ZF2001
candidate vaccine against COVID-19
ZF2001, trade-named Zifivax or ZF-UZ-VAC-2001, is an adjuvanted protein subunit COVID-19 vaccine developed by Anhui Zhifei Longcom in collaboration with the Institute of Microbiology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The vaccine candidate is in Phase III trials with 29,000 participants in China, Ecuador, Malaysia, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan.
ZF2001 employs technology similar to other protein-based vaccines in Phase III trials from Novavax, Vector Institute, and Medicago.
ZF2001 was first approved for use in Uzbekistan and later China. Production capacity is expected to be one billion doses a year in China and 200 million in Uzbekistan. By July, 100 million doses had been administered in China and Uzbekistan.
Medical uses
It is administered in three doses over a period of two months.
Efficacy
In August 2021, preliminary data from a phase III study with 28,500 participants indicated an overall efficacy of 82% against disease of any severity. Efficacy was 93% against the Alpha variant and 78% against the Delta variant.
In July 2021, lab studies showed ZF2001 retained neutralizing effects against B.1.429 (Epsilon), B.1.351(Beta), P.1(Gamma), B.1.525(Eta), B.1.617.1(Kappa), the neutralizing titers decreased ranging from 1.1 fold to 2.1 fold, but the neutralizing efficacy were still good.
“ZF2001” enters the record as candidate vaccine against COVID-19. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what ZF2001, candidate and vaccine can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“ZF2001” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, ZF2001, candidate and vaccine provides the most credible route into that argument.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q97154236. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2001 and 2021.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “ZF2001”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow ZF2001 primary sources, ZF2001 archive and ZF2001 research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “ZF2001”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “ZF2001” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.