleocapsid Protein of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2. Molecules 2020, 25, 5088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Rehman, H.M.; Mirza, M.U.; Ahmad, M.A.; Saleem, M.; Froeyen, M.; Ahmad, S.; Gul, R.; Alghamdi, H.A.; Aslam, M.S.; Sajjad, M.; et al. A putative prophylactic solution for COVID-19: Development of novel multiepitope vaccine candidate against sars-cov-2 by comprehensive immunoinformatic and molecular modelling approach. Biology 2020, 9, 296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Samad, A.; Ahammad, F.; Nain, Z.; Alam, R.; Imon, R.R.; Hasan, M.; Rahman, M.S. Designing a multi-epitope vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: An immunoinformatics approach. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2020, 40, 14–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Sanami, S.; Zandi, M.; Pourhossein, B.; Mobini, G.-R.; Safaei, M.; Abed, A.; Arvejeh, P.M.; Chermahini, F.A.; Alizadeh, M. Design of a multi-epitope vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 using immunoinformatics approach. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 164, 871–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Sarkar, B.; Ullah, M.A.; Araf, Y.; Rahman, M.S. Engineering a novel subunit vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 by exploring immunoinformatics approach. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2020, 21, 100478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Sarkar, B.; Ullah, M.A.; Johora, F.T.; Taniya, M.A.; Araf, Y. The Essential Facts of Wuhan Novel Coronavirus Outbreak in China and Epitope-Based Vaccine Designing against COVID-19; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  96. Singh, A.; Mukesh, T.; Sharma, L.K.; Kailash, C. Designing a multi-epitope peptide based vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 16219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Srivastava, S.; Verma, S.; Kamthania, M.; Agarwal, D.; Saxena, A.K.; Kolbe, M.; Singh, S.; Kotnis, A.; Rathi, B.; Nayar, S.A.; et al. Computationally validated SARS-CoV-2 CTL and HTL Multi-Patch vaccines, designed by reverse epitomics approach, show potential to cover large ethnically distributed human population worldwide. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2020, 40, 2369–2388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Zaheer, T.; Waseem, M.; Waqar, W.; Dar, H.A.; Shehroz, M.; Naz, K.; Ishaq, Z.; Tahir, A.; Ullah, N.; Bakhtiar, S.M.; et al. Anti-COVID-19 multi-epitope vaccine designs employing global viral genome sequences. PeerJ 2020, 8, e9541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Wang, D.; Mai, J.; Zhou, W.; Yu, W.; Zhan, Y.; Wang, N.; Epstein, N.D.; Yang, Y. Immunoinformatic analysis of T-and B-cell epitopes for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine design. Vaccines 2020, 8, 355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Yadav, P.; Potdar, V.; Choudhary, M.; Nyayanit, D.; Agrawal, M.; Jadhav, S.; Majumdar, T.; Shete-Aich, A.; Basu, A.; Abraham, P.; et al. Full-genome sequences of the first two SARS-CoV-2 viruses from India. Indian J. Med. Res. 2020, 151, 200–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Yazdani, Z.; Rafiei, A.; Yazdani, M.; Valadan, R. Design an Efficient Multi-Epitope Peptide Vaccine Candidate Against SARS-CoV-2: An in silico Analysis. Infect. Drug Resist. 2020, 13, 3007–3022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Adam, K.M. Immunoinformatics approach for multi-epitope vaccine design against structural proteins and ORF1a polyprotein of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Trop. Dis. Travel Med. Vaccines 2021, 7, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Ahmad, S.; Waheed, Y.; Ismail, S.; Abbasi, S.W.; Najmi, M.H. A computational study to disclose potential drugs and vaccine ensemble for COVID-19 conundrum. J. Mol. Liq. 2021, 324, 114734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Akbay, B.; Abidi, S.H.; Ibrahim, M.A.A.; Mukhatayev, Z.; Ali, S. Multi-Subunit SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Design Using Evolutionarily Conserved T- and B- Cell Epitopes. Vaccines 2021, 9, 702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Akhtar, N.; Joshi, A.; Singh, B.; Kaushik, V. Immuno-informatics quest against COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2: Determin-ing putative T-cell epitopes for vaccine prediction. Infect. Disord. Drug Targets 2021, 21, 541–552. [Google Scholar]
  106. Al Zamane, S.; Nobel, F.A.; Jebin, R.A.; Amin, M.B.; Somadder, P.D.; Antora, N.J.; Hossain, M.I.; Islam, M.J.; Ahmed, K.; Moni, M.A. Development of an in silico multi-epitope vaccine against SARS-COV-2 by précised immune-informatics approaches. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2021, 27, 100781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Almofti, Y.A.; Abd-elrahman, K.A.; Eltilib, E.E.M. Vaccinomic approach for novel multi epitopes vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). BMC Immunol. 2021, 22, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Bashir, Z.; Ahmad, S.U.; Kiani, B.H.; Jan, Z.; Khan, N.; Khan, U.; Haq, I.; Zahir, F.; Qadus, A.; Mahmood, T. Immunoinformatics approaches to explore B and T cell epitope-based vaccine designing for SARS-CoV-2 Virus. Pak. J. Pharm. Sci. 2021, 34, 345–352. [Google Scholar]
  109. Bhatnager, R.; Bhasin, M.; Arora, J.; Dang, A.S. Epitope based peptide vaccine against SARS-COV2: An immune-informatics approach. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 5690–5705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Bhattacharya, S.; Banerjee, A.; Ray, S. Development of new vaccine target against SARS-CoV2 using envelope (E) protein: An evolutionary, molecular modeling and docking based study. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 172, 74–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Chauhan, V.; Rungta, T.; Rawat, M.; Goyal, K.; Gupta, Y.; Singh, M.P. Excavating SARS-coronavirus 2 genome for epitope-based subunit vaccine synthesis using immunoinformatics approach. J. Cell. Physiol. 2020, 236, 1131–1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Chen, Z.; Ruan, P.; Wang, L.; Nie, X.; Ma, X.; Tan, Y. T and B cell Epitope analysis of SARS-CoV-2 S protein based on immunoinformatics and experimental research. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2021, 25, 1274–1289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Chukwudozie, O.S.; Gray, C.M.; Fagbayi, T.A.; Chukwuanukwu, R.C.; Oyebanji, V.O.; Bankole, T.T.; Adewole, R.A.; Daniel, E.M. Immuno-informatics design of a multimeric epitope peptide based vaccine targeting SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0248061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Cuspoca, A.F.; Díaz, L.L.; Acosta, A.F.; Peñaloza, M.K.; Méndez, Y.R.; Clavijo, D.C.; Reyes, J.Y. An immunoinformatics approach for sars-cov-2 in latam populations and multi-epitope vaccine candidate directed towards the world’s population. Vaccines 2021, 9, 581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Dariushnejad, H.; Ghorbanzadeh, V.; Akbari, S.; Hashemzadeh, P. Designing a Multi-epitope Peptide Vaccine Against COVID-19 Variants Utilizing In-silico Tools. Iran. J. Med. Microbiol. 2021, 15, 592–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Enayatkhani, M.; Hasaniazad, M.; Faezi, S.; Gouklani, H.; Davoodian, P.; Ahmadi, N.; Einakian, M.A.; Karmostaji, A.; Ahmadi, K. Reverse vaccinology approach to design a novel multi-epitope vaccine candidate against COVID-19: An in silico study. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 2857–2872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Ezaj, M.M.A.; Junaid, M.; Akter, Y.; Nahrin, A.; Siddika, A.; Afrose, S.S.; Nayeem, S.M.A.; Haque, M.S.; Moni, M.A.; Hosen, S.M.Z. Whole proteome screening and identification of potential epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 for vaccine design-an immunoinformatic, molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulation accelerated robust strategy. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 40, 6477–6502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Fatoba, A.J.; Maharaj, L.; Adeleke, V.T.; Okpeku, M.; Adeniyi, A.A.; Adeleke, M.A. Immunoinformatics prediction of overlapping CD8+ T-cell, IFN-γ and IL-4 inducer CD4+ T-cell and linear B-cell epitopes based vaccines against COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2). Vaccine 2021, 39, 1111–1121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Fereshteh, S.; Sepehr, A.; Rahimirad, N.; Sanikhani, R.; Badmasti, F. In silico evaluation of surface-exposed proteins of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to propose a multi-epitope vaccine candidate. Health Biotechnol. Biopharma 2021, 4, 51–72. [Google Scholar]
  120. Ferreira, C.S.; Martins, Y.C.; Souza, R.C.; Vasconcelos, A.T.R. EpiCurator: An immunoinformatic workflow to predict and prioritize SARS-CoV-2 epitopes. PeerJ 2021, 9, e12548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Ghosh, N.; Sharma, N.; Saha, I. Immunogenicity and antigenicity based T-cell and B-cell epitopes identification from conserved regions of 10664 SARS-CoV-2 genomes. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2021, 92, 104823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Ghosh, N.; Sharma, N.; Saha, I.; Saha, S. Genome-wide analysis of Indian SARS-CoV-2 genomes to identify T-cell and B-cell epitopes from conserved regions based on immunogenicity and antigenicity. Int. Immunopharmacol. 2021, 91, 107276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Guo, J.Y.; Liu, I.J.; Lin, H.T.; Wang, M.J.; Chang, Y.L.; Lin, S.C.; Liao, M.Y.; Hsu, W.C.; Lin, Y.L.; Liao, J.C.; et al. Identification of COVID-19 B-cell epitopes with phage-displayed peptide library. J. Biomed. Sci. 2021, 28, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Hafidzhah, M.A.; Wijaya, R.M.; Probojati, R.T.; Kharisma, V.D.; Ansori, A.N.M.; Parikesit, A.A. Potential vaccine targets for COVID-19 and phylogenetic analysis based on the nucleocapsid phosphoprotein of Indonesian SARS-CoV-2 isolates. Indones. J. Pharm. 2021, 32, 328–337. [Google Scholar]
  125. Hisham, Y.; Ashhab, Y.; Hwang, S.-H.; Kim, D.-E. Identification of highly conserved sars-cov-2 antigenic epitopes with wide coverage using reverse vaccinology approach. Viruses 2021, 13, 787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Jain, R.; Jain, A.; Verma, S. Prediction of Epitope based Peptides for Vaccine Development from Complete Proteome of Novel Corona Virus (SARS-COV-2) Using Immunoinformatics. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 2021, 27, 1729–1740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Jawalagatti, V.; Kirthika, P.; Park, J.-Y.; Hewawaduge, C.; Lee, J.H. Highly feasible immunoprotective multicistronic SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate blending novel eukaryotic expression and Salmonella bactofection. J. Adv. Res. 2021, 36, 211–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Jena, M.; Kumar, V.; Kancharla, S.; Kolli, P. Reverse vaccinology approach towards the in-silico multiepitope vaccine development against SARS-CoV-2. F1000Research 2021, 10, 44. [Google Scholar]
  129. Khan, A.; Khan, S.; Saleem, S.; Nizam-Uddin, N.; Mohammad, A.; Khan, T.; Ahmad, S.; Arshad, M.; Ali, S.S.; Suleman, M.; et al. Immunogenomics guided design of immunomodulatory multi-epitope subunit vaccine against the SARS-CoV-2 new variants, and its validation through in silico cloning and immune simulation. Comput. Biol. Med. 2021, 133, 104420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Kumar, N.; Nikita, A.; Anchala, K.; Damini, S.; Sonam, G.; Prajapati, V.K.; Chandra, R.; Abhinav, G. Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte elicited vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 employing immunoinformatics framework. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 7653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Montes-Grajales, D.; Olivero-Verbe, J. Bioinformatics prediction of sars-cov-2 epitopes as vaccine candidates for the colombian population. Vaccines 2021, 9, 797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Moura, R.R.D.; Agrelli, A.; Santos-Silva, C.A.; Silva, N.; Assunção, B.R.; Brandão, L.; Benko-Iseppon, A.M.; Crovella, S. Immunoinformatic approach to assess SARS-CoV-2 protein S epitopes recognised by the most frequent MHC-I alleles in the Brazilian population. J. Clin. Pathol. 2021, 74, 528–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Waqas, M.; Haider, A.; Rehman, A.; Qasim, M.; Umar, A.; Sufyan, M.; Hafiza, N.A.; Mir, A.; Razzaq, R.; Rasool, D.; et al. Immunoinformatics and Molecular Docking Studies Predicted Potential Multiepitope-Based Peptide Vaccine and Novel Compounds against Novel SARS-CoV-2 through Virtual Screening. BioMed Res. Int. 2021, 2021, 1596834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Naveed, M.; Tehreem, S.; Arshad, S.; Bukhari, S.A.; Shabbir, M.A.; Essa, R.; Ali, N.; Zaib, S.; Khan, A.; Al-Harrasi, A.; et al. Design of a novel multiple epitope-based vaccine: An immunoinformatics approach to combat SARS-CoV-2 strains. J. Infect. Public Health 2021, 14, 938–946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Oso, B.J.; Olaoye, I.F.; Ogidi, C.O. In silico Design of a Vaccine Candidate for SAR S-CoV-2 Based on Multiple T-cell and B-cell Epitopes. Arch. Razi Inst. 2021, 76, 1141–1151. [Google Scholar]
  136. Paul, D.; Pyne, N.; Paul, S. Mutation profile of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and identification of potential multiple epitopes within spike protein for vaccine development against SARS-CoV-2. VirusDisease 2021, 32, 703–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Pourseif, M.M.; Parvizpour, S.; Jafari, B.; Dehghani, J.; Naghili, B.; Omidi, Y. A domain-based vaccine construct against SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19 pandemic: Development of self-amplifying mRNA and peptide vaccines. BioImpacts BI 2021, 11, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Rantam, F.A.; Kharisma, V.D.; Sumartono, C.; Nugraha, J.; Wijaya, A.Y.; Susilowati, H.; Kuncorojakti, S.; Nugraha, A.P. Molecular docking and dynamic simulation of conserved B cell epitope of SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein Indonesian isolates: An immunoinformatic approach. F1000Research 2021, 10, 813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Ravindran, R.; Gunasekaran, S.; Easwaran, M.; Lulu, S.; Unni, P.A.; Vino, S.; Doble, M. Immunoinformatic Approach to Design a Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 Membrane Glycoprotein; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  140. Rehman, Z.; Fahim, A.; Bhatti, M.F. Scouting the receptor-binding domain of SARS coronavirus 2: A comprehensive immunoinformatics inquisition. Future Virol. 2021, 16, 117–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Rencilin, C.F.; Rosy, J.C.; Mohan, M.; Coico, R.; Sundar, K. Identification of SARS-CoV-2 CTL epitopes for development of a multivalent subunit vaccine for COVID-19. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2021, 89, 104712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Rouka, E.; Gourgoulianis, K.I.; Zarogiannis, S.G. In silico investigation of the viroporin E as a vaccine target against SARS-CoV-2. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol. 2021, 320, L1057–L1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Roy, A.S.; Tonmoy, M.I.Q.; Fariha, A.; Hami, I.; Afif, I.K.; Munim, M.A.; Alam, M.R.; Hossain, M.S. Multi-epitope based peptide vaccine design using three structural proteins (S, e, and m) of SARS-CoV-2: An in silico approach. J. Appl. Biotechnol. Rep. 2021, 8, 146–154. [Google Scholar]
  144. Saba, A.A.; Adiba, M.; Saha, P.; Hosen, M.I.; Chakraborty, S.; Nabi, A.H.M.N. An in-depth in silico and immunoinformatics approach for designing a potential multi-epitope construct for the effective development of vaccine to combat against SARS-CoV-2 encompassing variants of concern and interest. Comput. Biol. Med. 2021, 136, 104703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Sadat, S.M.; Aghadadeghi, M.R.; Yousefi, M.; Khodaei, A.; Larijani, M.S.; Bahramali, G. Bioinformatics analysis of SARS-CoV-2 to approach an effective vaccine candidate against COVID-19. Mol. Biotechnol. 2021, 63, 389–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Saha, R.; Ghosh, P.; Burra, V.L.S.P. Designing a next generation multi-epitope based peptide vaccine candidate against SARS-CoV-2 using computational approaches. 3 Biotech 2021, 11, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Sanami, S.; Alizadeh, M.; Nosrati, M.; Dehkordi, K.A.; Azadegan-Dehkordi, F.; Tahmasebian, S.; Nosrati, H.; Arjmand, M.-H.; Ghasemi-Dehnoo, M.; Rafiei, A.; et al. Exploring SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins to design a multi-epitope vaccine using immunoinformatics approach: An in silico study. Comput. Biol. Med. 2021, 133, 104390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Moghri, S.A.H.M.H.; Ranjbar, M.; Hassannia, H.; Khakdan, F. Designing a Novel Multi-Epitope Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2; Implication for Viral Binds and Fusion Inhibition through Inducing Neutralizing Antibodies; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  149. Singh, J.; Malik, D.; Raina, A. Immuno-informatics approach for B-cell and T-cell epitope based peptide vaccine design against novel COVID-19 virus. Vaccine 2021, 39, 1087–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Singh, P.; Tripathi, M.K.; Shrivastava, R. In silico identification of linear B-cell epitope in Coronavirus 2019 (SARS-CoV-2) surface glycoprotein: A prospective towards peptide vaccine. Minerva Biotechnol. Biomol. Res. 2021, 33, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Solanki, V.; Tiwari, M.; Tiwari, V. Immunoinformatic approach to design a multiepitope vaccine targeting non-mutational hotspot regions of structural and non-structural proteins of the SARS-CoV-2. PeerJ 2021, 9, e11126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Srivastava, V.K.; Kaushik, S.; Bhargava, G.; Jain, A.; Saxena, J.; Jyoti, A. A Bioinformatics Approach for the Prediction of Immunogenic Properties and Structure of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.1 Variant Spike Protein. BioMed Res. Int. 2021, 2021, 7251119. [Google Scholar]
  153. Susithra Priyadarshni, M.; Isaac Kirubakaran, S.; Harish, M.C. In silico approach to design a multi-epitopic vaccine candidate targeting the non-mutational immunogenic regions in envelope protein and surface glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Uttamrao, P.P.; Sathyaseelan, C.; Patro, L.P.P.; Rathinavelan, T. Revelation of Potent Epitopes Present in Unannotated ORF Antigens of SARS-CoV-2 for Epitope-Based Polyvalent Vaccine Design Using Immunoinformatics Approach. Front. Immunol. 2021, 12, 692937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Vakili, B.; Bagheri, A.; Negahdaripour, M. Deep survey for designing a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 and its new mutations. Biologia 2021, 76, 3465–3476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  156. Vivekanandam, R.; Rajagopalan, K.; Jeevanandam, M.; Ganesan, H.; Jagannathan, V.; Selvan Christyraj, J.D.; Kalimuthu, K.; Selvan Christyraj, J.R.S.; Mohan, M. Designing of cytotoxic T lymphocyte-based multi-epitope vaccine against SARS-CoV2: A reverse vaccinology approach. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Yahaya, A.A.; Sanusi, S.; Malo, F.U. Computer-assisted multi-epitopes T-cell subunit Covid-19 vaccine design. Biomed. Biotechnol. Res. J. 2021, 5, 27–34. [Google Scholar]
  158. Yang, Z.; Bogdan, P.; Nazarian, S. An in silico deep learning approach to multi-epitope vaccine design: A SARS-CoV-2 case study. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 3238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Yashvardhini, N.; Kumar, A.; Jha, D.K. Immunoinformatics Identification of B-and T-Cell Epitopes in the RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase of SARS-CoV-2. Can. J. Infect. Dis. Med. Microbiol. 2021, 2021, 6627141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Devi, Y.D.; Goswami, H.B.; Konwar, S.; Doley, C.; Dolley, A.; Devi, A.; Chongtham, C.; Dowerah, D.; Biswa, V.; Jamir, L.; et al. Immunoinformatics mapping of potential epitopes in SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0258645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Zhuang, S.; Tang, L.; Dai, Y.; Feng, X.; Fang, Y.; Tang, H.; Jiang, P.; Wu, X.; Fang, H.; Chen, H. Bioinformatic prediction of immunodominant regions in spike protein for early diagnosis of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). PeerJ 2021, 9, e11232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Palanisamy, N.; Lennerstrand, J. Computational Prediction of Usutu Virus E Protein B Cell and T Cell Epitopes for Potential Vaccine Development. Scand. J. Immunol. 2017, 85, 350–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  163. Satyam, R.; Janahi, E.M.; Bhardwaj, T.; Somvanshi, P.; Haque, S.; Najm, M.Z. In silico identification of immunodominant B-cell and T-cell epitopes of non-structural proteins of Usutu Virus. Microb. Pathog. 2018, 125, 129–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Kaliamurthi, S.; Selvaraj, G.; Kaushik, A.C.; Ke-Ren, G.; Dong-Qing, W. Designing of CD8+ and CD8+-overlapped CD4+ epitope vaccine by targeting late and early proteins of human papillomavirus. Biologics 2018, 12, 107–125. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  165. Kaliamurthi, S.; Selvaraj, G.; Chinnasamy, S.; Wang, Q.; Nangraj, A.S.; Cho, W.C.S.; Gu, K.; Wei, D.-Q. Exploring the papillomaviral proteome to identify potential candidates for a chimeric vaccine against cervix papilloma using immunomics and computational structural vaccinology. Viruses 2019, 11, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  166. Namvar, A.; Bolhassani, A.; Javadi, G.; Noormohammadi, Z. In silico/In vivo analysis of high-risk papillomavirus L1 and L2 conserved sequences for development of cross-subtype prophylactic vaccine. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 15225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  167. Dehghani, B.; Hasanshahi, Z.; Hashempour, T.; Motamedifar, M. The possible regions to design Human Papilloma Viruses vaccine in Iranian L1 protein. Biologia 2020, 75, 749–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Abbasifarid, E.; Bolhassani, A.; Irani, S.; Sotoodehnejadnematalahi, F. Synergistic effects of exosomal crocin or curcumin compounds and HPV L1-E7 polypeptide vaccine construct on tumor eradication in C57BL/6 mouse model. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0258599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Ahmad, N.; Ali, S.S.; Ahmad, S.; Hussain, Z.; Qasim, M.; Suleman, M.; Ali, S.; Nizam-Uddin, N.; Khan, A.; Wei, D.-Q. Computational Modeling of Immune Response Triggering Immunogenic Peptide Vaccine against the Human Papillomaviruses to Induce Immunity against Cervical Cancer. Viral Immunol. 2021, 34, 457–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Bagheri, A.; Nezafat, N.; Eslami, M.; Ghasemi, Y.; Negahdaripour, M. Designing a therapeutic and prophylactic candidate vaccine against human papillomavirus through vaccinomics approaches. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2021, 95, 105084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Samira, S.; Fatemeh, A.-D.; Mahmoud, R.-K.; Majid, S.; Maryam, G.-D.; Mehran, M.; Morteza, A.; Nader, B. Design of a multi-epitope vaccine against cervical cancer using immunoinformatics approaches. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 12397. [Google Scholar]
  172. Sisakht, M.; Mahmoodzadeh, A.; Zahedi, M.; Rostamzadeh, D.; Hasan-Abad, A.M.; Atapour, A. In silico approach for designing a novel recombinant fusion protein as a candidate vaccine against hpv. Curr. Proteom. 2021, 18, 549–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Hasan, M.; Ghosh, P.P.; Azim, K.F.; Mukta, S.; Abir, R.A.; Nahar, J.; Hasan Khan, M.M. Reverse vaccinology approach to design a novel multi-epitope subunit vaccine against avian influenza A (H7N9) virus. Microb. Pathog. 2019, 130, 19–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Hekmat, S.; Siadat, S.D.; Aghasadeghi, M.R.; Sadat, S.M.; Bahramali, G.; Aslani, M.M.; Mahdavi, M.; Shahbazi, S. From in-silico immunogenicity verification to in vitro expression of recombinant Core-NS3 fusion protein of HCV. Bratisl. Med. J. 2017, 118, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Ikram, A.; Zaheer, T.; Awan, F.M.; Obaid, A.; Naz, A.; Hanif, R.; Paracha, R.Z.; Ali, A.; Naveed, A.K.; Janjua, H.A. Exploring NS3/4A, NS5A and NS5B proteins to design conserved subunit multi-epitope vaccine against HCV utilizing immunoinformatics approaches. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 16107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  176. Chauhan, V.; Singh, M.P.; Ratho, R.K. Identification of T cell and B cell epitopes against Indian HCV-genotype-3a for vaccine development- An in silico analysis. Biologicals 2018, 53, 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  177. Atapour, A.; Mokarram, P.; MostafaviPour, Z.; Hosseini, S.Y.; Ghasemi, Y.; Mohammadi, S.; Nezafat, N. Designing a fusion protein vaccine against HCV: An in silico approach. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 2019, 25, 861–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Dehghan, Z.; Lari, A.; Yarian, F.; Ahangarzadeh, S.; Sharifnia, Z.; Shahzamani, K.; Shahidi, S. Development of polyepitopic immunogenic contrast against hepatitis C virus 1a-6a genotype by in silico approach. Biomed. Biotechnol. Res. J. 2020, 4, 355–364. [Google Scholar]
  179. Khalid, H.; Ashfaq, U.A. Exploring HCV genome to construct multi-epitope based subunit vaccine to battle HCV infection: Immunoinformatics based approach. J. Biomed. Inform. 2020, 108, 103498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Khan, A.; Nawaz, M.; Ullah, S.; Rehman, I.U.; Khan, A.; Saleem, S.; Zaman, N.; Shinwari, Z.K.; Ali, M.; Wei, D.-Q. Core amino acid substitutions in HCV-3a isolates from Pakistan and opportunities for multi-epitopic vaccines. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2020, 40, 3753–3768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  181. Ahmad, S.; Shahid, F.; Tahir Ul Qamar, M.; Ur Rehman, H.; Abbasi, S.W.; Sajjad, W.; Ismail, S.; Alrumaihi, F.; Allemailem, K.S.; Almatroudi, A.; et al. Immuno-informatics analysis of pakistan-based hcv subtype-3a for chimeric polypeptide vaccine design. Vaccines 2021, 9, 293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Pyasi, S.; Sharma, V.; Dipti, K.; Jonniya, N.A.; Nayak, D. Immunoinformatics approach to design multi-epitope-subunit vaccine against bovine ephemeral fever disease. Vaccines 2021, 9, 925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Pradhan, D.; Yadav, M.; Verma, R.; Khan, N.S.; Jena, L.; Jain, A.K. Discovery of T-cell driven subunit vaccines from Zika virus genome: An immunoinformatics approach. Interdiscip. Sci. Comput. Life Sci. 2017, 9, 468–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Yadav, G.; Rao, R.; Raj, U.; Varadwaj, P.K. Computational modeling and analysis of prominent T-cell epitopes for assisting in designing vaccine of ZIKA virus. J. Appl. Pharm. Sci. 2017, 7, 116–122. [Google Scholar]
  185. Kumar Pandey, R.; Ojha, R.; Mishra, A.; Kumar Prajapati, V. Designing B- and T-cell multi-epitope based subunit vaccine using immunoinformatics approach to control Zika virus infection. J. Cell. Biochem. 2018, 119, 7631–7642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  186. Salvador, E.A.; Pires de Souza, G.A.; Cotta Malaquias, L.C.; Wang, T.; Leomil Coelho, L.F. Identification of relevant regions on structural and nonstructural proteins of Zika virus for vaccine and diagnostic test development: An in silico approach. New Microbes New Infect. 2019, 29, 100506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  187. Mittal, A.; Sasidharan, S.; Raj, S.; Balaji, S.N.; Saudagar, P. Exploring the Zika Genome to Design a Potential Multiepitope Vaccine Using an Immunoinformatics Approach. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 2020, 26, 2231–2240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Shahid, F.; Ashfaq, U.A.; Javaid, A.; Khalid, H. Immunoinformatics guided rational design of a next generation multi epitope based peptide (MEBP) vaccine by exploring Zika virus proteome. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2020, 80, 104199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Ezzemani, W.; Windisch, M.P.; Kettani, A.; Altawalah, H.; Nourlil, J.; Benjelloun, S.; Ezzikouri, S. Immuno-informatics-based identification of novel potential b cell and t cell epitopes to fight zika virus infections. Infect. Disord. Drug Targets 2021, 21, 572–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Paul, D.; Sharif, I.H.; Sayem, A.; Ahmed, H.; Saleh, A.; Mahmud, S. In silico prediction of a highly immunogenic and conserved epitope against Zika Virus. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2021, 24, 100613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Jain, P.; Joshi, A.; Akhtar, N.; Krishnan, S.; Kaushik, V. An immunoinformatics study: Designing multivalent T-cell epitope vaccine against canine circovirus. J. Genet. Eng. Biotechnol. 2021, 19, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Ali, M.; Pandey, R.K.; Khatoon, N.; Narula, A.; Mishra, A.; Prajapati, V.K. Exploring dengue genome to construct a multi-epitope based subunit vaccine by utilizing immunoinformatics approach to battle against dengue infection. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 9232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  193. Subramaniyan, V.; Venkatachalam, R.; Srinivasan, P.; Palani, M. In silico prediction of monovalent and chimeric tetravalent vaccines for prevention and treatment of dengue fever. J. Biomed. Res. 2017, 32, 222–236. [Google Scholar]
  194. Adnan, M.; Nuhamunada, M.; Hidayati, L.; Wijayanti, N. In silico vaccine design against dengue virus type 2 envelope glycoprotein. HAYATI J. Biosci. 2020, 27, 228–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Krishnan, S.; Amit, J.; Vikas, K. T cell epitope designing for dengue peptide vaccine using docking and molecular simulation studies. Mol. Simul. 2020, 46, 787–795. [Google Scholar]
  196. Islam, R.; Parvez, M.S.A.; Anwar, S.; Hosen, M.J. Delineating blueprint of an epitope-based peptide vaccine against the multiple serovars of dengue virus: A hierarchical reverse vaccinology approach. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2020, 20, 100430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Fadaka, A.O.; Samantha, S.N.R.; Martin, D.R.; Mediline, G.; Ashwil, K.; Madimabe, M.A.; Meyer, M. Immunoinformatics design of a novel epitope-based vaccine candidate against dengue virus. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 19707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  198. Krishnan, S.; Joshi, A.; Akhtar, N.; Kaushik, V. Immunoinformatics designed T cell multi epitope dengue peptide vaccine derived from non structural proteome. Microb. Pathog. 2021, 150, 104728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  199. Hoque, H.; Islam, R.; Ghosh, S.; Rahaman, M.M.; Jewel, N.A.; Miah, M.A. Implementation of in silico methods to predict common epitopes for vaccine development against Chikungunya and Mayaro viruses. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  200. Ojha, R.; Pareek, A.; Pandey, R.K.; Prusty, D.; Prajapati, V.K. Strategic Development of a Next-Generation Multi-Epitope Vaccine to Prevent Nipah Virus Zoonotic Infection. ACS Omega 2019, 4, 13069–13079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  201. Ravichandran, L.; Venkatesan, A.; Febin Prabhu Dass, J. Epitope-based immunoinformatics approach on RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) protein complex of Nipah virus (NiV). J. Cell. Biochem. 2019, 120, 7082–7095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Kaushik, V. In Silico Identification of Epitope-Based Peptide Vaccine for Nipah Virus. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 2020, 26, 1147–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Majee, P.; Jain, N.; Kumar, A. Designing of a multi-epitope vaccine candidate against Nipah virus by in silico approach: A putative prophylactic solution for the deadly virus. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 1461–1480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  204. Raju, S.; Sahoo, D.; Bhari, V.K. In-silico design of multi-epitope vaccine against Nipah virus using immunoinformatics approach. J. Pure Appl. Microbiol. 2021, 15, 212–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  205. Sharma, S.; Srivastava, S.; Kumar, A.; Srivastava, V. Anticipation of Antigenic Sites for the Goal of Vaccine Designing Against Nipah Virus: An Immunoinformatics Inquisitive Quest. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 2021, 27, 1899–1911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  206. Soltan, M.A.; Eldeen, M.A.; Elbassiouny, N.; Ibrahim, M.; El-damasy, D.A.; Fayad, E.; Abu Ali, O.A.; Raafat, N.; Eid, R.A.; Al-Karmalawy, A.A. Proteome Based Approach Defines Candidates for Designing a Multitope Vaccine against the Nipah Virus. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 9330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Sarkar, B.; Ullah, M.A.; Araf, Y. A systematic and reverse vaccinology approach to design novel subunit vaccines against Dengue virus type-1 (DENV-1) and human Papillomavirus-16 (HPV-16). Inform. Med. Unlocked 2020, 19, 100343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Dash, R.; Das, R.; Junaid, M.; Akash, M.F.C.; Islam, A.; Hosen, S.Z. In silico-based vaccine design against Ebola virus glycoprotein. Adv. Appl. Bioinform. Chem. 2017, 10, 11–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Dehghani, B.; Ghasabi, F.; Hashempoor, T.; Joulaei, H.; Hasanshahi, Z.; Halaji, M.; Chatrabnous, N.; Mousavi, Z.; Moayedi, J. Functional and structural characterization of Ebola virus glycoprotein (1976–2015)—An in silico study. Int. J. Biomath. 2017, 10, 1750108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Kadam, A.; Sasidharan, S.; Saudagar, P. Computational design of a potential multi-epitope subunit vaccine using immunoinformatics to fight Ebola virus. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2020, 85, 104464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Ullah, M.A.; Sarkar, B.; Islam, S.S. Exploiting the reverse vaccinology approach to design novel subunit vaccines against Ebola virus. Immunobiology 2020, 225, 151949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Mustafa, M.I.; Shantier, S.W.; Abdelmageed, M.I.; Makhawi, A.M. Epitope-based peptide vaccine against Bombali Ebolavirus viral protein 40: An immunoinformatics combined with molecular docking studies. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2021, 25, 100694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. Shankar, U.; Jain, N.; Mishra, S.K.; Sk, M.F.; Kar, P.; Kumar, A. Mining of Ebola virus genome for the construction of multi-epitope vaccine to combat its infection. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 40, 4815–4831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  214. Deng, H.; Yu, S.; Guo, Y.; Gu, L.; Wang, G.; Ren, Z.; Li, Y.; Li, K.; Li, R. Development of a multivalent enterovirus subunit vaccine based on immunoinformatic design principles for the prevention of HFMD. Vaccine 2020, 38, 3671–3681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  215. Waheed, Y.; Safi, S.Z.; Najmi, M.H.; Aziz, H.; Imran, M. Prediction of promiscuous T cell epitopes in RNA dependent RNA polymerase of chikungunya virus. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med. 2017, 10, 760–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  216. Tahir ul Qamar, M.; Bari, A.; Adeel, M.M.; Maryam, A.; Ashfaq, U.A.; Du, X.; Muneer, I.; Ahmad, H.I.; Jia, W. Peptide vaccine against chikungunya virus: Immuno-informatics combined with molecular docking approach. J. Transl. Med. 2018, 16, 298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  217. Narula, A.; Pandey, R.K.; Khatoon, N.; Mishra, A.; Prajapati, V.K. Excavating chikungunya genome to design B and T cell multi-epitope subunit vaccine using comprehensive immunoinformatics approach to control chikungunya infection. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2018, 61, 4–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  218. Anwar, S.; Mourosi, J.T.; Khan, M.F.; Hosen, M.J. Prediction of epitope-based peptide vaccine against the Chikungunya virus by immuno-informatics approach. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2020, 21, 325–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  219. Bappy, S.S.; Sultana, S.; Adhikari, J.; Mahmud, S.; Khan, M.A.; Kibria, K.M.K.; Rahman, M.M.; Shibly, A.Z. Extensive immunoinformatics study for the prediction of novel peptide-based epitope vaccine with docking confirmation against envelope protein of Chikungunya virus: A computational biology approach. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 1139–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Mishu, I.D.; Akter, S.; Alam, A.S.M.R.U.; Hossain, M.A.; Sultana, M. In silico Evolutionary Divergence Analysis Suggests the Potentiality of Capsid Protein VP2 in Serotype-Independent Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus Detection. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Bano, T.; Janahi, E.M.; Dhasmana, A.; Lohani, M.; Haque, S.; Mandal, R.K.; Dar, S.A.; Jawed, A.; Wahid, M.; Akhter, N.; et al. In silico CD4+, CD8+ & humoral immunity associated antigenic epitope prediction and HLA distribution analysis of HTLV-I. J. BUON 2018, 23, 1514–1527. [Google Scholar]
  222. Pandey, R.K.; Ojha, R.; Chatterjee, N.; Upadhyay, N.; Mishra, A.; Prajapati, V.K. Combinatorial screening algorithm to engineer multiepitope subunit vaccine targeting human T-lymphotropic virus-1 infection. J. Cell. Physiol. 2019, 234, 8717–8726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Raza, T.; Mizan, S.; Yasmin, F.; Al-Shahriar, A.; Shahik, S. Epitope-based universal vaccine for Human T-lymphotropic virus-1 (HTLV-1). PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0248001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  224. Tariq, M.H.; Bhatti, R.; Ali, N.F.; Ashfaq, U.A.; Shahid, F.; Almatroudi, A.; Khurshid, M. Rational design of chimeric Multiepitope Based Vaccine (MEBV) against human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1: An integrated vaccine informatics and molecular docking based approach. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0258443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  225. Bano, T.; Akhtar, S.; Siddiqui, M.H.; Arif, J.M.; Lohani, M.; Sayeed, U.; Khan, M.K.A. Peptide based vaccine design for therapeutic intervention against Htlv-I: A computational approach. Biochem. Cell. Arch. 2017, 17, 777–788. [Google Scholar]
  226. Bahrami, A.A.; Bandehpour, M.; Khalesi, B.; Kazemi, B. Computational Design and Analysis of a Poly-Epitope Fusion Protein: A New Vaccine Candidate for Hepatitis and Poliovirus. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 2020, 26, 389–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Srivastava, S.; Kamthania, M.; Singh, S.; Saxena, A.K.; Sharma, N. Structural basis of development of multi-epitope vaccine against middle east respiratory syndrome using in silico approach. Infect. Drug Resist. 2018, 11, 2377–2391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  228. Ashfaq, U.A.; Saleem, S.; Masoud, M.S.; Ahmad, M.; Nahid, N.; Bhatti, R.; Almatroudi, A.; Khurshid, M. Rational design of multi epitope-based subunit vaccine by exploring MERS-COV proteome: Reverse vaccinology and molecular docking approach. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0245072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  229. Khan, S.; Shaker, B.; Ahmad, S.; Abbasi, S.W.; Arshad, M.; Haleem, A.; Ismail, S.; Zaib, A.; Sajjad, W. Towards a novel peptide vaccine for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus and its possible use against pandemic COVID-19. J. Mol. Liq. 2021, 324, 114706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Ul Qamar, M.T.; Saleem, S.; Ashfaq, U.A.; Bari, A.; Anwar, F.; Alqahtani, S. Epitope-based peptide vaccine design and target site depiction against Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus: An immune-informatics study. J. Transl. Med. 2019, 17, 362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Mahmud, S.; Rafi, M.O.; Paul, G.K.; Promi, M.M.; Shimu, M.S.S.; Biswas, S.; Emran, T.B.; Dhama, K.; Alyami, S.A.; Moni, M.A.; et al. Designing a multi-epitope vaccine candidate to combat MERS-CoV by employing an immunoinformatics approach. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 15431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  232. Chaudhuri, D.; Datta, J.; Majumder, S.; Giri, K. In silico designing of peptide based vaccine for Hepatitis viruses using reverse vaccinology approach. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2020, 84, 104388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Nosrati, M.; Mohabatkar, H.; Behbahani, M. Introducing of an integrated artificial neural network and Chou’s pseudo amino acid composition approach for computational epitope-mapping of Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever virus antigens. Int. Immunopharmacol. 2020, 78, 106020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  234. Shrivastava, N.; Verma, A.; Dash, P.K. Identification of functional epitopes of structural proteins and in-silico designing of dual acting multiepitope anti-tick vaccine against emerging Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2020, 151, 105396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  235. Tahir Ul Qamar, M.; Ismail, S.; Ahmad, S.; Mirza, M.U.; Abbasi, S.W.; Ashfaq, U.A.; Chen, L.-L. Development of a Novel Multi-Epitope Vaccine Against Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic Fever Virus: An Integrated Reverse Vaccinology, Vaccine Informatics and Biophysics Approach. Front. Immunol. 2021, 12, 669812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  236. Khan, M.S.A.; Nain, Z.; Syed, S.B.; Abdulla, F.; Moni, M.A.; Sheam, M.M.; Karim, M.M.; Adhikari, U.K. Computational formulation and immune dynamics of a multi-peptide vaccine candidate against Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus. Mol. Cell. Probes 2021, 55, 101693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Kalyanaraman, N. In silico prediction of potential vaccine candidates on capsid protein of human bocavirus 1. Mol. Immunol. 2018, 93, 193–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Abdulla, F.; Nain, Z.; Hossain, M.M.; Sayed, S.B.; Ahmed Khan, M.S.; Adhikari, U.K. Computational Approach for Screening the Whole Proteome of Hantavirus and Designing a Multi-Epitope Subunit Vaccine; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  239. Abdulla, F.; Nain, Z.; Hossain, M.M.; Syed, S.B.; Ahmed Khan, M.S.; Adhikari, U.K. A comprehensive screening of the whole proteome of hantavirus and designing a multi-epitope subunit vaccine for cross-protection against hantavirus: Structural vaccinology and immunoinformatics study. Microb. Pathog. 2021, 150, 104705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Conte, F.P.; Tinoco, B.C.; Santos, C.T.; Oliveira, R.C.; Figueira, M.J.; Mohana-Borges, R.; Lemos, E.R.S.; Neves, P.C.D.C.; Rodrigues-da-Silva, R.N. Identification and validation of specific B-cell epitopes of hantaviruses associated to hemorrhagic fever and renal syndrome. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2019, 13, e0007915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  241. Ghafoor, D.; Kousar, A.; Ahmed, W.; Khan, S.; Ullah, Z.; Ullah, N.; Khan, S.; Ahmed, S.; Khan, Z.; Riaz, R. Computational vaccinology guided design of multi-epitopes subunit vaccine designing against Hantaan virus and its validation through immune simulations. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2021, 93, 104950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Ojha, R.; Nandani, R.; Prajapati, V.K. Contriving multiepitope subunit vaccine by exploiting structural and nonstructural viral proteins to prevent Epstein–Barr virus-associated malignancy. J. Cell. Physiol. 2019, 234, 6437–6448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Chauhan, V.; Goyal, K.; Singh, M.P. Identification of broadly reactive epitopes targeting major glycoproteins of Herpes simplex virus (HSV) 1 and 2—An immunoinformatics analysis. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2018, 61, 24–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  244. Hasan, M.; Islam, S.; Chakraborty, S.; Mustafa, A.H.; Azim, K.F.; Joy, Z.F.; Hossain, M.N.; Foysal, S.H.; Hasan, M.N. Contriving a chimeric polyvalent vaccine to prevent infections caused by herpes simplex virus (type-1 and type-2): An exploratory immunoinformatic approach. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2020, 38, 2898–2915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  245. Sarkar, B.; Ullah, M.A. Designing Novel Subunit Vaccines against Herpes Simplex Virus-1 Using Reverse Vaccinology Approach; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  246. Sarkar, B.; Ullah, M.A.; Araf, Y.; Das, S.; Rahman, M.H.; Moin, A.T. Designing novel epitope-based polyvalent vaccines against herpes simplex virus-1 and 2 exploiting the immunoinformatics approach. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 6585–6605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  247. Zheng, B.; Suleman, M.; Zafar, Z.; Ali, S.S.; Nasir, S.N.; Namra; Hussain, Z.; Waseem, M.; Khan, A.; Hassan, F.; et al. Towards an ensemble vaccine against the pegivirus using computational modelling approaches and its validation through in silico cloning and immune simulation. Vaccines 2021, 9, 818. [Google Scholar]
  248. Batool, H.; Batool, S.; Mahmood, M.S.; Mushtaq, N.; Khan, A.U.; Ali, M.; Sahibzada, K.I.; Ashraf, N.M. Prediction of Putative Epitope-based Vaccine Against All Corona Virus strains for Chinese Population: Approach toward Development of Vaccine. Microbiol. Immunol. 2020, 65, 154–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  249. Chakraborty, C.; Sharma, A.R.; Bhattacharya, M.; Saha, R.P.; Ghosh, S.; Biswas, S.; Samanta, S.; Sharma, G.; Agoramoorthy, G.; Lee, S.-S. SARS-CoV-2 and other human coronaviruses: Mapping of protease recognition sites, antigenic variation of spike protein and their grouping through molecular phylogenetics. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2021, 89, 104729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Devi, A.; Chaitanya, N.S.N. In silico designing of multi-epitope vaccine construct against human coronavirus infections. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 6903–6917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Sarkar, B.; Ullah, M.A.; Araf, Y.; Islam, N.N.; Zohora, U.S. Immunoinformatics-guided designing and in silico analysis of epitope-based polyvalent vaccines against multiple strains of human coronavirus (HCoV). Expert Rev. Vaccines 2021, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  252. Awadelkareem, E.A.; Ali, S.A.E. Vaccine Design against Coronavirus Spike (S) Glycoprotein in Chicken: Immunoinformatic and Computational Approaches; Research Square: Durham, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  253. Hossain, M.U.; Omar, T.M.; Oany, A.R.; Kibria, K.M.K.; Shibly, A.Z.; Moniruzzaman, M.; Ali, S.R.; Islam, M.M. Design of peptide-based epitope vaccine and further binding site scrutiny led to groundswell in drug discovery against Lassa virus. 3 Biotech 2018, 8, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  254. Sayed, S.B.; Nain, Z.; Khan, M.S.A.; Abdulla, F.; Tasmin, R.; Adhikari, U.K. Exploring Lassa Virus Proteome to Design a Multi-epitope Vaccine Through Immunoinformatics and Immune Simulation Analyses. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 2020, 26, 2089–2107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  255. Abass, O.A.; Timofeev, V.I.; Sarkar, B.; Onobun, D.O.; Ogunsola, S.O.; Aiyenuro, A.E.; Aborode, A.T.; Aigboje, A.E.; Omobolanle, B.N.; Imolele, A.G.; et al. Immunoinformatics analysis to design novel epitope based vaccine candidate targeting the glycoprotein and nucleoprotein of Lassa mammarenavirus (LASMV) using strains from Nigeria. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Baral, P.; Elumalai, P.; Gerstman, B.S.; Chapagain, P.P. In-silico identification of the vaccine candidate epitopes against the Lassa virus hemorrhagic fever. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 7667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  257. Jafari, D.; Malih, S.; Gomari, M.M.; Safari, M.; Jafari, R.; Farajollahi, M.M. Designing a chimeric subunit vaccine for influenza virus, based on HA2, M2e and CTxB: A bioinformatics study. BMC Mol. Cell Biol. 2020, 21, 89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  258. Bhardwaj, A.; Sharma, R.; Grover, A. Immuno-informatics guided designing of a multi-epitope vaccine against Dengue and Zika. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. Mahata, D.; Mukherjee, D.; Malviya, V.; Mukherjee, G. Targeting “Immunogenic Hotspots” in Dengue and Zika Virus: A Novel Approach to a Common Vaccine; Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: Long Island, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  260. Sarkar, B.; Ullah, M.A.; Araf, Y.; Das, S.; Hosen, M.J. Blueprint of epitope-based multivalent and multipathogenic vaccines: Targeted against the dengue and zika viruses. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 6882–6902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  261. Banerjee, S.; Gupta, P.S.S.; Bandyopadhyay, A.K. Insight into SNPs and epitopes of E protein of newly emerged genotype-I isolates of JEV from Midnapur, West Bengal, India. BMC Immunol. 2017, 18, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  262. Chauhan, V.; Singh, M.P. Immuno-informatics approach to design a multi-epitope vaccine to combat cytomegalovirus infection. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2020, 147, 105279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  263. Verma, S.; Pandey, A.K. A disclosure of hidden secrets in human cytomegalovirus: An in-silico study of identification of novel genes and their analysis for vaccine development. Meta Gene 2020, 25, 100754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  264. Akhtar, N.; Joshi, A.; Singh, J.; Kaushik, V. Design of a novel and potent multivalent epitope based human cytomegalovirus peptide vaccine: An immunoinformatics approach. J. Mol. Liq. 2021, 335, 116586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  265. Chauhan, V.; Rungta, T.; Goyal, K.; Singh, M.P. Designing a multi-epitope based vaccine to combat Kaposi Sarcoma utilizing immunoinformatics approach. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 2517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  266. Pandey, R.K.; Ojha, R.; Aathmanathan, V.S.; Krishnan, M.; Prajapati, V.K. Immunoinformatics approaches to design a novel multi-epitope subunit vaccine against HIV infection. Vaccine 2018, 36, 2262–2272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Larijani, M.S.; Sadat, S.M.; Bolhassani, A.; Pouriayevali, M.H.; Bahramali, G.; Ramezani, A. In silico design and immunologic evaluation of HIV-1 p24-nef fusion protein to approach a therapeutic vaccine candidate services. Curr. HIV Res. 2018, 16, 322–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  268. Abdulla, F.; Adhikari, U.K.; Uddin, M.K. Exploring T & B-cell epitopes and designing multi-epitope subunit vaccine targeting integration step of HIV-1 lifecycle using immunoinformatics approach. Microb. Pathog. 2019, 137, 103791. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  269. Arumugam, S.; Prasad, V. In-silico design of envelope based multi-epitope vaccine candidate against Kyasanur forest disease virus. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 17118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  270. Hasan, M.; Azim, K.F.; Begum, A.; Khan, N.A.; Shammi, T.S.; Imran, A.S.; Chowdhury, I.M.; Urme, S.R.A. Vaccinomics strategy for developing a unique multi-epitope monovalent vaccine against Marburg marburgvirus. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2019, 70, 140–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  271. Mahmud, S.M.N.; Rahman, M.; Kar, A.; Jahan, N.; Khan, A. Designing of an epitope-based universal peptide vaccine against highly conserved regions in rna dependent rna polymerase protein of human marburg virus: A computational assay. Anti Infect. Agents 2020, 18, 294–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  272. Sami, S.A.; Marma, K.K.S.; Mahmud, S.; Khan, M.A.N.; Albogami, S.; El-Shehawi, A.M.; Rakib, A.; Chakraborty, A.; Mohiuddin, M.; Dhama, K.; et al. Designing of a Multi-epitope Vaccine against the Structural Proteins of Marburg Virus Exploiting the Immunoinformatics Approach. ACS Omega 2021, 6, 32043–32071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  273. Joshi, A.; Pathak, D.C.; Mannan, M.A.-U.; Kaushik, V. In-silico designing of epitope-based vaccine against the seven banded grouper nervous necrosis virus affecting fish species. Netw. Model. Anal. Health Inform. Bioinform. 2021, 10, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  274. Azim, K.F.; Hasan, M.; Hossain, M.N.; Somana, S.R.; Hoque, S.F.; Bappy, M.N.I.; Chowdhury, A.T.; Lasker, T. Immunoinformatics approaches for designing a novel multi epitope peptide vaccine against human norovirus (Norwalk virus). Infect. Genet. Evol. 2019, 74, 103936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  275. Ahmad, I.; Ali, S.S.; Zafar, B.; Hashmi, H.F.; Shah, I.; Khan, S.; Suleman, M.; Khan, M.; Ullah, S.; Ali, S.; et al. Development of multi-epitope subunit vaccine for protection against the norovirus’ infections based on computational vaccinology. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2020, 40, 3098–3109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  276. Moeini, H.; Afridi, S.Q.; Donakonda, S.; Knolle, P.A.; Protzer, U.; Hoffmann, D. Linear B-Cell epitopes in human norovirus GII. 4 capsid protein elicit blockade antibodies. Vaccines 2021, 9, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  277. Saha, C.K.; Mahbub Hasan, M.; Saddam Hossain, M.; Asraful Jahan, M.; Azad, A.K. In silico identification and characterization of common epitope-based peptide vaccine for Nipah and Hendra viruses. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med. 2017, 10, 529–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  278. Mohanty, E.; Dehury, B.; Satapathy, A.K.; Dwibedi, B. Design and testing of a highly conserved human rotavirus VP8* immunogenic peptide with potential for vaccine development. J. Biotechnol. 2018, 281, 48–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  279. Nirwati, H.; Donato, C.M.; Ikram, A.; Aman, A.T.; Wibawa, T.; Kirkwood, C.D.; Soenarto, Y.; Pan, Q.; Hakim, M.S. Phylogenetic and immunoinformatic analysis of VP4, VP7, and NSP4 genes of rotavirus strains circulating in children with acute gastroenteritis in Indonesia. J. Med. Virol. 2019, 91, 1776–1787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  280. Devi, Y.D.; Devi, A.; Gogoi, H.; Dehingia, B.; Doley, R.; Buragohain, A.K.; Singh, C.S.; Borah, P.P.; Rao, C.D.; Ray, P.; et al. Exploring rotavirus proteome to identify potential B- and T-cell epitope using computational immunoinformatics. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  281. Adhikari, U.K.; Tayebi, M.; Mizanur Rahman, M. Immunoinformatics approach for epitope-based peptide vaccine design and active site prediction against polyprotein of emerging oropouche virus. J. Immunol. Res. 2018, 2018, 6718083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  282. Hossain, M.U.; Keya, C.A.; Das, K.C.; Hashem, A.; Omar, T.M.; Khan, M.A.; Rakib-Uz-Zaman, S.M.; Salimullah, M. An immunopharmacoinformatics approach in development of vaccine and drug candidates for West Nile Virus. Front. Chem. 2018, 6, 246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  283. Alom, M.W.; Shehab, M.N.; Sujon, K.M.; Akter, F. Exploring E, NS3, and NS5 proteins to design a novel multi-epitope vaccine candidate against West Nile Virus: An in-silico approach. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2021, 25, 100644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Khan, M.T.; Islam, R.; Jerin, T.J.; Mahmud, A.; Khatun, S.; Kobir, A.; Islam, M.N.; Akter, A.; Mondal, S.I. Immunoinformatics and molecular dynamics approaches: Next generation vaccine design against West Nile virus. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0253393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  285. Bohra, N.; Sasidharan, S.; Raj, S.; Balaji, S.N.; Saudagar, P. Utilising capsid proteins of poliovirus to design a multi-epitope based subunit vaccine by immunoinformatics approach. Mol. Simul. 2020, 46, 419–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Hossain, R.; Yasmin, T.; Hosen, M.I.; Nabi, A.H.M.N. In silico identification of potential epitopes present in human adenovirus proteins for vaccine design and of putative drugs for treatment against viral infection. J. Immunol. Methods 2018, 455, 55–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  287. Tufail, S.; Shah, M.A.; Zafar, M.; Asif, T.A.; Shehzad, A.; Shah, M.S.; Habib, M.; Saleemi, M.K.; Muddassar, M.; Mirza, O.; et al. Identification of potent epitopes on hexon capsid protein and their evaluation as vaccine candidates against infections caused by members of Adenoviridae family. Vaccine 2021, 39, 3560–3564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  288. Wang, D.; Mai, J.; Yang, Y.; Wang, N. Porcine Parvovirus 7: Evolutionary Dynamics and Identification of Epitopes toward Vaccine Design. Vaccines 2020, 8, 359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  289. Amimo, J.O.; Machuka, E.M.; Abworo, E.O.; Vlasova, A.N.; Pelle, R. Whole genome sequence analysis of porcine astroviruses reveals novel genetically diverse strains circulating in east african smallholder pig farms. Viruses 2020, 12, 1262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  290. Ferreyra, F.M.; Harmon, K.; Bradner, L.; Burrough, E.; Derscheid, R.; Magstadt, D.R.; Michael, A.; de Almeida, M.N.; Schumacher, L.; Siepker, C.; et al. Comparative analysis of novel strains of porcine astrovirus type 3 in the USA. Viruses 2021, 13, 1859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  291. Siañez-Estrada, L.I.; Rivera-Benítez, J.F.; Rosas-Murrieta, N.H.; Reyes-Leyva, J.; Santos-López, G.; Herrera-Camacho, I. Immunoinformatics approach for predicting epitopes in HN and F proteins of Porcine rubulavirus. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0239785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  292. Pavitrakar, D.V.; Atre, N.M.; Tripathy, A.S.; Shil, P. Design of a multi-epitope peptide vaccine candidate against chandipura virus: An immuno-informatics study. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2020, 40, 648–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  293. Deb, D.; Basak, S.; Kar, T.; Narsaria, U.; Castiglione, F.; Paul, A.; Pandey, A.; Srivastava, A.P. Immunoinformatics based designing a multi-epitope vaccine against pathogenic Chandipura vesiculovirus. J. Cell. Biochem. 2021, 123, 322–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  294. Fadholly, A.; Ansori, A.N.M.; Kharisma, V.D.; Rahmahani, J.; Tacharina, M.R. Immunobioinformatics of rabies virus in various countries of asia: Glycoprotein gene. Res. J. Pharm. Technol. 2021, 14, 883–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  295. Kamthania, M.; Srivastava, S.; Desai, M.; Jain, A.; Shrivastav, A.; Sharma, D.K. Immunoinformatics Approach to Design T-cell Epitope-Based Vaccine Against Hendra Virus. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 2019, 25, 1627–1637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  296. Hossan, M.I.; Chowdhury, A.S.; Hossain, M.U.; Khan, M.A.; Mahmood, T.B.; Mizan, S. Immunoinformatics aided-design of novel multi-epitope based peptide vaccine against Hendra henipavirus through proteome exploration. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2021, 25, 100678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  297. Hossain, M.S.; Hossan, M.I.; Mizan, S.; Moin, A.T.; Yasmin, F.; Akash, A.-S.; Powshi, S.N.; Hasan, A.K.R.; Chowdhury, A.S. Immunoinformatics approach to designing a multi-epitope vaccine against Saint Louis Encephalitis Virus. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2021, 22, 100500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  298. Choga, W.T.; Anderson, M.; Zumbika, E.; Phinius, B.B.; Mbangiwa, T.; Bhebhe, L.N.; Baruti, K.; Kimathi, P.O.; Seatla, K.K.; Musonda, R.M.; et al. In Silico Prediction of Human Leukocytes Antigen (HLA) Class II Binding Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) Peptides in Botswana. Viruses 2020, 12, 731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  299. Mobini, S.; Chizari, M.; Mafakher, L.; Rismani, E.; Rismani, E. Computational Design of a Novel VLP-Based Vaccine for Hepatitis B Virus. Front. Immunol. 2020, 11, 2074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  300. Srivastava, S.; Kamthania, M.; Kumar Pandey, R.; Kumar Saxena, A.; Saxena, V.; Kumar Singh, S.; Kumar Sharma, R.; Sharma, N. Design of novel multi-epitope vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome validated through multistage molecular interaction and dynamics. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2019, 37, 4345–4360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  301. Kumar, N.; Sood, D.; Chandra, R. Vaccine Formulation and Optimization for Human Herpes Virus-5 through an Immunoinformatics Framework. ACS Pharmacol. Transl. Sci. 2020, 3, 1318–1329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  302. Kumar, N.; Singh, A.; Grover, S.; Kumari, A.; Kumar Dhar, P.; Chandra, R.; Grover, A. HHV-5 epitope: A potential vaccine candidate with high antigenicity and large coverage. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2019, 37, 2098–2109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  303. Momtaz, F.; Foysal, J.; Rahman, M.; Fotedar, R. Design of epitope based vaccine against shrimp white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) by targeting the envelope proteins: An immunoinformatic approach. Turk. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2019, 19, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  304. Rodrigues, R.L.; Menezes, G.D.L.; Saivish, M.V.; Costa, V.G.D.; Pereira, M.; Moreli, M.L.; Silva, R.A.D. Prediction of MAYV peptide antigens for immunodiagnostic tests by immunoinformatics and molecular dynamics simulations. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 13339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  305. Silva, M.K.; Gomes, H.S.S.; Silva, O.L.T.; Campanelli, S.E.; Campos, D.M.O.; Araújo, J.M.G.; Fernandes, J.V.; Fulco, U.L.; Oliveira, J.I.N. Identification of promiscuous T cell epitopes on Mayaro virus structural proteins using immunoinformatics, molecular modeling, and QM:MM approaches. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2021, 91, 104826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  306. Sankar, S.; Ramamurthy, M.; Nandagopal, B.; Sridharan, G. T-cell epitopes predicted from the Nucleocapsid protein of Sin Nombre virus restricted to 30 HLA alleles common to the North American population. Bioinformation 2017, 13, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  307. Ansori, A.N.M.; Kusala, M.K.J.; Nidom, R.V.; Indrasari, S.; Zarkasie, K.; Santoso, K.P.; Nidom, C.A. Pathological and molecular characterization of newcastle disease virus isolated from gallus gallus in java, indonesia. Indian J. Anim. Res. 2021, 55, 930–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  308. Hosseini, S.S.; Kolyani, K.A.; Tabatabaei, R.R.; Goudarzi, H.; Sepahi, A.A.; Salemi, M. In silico prediction of B and T cell epitopes based on NDV fusion protein for vaccine development against Newcastle disease virus. Vet. Res. Forum 2021, 12, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  309. Mohammadi, E.; Dashty, S. Epitope prediction, modeling, and docking studies for H3L protein as an agent of smallpox. Biotechnologia 2019, 100, 69–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  310. Tahir Ul Qamar, M.; Shokat, Z.; Muneer, I.; Ashfaq, U.A.; Javed, H.; Anwar, F.; Bari, A.; Zahid, B.; Saari, N. Multiepitope-Based Subunit Vaccine Design and Evaluation against Respiratory Syncytial Virus Using Reverse Vaccinology Approach. Vaccines 2020, 8, 288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  311. Naqvi, S.T.Q.; Yasmeen, M.; Ismail, M.; Muhammad, S.A.; Nawazish-I-Husain, S.; Ali, A.; Munir, F.; Zhang, Q. Designing of Potential Polyvalent Vaccine Model for Respiratory Syncytial Virus by System Level Immunoinformatics Approaches. BioMed Res. Int. 2021, 2021, 9940010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  312. Suleman, M.; Qamar, M.T.U.; Rasool, S.; Rasool, A.; Albutti, A.; Alsowayeh, N.; Alwashmi, A.S.S.; Aljasir, M.A.; Ahmad, S.; Hussain, Z.; et al. Immunoinformatics and immunogenetics-based design of immunogenic peptides vaccine against the emerging tick-borne encephalitis virus (Tbev) and its validation through in silico cloning and immune simulation. Vaccines 2021, 9, 1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  313. Adhikari, U.K.; Rahman, M.M. Overlapping CD8 + and CD4 + T-cell epitopes identification for the progression of epitope-based peptide vaccine from nucleocapsid and glycoprotein of emerging Rift Valley fever virus using immunoinformatics approach. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2017, 56, 75–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  314. Bhuiyan, M.A.; Quayum, S.T.; Ahammad, F.; Alam, R.; Samad, A.; Nain, Z. Discovery of potential immune epitopes and peptide vaccine design—A prophylactic strategy against Rift Valley fever virus [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2021, 9, 999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  315. Tosta, S.F.D.O.; Passos, M.S.; Kato, R.; Salgado, Á.; Xavier, J.; Jaiswal, A.K.; Soares, S.C.; Azevedo, V.; Giovanetti, M.; Tiwari, S.; et al. Multi-epitope based vaccine against yellow fever virus applying immunoinformatics approaches. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 39, 219–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  316. Berman, H.M.; Westbrook, J.; Feng, Z.; Gilliland, G.; Bhat, T.N.; Weissig, H.; Shindyalov, I.N.; Bourne, P.E. The protein data bank. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000, 28, 235–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  317. Pan, Q.; Yang, Y.; Gao, Y.; Qi, X.; Liu, C.; Zhang, Y.; Cui, H.; Wang, X. An inactivated novel genotype fowl adenovirus 4 protects chickens against the hydropericardium syndrome that recently emerged in China. Viruses 2017, 9, 216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  318. World Health Organization. COVID-19 Vaccine Tracker and Landscape. Available online: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/draft-landscape-of-covid-19-candidate-vaccines (accessed on 11 March 2022).
  319. Sapkal, G.N.; Yadav, P.D.; Ella, R.; Deshpande, G.R.; Sahay, R.R.; Gupta, N.; Vadrevu, K.M.; Abraham, P.; Panda, S.; Bhargava, B. Inactivated COVID-19 vaccine BBV152/COVAXIN effectively neutralizes recently emerged B. 1.1. 7 variant of SARS-CoV-2. J. Travel Med. 2021, 28, taab051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  320. Zhang, Y.; Zeng, G.; Pan, H.; Li, C.; Hu, Y.; Chu, K.; Han, W.; Chen, Z.; Tang, R.; Yin, W. Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in healthy adults aged 18–59 years: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 clinical trial. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2021, 21, 181–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  321. Wu, Z.; Hu, Y.; Xu, M.; Chen, Z.; Yang, W.; Jiang, Z.; Li, M.; Jin, H.; Cui, G.; Chen, P. Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) in healthy adults aged 60 years and older: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 clinical trial. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2021, 21, 803–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  322. Tanriover, M.D.; Doğanay, H.L.; Akova, M.; Güner, H.R.; Azap, A.; Akhan, S.; Köse, Ş.; Erdinç, F.Ş.; Akalın, E.H.; Tabak, Ö.F. Efficacy and safety of an inactivated whole-virion SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac): Interim results of a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial in Turkey. Lancet 2021, 398, 213–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  323. Voysey, M.; Clemens, S.A.C.; Madhi, S.A.; Weckx, L.Y.; Folegatti, P.M.; Aley, P.K.; Angus, B.; Baillie, V.L.; Barnabas, S.L.; Bhorat, Q.E. Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: An interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK. Lancet 2021, 397, 99–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  324. Sadoff, J.; Gray, G.; Vandebosch, A.; Cárdenas, V.; Shukarev, G.; Grinsztejn, B.; Goepfert, P.A.; Truyers, C.; Fennema, H.; Spiessens, B. Safety and efficacy of single-dose Ad26. COV2. S vaccine against Covid-19. N. Engl. J. Med. 2021, 384, 2187–2201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  325. Polack, F.P.; Thomas, S.J.; Kitchin, N.; Absalon, J.; Gurtman, A.; Lockhart, S.; Perez, J.L.; Marc, G.P.; Moreira, E.D.; Zerbini, C. Safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 383, 2603–2615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  326. Baden, L.R.; El Sahly, H.M.; Essink, B.; Kotloff, K.; Frey, S.; Novak, R.; Diemert, D.; Spector, S.A.; Rouphael, N.; Creech, C.B. Efficacy and safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 384, 403–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  327. World Health Organization. Tracking SARS-CoV-2 Variants. Available online: https://www.who.int/en/activities/tracking-SARS-CoV-2-variants/ (accessed on 11 March 2022).
  328. Dai, L.; Gao, G.F. Viral targets for vaccines against COVID-19. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2021, 21, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  329. Martínez-Flores, D.; Zepeda-Cervantes, J.; Cruz-Reséndiz, A.; Aguirre-Sampieri, S.; Sampieri, A.; Vaca, L. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines based on the spike glycoprotein and implications of new viral variants. Front. Immunol. 2021, 12, 701501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  330. Harvey, W.T.; Carabelli, A.M.; Jackson, B.; Gupta, R.K.; Thomson, E.C.; Harrison, E.M.; Ludden, C.; Reeve, R.; Rambaut, A.; Peacock, S.J. SARS-CoV-2 variants, spike mutations and immune escape. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2021, 19, 409–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  331. Sette, A.; Rappuoli, R. Reverse vaccinology: Developing vaccines in the era of genomics. Immunity 2010, 33, 530–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Vaccines 10 01785 g001 550
Figure 1. The five key stages of Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework for conducting a scoping review.
Figure 1. The five key stages of Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework for conducting a scoping review.
Vaccines 10 01785 g001
Vaccines 10 01785 g002 550
Figure 2. PRISMA 2020 flow diagram used for screening and selection of studies.
Figure 2. PRISMA 2020 flow diagram used for screening and selection of studies.
Vaccines 10 01785 g002
Vaccines 10 01785 g003 550
Figure 3. Number of publications by year.
Figure 3. Number of publications by year.
Vaccines 10 01785 g003
Table
Table 1. The main elements in this study’s research question according to the JBI framework’s PCC mnemonic.
Table 1. The main elements in this study’s research question according to the JBI framework’s PCC mnemonic.
P
Population		C
Concept		C
Context
‘different viral pathogens’‘potential vaccine candidates predicted by VaxiJen’‘between 2017 and 2021’
Abbreviations: JBI: Joanna Briggs Institute; PCC: population-concept-context.
Table
Table 2. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion of articles in this study.
Table 2. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion of articles in this study.
Inclusion CriteriaExclusion Criteria
  • Research focused on the usage of VaxiJen for the prediction of PVCs for different viral pathogens
  • Articles published from the year 2017–2021
  • Articles written in the English language
  • Studies published in peer-reviewed journals and unpublished papers
  • Articles that allowed access to the full text
  • Type of studies: original articles
  • Research not focused on the usage of VaxiJen for the prediction of PVCs for different viral pathogens
  • Studies published in year 2017 that were already covered in Zaharieva et al.’s [18] narrative review article
  • Non-English articles
  • Articles without access to the full text
  • Non-original articles
Abbreviations: PVCs: potential vaccine candidates.
Table
Table 3. Number of publications by pathogen.
Table 3. Number of publications by pathogen.
PathogenNumber of PublicationsPathogenNumber of Publications
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) [41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,
50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,
70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,
80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,
90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,
100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,
110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,
120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,
130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,
140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,
150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,
160,161]		121Usutu virus (USUV) [162,163]2
Human papillomavirus (HPV) [164,165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172]9Avian influenza A (H7N9) virus [173]1
Hepatitis C virus [174,175,176,177,178,179,180,181]8Bovine ephemeral fever virus [182]1
Zika virus (ZIKV) [183,184,185,186,187,188,189,190]8Canine circovirus [191]1
Dengue virus [192,193,194,195,196,197,198]7Chikungunya virus and Mayaro virus [199]1
Nipah virus (NiV) [200,201,202,203,204,205,206]7Dengue virus and human papillomavirus [207]1
Ebola virus [208,209,210,211,212,213]6Enteroviruses [214]1
Chikungunya virus [215,216,217,218,219]5Foot-and-mouth disease virus [220]1
Human T cell lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) [221,222,223,224,225]5Hepatitis and Poliovirus [226]1
Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) [227,228,229,230,231]5Hepatitis viruses [232]1
Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever (CCHF) virus [233,234,235,236]4Human bocavirus 1 (HBoV1) [237]1
Hantavirus [238,239,240,241]4Human herpesvirus 4 (HHV-4) or Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) [242]1
Herpes simplex virus [243,244,245,246]4Human pegivirus (HPgV) [247]1
Human coronaviruses [248,249,250,251]4Infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) [252]1
Lassa virus (LASV) [253,254,255,256]4Influenza A virus [257]1
Dengue virus and Zika virus [258,259,260]3Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) [261]1
Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) [262,263,264]3Kaposi’s sarcoma-associated herpesvirus (KSHV) [265]1
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) [266,267,268]3Kyasanur forest disease virus (KFDV) [269]1
Marburg virus (MARV) [270,271,272]3Neural necrosis virus (NNV) [273]1
Norovirus (NoV) [274,275,276]3Nipah virus (NiV) and Hendra virus (HeV) [277]1
Rotavirus [278,279,280]3Oropouche virus (OROV) [281]1
West Nile virus (WNV) [282,283,284]3Poliovirus [285]1
Adenoviruses [286,287]2Porcine parvovirus 7 (PPV7) [288]1
Astroviruses [289,290]2Porcine rubulavirus (PRV) [291]1
Chandipura virus [292,293]2Rabies virus (RABV) [294]1
Hendra virus (HeV) [295,296]2Saint Louis encephalitis virus (SLEV) [297]1
Hepatitis B virus [298,299]2Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 (SARS-CoV-1 or SARS-CoV) [300]1
Human herpes virus-5 (HHV-5) or Cytomegalovirus (CMV) [301,302]2Shrimp white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) [303]1
Mayaro virus (MAYV) [304,305]2Sin Nombre virus (SNV) [306]1
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) [307,308]2Smallpox viruses [309]1
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) [310,311]2Tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV) [312]1
Rift Valley fever virus [313,314]2Yellow fever virus (YFV) [315]1
Boldface denotes the top three pathogens with the highest number of publications. The table is sorted by number of publications descending, then by pathogen ascending.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Salod, Z.; Mahomed, O. Mapping Potential Vaccine Candidates Predicted by VaxiJen for Different Viral Pathogens between 2017–2021—A Scoping Review. Vaccines 2022, 10, 1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10111785

AMA Style

Salod Z, Mahomed O. Mapping Potential Vaccine Candidates Predicted by VaxiJen for Different Viral Pathogens between 2017–2021—A Scoping Review. Vaccines. 2022; 10(11):1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10111785

Chicago/Turabian Style

Salod, Zakia, and Ozayr Mahomed. 2022. "Mapping Potential Vaccine Candidates Predicted by VaxiJen for Different Viral Pathogens between 2017–2021—A Scoping Review" Vaccines 10, no. 11: 1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10111785

APA Style

Salod, Z., & Mahomed, O. (2022). Mapping Potential Vaccine Candidates Predicted by VaxiJen for Different Viral Pathogens between 2017–2021—A Scoping Review. Vaccines, 10(11), 1785. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10111785

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop