Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Main subject
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
biorxiv; 2023.
Preprint in English | bioRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.11.06.565765

ABSTRACT

Waning immunity and continued virus evolution have limited the durability of protection from symptomatic infection mediated by intramuscularly (IM)-delivered mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 although protection from severe disease remains high. Mucosal vaccination has been proposed as a strategy to increase protection at the site of SARS-CoV-2 infection by enhancing airway immunity, potentially reducing rates of infection and transmission. Here, we compared protection against XBB.1.16 virus challenge 5 months following IM or mucosal boosting in non-human primates (NHP) that had previously received a two-dose mRNA-1273 primary vaccine regimen. The mucosal boost was composed of a bivalent chimpanzee adenoviral-vectored vaccine encoding for both SARS-CoV-2 WA1 and BA.5 spike proteins (ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S) and delivered either by an intranasal mist or an inhaled aerosol. An additional group of animals was boosted by the IM route with bivalent WA1/BA.5 spike-matched mRNA (mRNA-1273.222) as a benchmark control. NHP were challenged in the upper and lower airways 18 weeks after boosting with XBB.1.16, a heterologous Omicron lineage strain. Cohorts boosted with ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S by an aerosolized or intranasal route had low to undetectable virus replication as assessed by levels of subgenomic SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the lungs and nose, respectively. In contrast, animals that received the mRNA-1273.222 boost by the IM route showed minimal protection against virus replication in the upper airway but substantial reduction of virus RNA levels in the lower airway. Immune analysis showed that the mucosal vaccines elicited more durable antibody and T cell responses than the IM vaccine. Protection elicited by the aerosolized vaccine was associated with mucosal IgG and IgA responses, whereas protection elicited by intranasal delivery was mediated primarily by mucosal IgA. Thus, durable immunity and effective protection against a highly transmissible heterologous variant in both the upper and lower airways can be achieved by mucosal delivery of a virus-vectored vaccine. Our study provides a template for the development of mucosal vaccines that limit infection and transmission against respiratory pathogens. Graphical abstract O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=166 HEIGHT=200 SRC="FIGDIR/small/565765v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (48K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@d49b9dorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@347455org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1c1a196org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1579130_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG C_FIG


Subject(s)
COVID-19
2.
biorxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | bioRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.02.03.479037

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron is highly transmissible and has substantial resistance to antibody neutralization following immunization with ancestral spike-matched vaccines. It is unclear whether boosting with Omicron-specific vaccines would enhance immunity and protection. Here, nonhuman primates that received mRNA-1273 at weeks 0 and 4 were boosted at week 41 with mRNA-1273 or mRNA-Omicron. Neutralizing antibody titers against D614G were 4760 and 270 reciprocal ID50 at week 6 (peak) and week 41 (pre-boost), respectively, and 320 and 110 for Omicron. Two weeks after boost, titers against D614G and Omicron increased to 5360 and 2980, respectively, for mRNA-1273 and 2670 and 1930 for mRNA-Omicron. Following either boost, 70-80% of spike-specific B cells were cross-reactive against both WA1 and Omicron. Significant and equivalent control of virus replication in lower airways was observed following either boost. Therefore, an Omicron boost may not provide greater immunity or protection compared to a boost with the current mRNA-1273 vaccine.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL