Are changes in physical activity during COVID-19 associated with mental health among Danish university students?

Aims: The benefits associated with being physical active on mental health is well-established, but little is known on how rapid changes in physical activity are associated with mental health. This study investigated the association between changes in physical activity and mental health among Danish university students during the first COVID-19 lockdown. Methods: Online survey data were collected among 2,280 university students at the University of Southern Denmark and University of Copenhagen in May-June 2020 as part the "COVID-19 International Student Well-being Study." Multiple linear regressions were used to analyze associations between changes in physical activity and mental health (depression and stress scores) adjusted for potential socio-economic confounders. Results: During the first COVID-19 lockdown, 40% decreased their moderate and 44% their vigorous physical activity, while 16% increased their moderate and 13% their vigorous physical activity. Overall, students with a stable physical activity level had the lowest mean depressive and stress scores. Adjusted analyses showed that a decrease in vigorous and moderate physical activity level was significantly associated with a higher depression score (mean difference (vigorous): 1.36, p < 0.001 and mean difference (moderate): 1.55, p < 0.001). A decrease in vigorous physical activity and an increase in moderate physical activity was associated with a 1-point increase in the PSS-4 stress score (p < 0.001). Conclusion: A substantial proportion of students changed their physical activity level during lockdown. Our findings emphasize the importance of staying physically active during COVID-19 lockdown. This knowledge might be important for relevant health authorities to bridle post-pandemic mental health challenges.

Distinct SARS-CoV-2 RNA fragments activate Toll-like receptors 7 and 8 and induce cytokine release from human macrophages and microglia.

Introduction: The pandemic coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and is marked by thromboembolic events and an inflammatory response throughout the body, including the brain. Methods: Employing the machine learning approach BrainDead we systematically screened for SARS-CoV-2 genome-derived single-stranded (ss) RNA fragments with high potential to activate the viral RNA-sensing innate immune receptors Toll-like receptor (TLR)7 and/or TLR8. Analyzing HEK TLR7/8 reporter cells we tested such RNA fragments with respect to their potential to induce activation of human TLR7 and TLR8 and to activate human macrophages, as well as iPSC-derived human microglia, the resident immune cells in the brain. Results: We experimentally validated several sequence-specific RNA fragment candidates out of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA fragments predicted in silico as activators of human TLR7 and TLR8. Moreover, these SARS-CoV-2 ssRNAs induced cytokine release from human macrophages and iPSC-derived human microglia in a sequence- and species-specific fashion. Discussion: Our findings determine TLR7 and TLR8 as key sensors of SARS-CoV-2-derived ssRNAs and may deepen our understanding of the mechanisms how this virus triggers, but also modulates an inflammatory response through innate immune signaling.

Distinct SARS-CoV-2 RNA fragments activate Toll-like receptors 7 and 8 and induce cytokine release from human macrophages and microglia

Introduction The pandemic coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and is marked by thromboembolic events and an inflammatory response throughout the body, including the brain Methods Employing the machine learning approach BrainDead we systematically screened for SARS-CoV-2 genome-derived single-stranded (ss) RNA fragments with high potential to activate the viral RNA-sensing innate immune receptors Toll-like receptor (TLR)7 and/or TLR8. Analyzing HEK TLR7/8 reporter cells we tested such RNA fragments with respect to their potential to induce activation of human TLR7 and TLR8 and to activate human macrophages, as well as iPSC-derived human microglia, the resident immune cells in the brain. Results We experimentally validated several sequence-specific RNA fragment candidates out of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA fragments predicted in silico as activators of human TLR7 and TLR8. Moreover, these SARS-CoV-2 ssRNAs induced cytokine release from human macrophages and iPSC-derived human microglia in a sequence- and species-specific fashion. Discussion Our findings determine TLR7 and TLR8 as key sensors of SARS-CoV-2-derived ssRNAs and may deepen our understanding of the mechanisms how this virus triggers, but also modulates an inflammatory response through innate immune signaling.

Differences in Immunogenicity of Three Different Homo- and Heterologous Vaccination Regimens against SARS-CoV-2.

Background: Due to findings on adverse reactions and clinical efficacy of different vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2, the administration of vaccination regimens containing both adenoviral vector vaccines and mRNA-based vaccines has become common. Data are still needed on the direct comparison of immunogenicity for these different regimens. Methods: We compared markers for immunogenicity (anti-S1 IgG/IgA, neutralizing antibodies, and T-cell response) with three different vaccination regimens (homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (n = 103), or mixture of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 with mRNA-1273 (n = 116) or BNT162b2 (n = 105)) at two time points: the day of the second vaccination as a baseline and 14 days later. Results: All examined vaccination regimens elicited measurable immune responses that were significantly enhanced after the second dose. Homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was markedly inferior in immunogenicity to all other examined regimens after administration of the second dose. Between the heterologous regimens, mRNA-1273 as second dose induced greater antibody responses than BNT162b2, with no difference found for neutralizing antibodies and T-cell response. Discussion: While these findings allow no prediction about clinical protection, from an immunological point of view, vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 with an mRNA-based vaccine at one or both time points appears preferable to homologous vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Whether or not the demonstrated differences between the heterologous regimens are of clinical significance will be subject to further research.

B-cell responses to vaccination with BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 6 months after second dose.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the state of B-cell immunity 6 months after the second vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in comparison to the state observed 2 weeks after vaccination. METHODS: Sera of 439 participants, whose immune responses to two doses of an mRNA-based vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) were previously characterized, was examined for anti-S1 IgG and IgA, anti-NCP IgG and neutralizing antibodies (nAb), and antinuclear antibodies (ANA). RESULTS: Levels of all examined markers decreased significantly from 2 weeks to 6 months after second vaccination (anti-S1 IgG: 3744 ± 2571.4 vs. 253 ± 144 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL; anti-S1 IgA: 12 ± 0 vs. 1.98 ± 1.75 optical density (OD) ratio; nAb: 100% ± 0% vs. 82% ± 19.3%), the vast majority of participants retaining reactive levels of anti-S1 IgG (436/439) and anti-S1 IgA (334/439) at 6 months. Immune responses were stronger for mRNA-1273 compared with BNT162b2 (anti-S1 IgG: 429 ± 289 vs. 243 ± 143 BAU/mL; anti-S1 IgA: 5.38 ± 3.91 vs. 1.89 ± 1.53 OD ratio; nAb: 90.5% ± 12.6% vs. 81% ± 19.3%). There was no meaningful influence of sex and age on the examined markers. There was a strong correlation between anti-S1 IgG and the surrogate neutralization assay (rho = 0.91, p <0.0001), but not for for IgA and the surrogate neutralization assay (rho = 0.52, p <0.0001). There was a ceiling effect for the association between anti-S1 IgG titres and the inhibition of binding between S1 and ACE2. ANA prevalence was unchanged from 2 weeks to 6 months after the second vaccination (87/498 vs. 77/435), as were the median ANA titres (1:160 vs. 1:160). DISCUSSION: Although the clinical consequences of decreasing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres cannot be estimated with certainty, a lowered degree of clinical protection against SARS-CoV-2 is possible. Persistently stronger responses to mRNA-1273 suggest that it might confer greater protection than BNT162b2, even 6 months after the second vaccination. Neither examined vaccinations induced ANA within the examined time frame.

Kinetics of the Antibody Response to Boostering With Three Different Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: Heterologous vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and a second dose of an mRNA-based vaccine have been shown to be more immunogenic than homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. In the current study, we examined the kinetics of the antibody response to the second dose of three different vaccination regimens (homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vs. ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 + BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) against SARS-CoV-2 in a longitudinal manner; whether there are differences in latency or amplitude of the early response and which markers are most suitable to detect these responses. METHODS: We performed assays for anti-S1 IgG and IgA, anti-NCP IgG and a surrogate neutralization assay on serum samples collected from 57 participants on the day of the second vaccination as well as the following seven days. RESULTS: All examined vaccination regimens induced detectable antibody responses within the examined time frame. Both heterologous regimens induced responses earlier and with a higher amplitude than homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Between the heterologous regimens, amplitudes were somewhat higher for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 + mRNA-1273. There was no difference in latency between the IgG and IgA responses. Increases in the surrogate neutralization assay were the first changes to be detectable for all regimens and the only significant change seen for homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. DISCUSSION: Both examined heterologous vaccination regimens are superior in immunogenicity, including the latency of the response, to homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. While the IgA response has a shorter latency than the IgG response after the first dose, no such difference was found after the second dose, implying that both responses are driven by separate plasma cell populations. Early and steep increases in surrogate neutralization levels suggest that this might be a more sensitive marker for antibody responses after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 than absolute levels of anti-S1 IgG.

The temporal course of T- and B-cell responses to vaccination with BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the response of the immune system (and its influencing factors) to vaccination with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. METHODS: 531 vaccinees, recruited from healthcare professionals, donated samples before, in between, and after the administration of the two doses of the vaccine. T- and B-cell responses were examined via interferon-γ (IFN-γ) release assay, and antibodies against different epitopes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (S1 and NCP) were detected via ELISA and surrogate neutralization assay. Results were correlated with influencing factors such as age, sex, prior infection, vaccine received (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273), and immunosuppression. Furthermore, antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) were measured to screen for autoimmune responses following vaccination with an mRNA vaccine. RESULTS: No markers of immunity against SARS-CoV-2 were found before the first vaccination. Two weeks after it, specific responses against SARS-CoV-2 were already measurable (median ± median absolute deviation (MAD): anti-S1 IgG 195.5 ± 172.7 BAU/mL; IgA 6.7 ± 4.9 OD; surrogate neutralization 39 ± 23.7%), and were significantly increased two weeks after the second dose (anti-S1 IgG 3744 ± 2571.4 BAU/mL; IgA 12 ± 0 OD; surrogate neutralization 100 ± 0%, IFN-γ 1897.2 ± 886.7 mIU/mL). Responses were stronger for younger participants (this difference decreasing after the second dose). Further influences were previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (causing significantly stronger responses after the first dose compared to unexposed individuals (p ≤ 0.0001)) and the vaccine received (significantly stronger reactions for recipients of mRNA-1273 after both doses, p < 0.05-0.0001). Some forms of immunosuppression significantly impeded the immune response to the vaccination (with no observable immune response in three immunosuppressed participants). There was no significant induction of ANAs by the vaccination (no change in qualitative ANA results (p 0.2592) nor ANA titres (p 0.08) from pre-to post-vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Both vaccines elicit strong and specific immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 which become detectable one week (T-cell response) or two weeks (B-cell response) after the first dose.