Immunogenicity Differences of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine According to Pre-Existing Adenovirus Immunity.

This study investigated the immunogenicity of, and reactogenicity to, the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine according to pre-existing adenovirus immunity. Individuals scheduled for COVID-19 vaccination were prospectively enrolled in a tertiary hospital with 2400 beds from March 2020 onwards. Pre-existing adenovirus immunity data was obtained before ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination. A total of 68 adult patients administered two doses of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine were enrolled. Pre-existing adenovirus immunity was identified in 49 patients (72.1%), but not in the remaining 19 patients (27.9%). The geometric mean titer of S-specific IgG antibodies was statistically higher in individuals without pre-existing adenovirus immunity at several time points: before the second ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 dose (56.4 (36.6-125.0) vs. 51.0 (17.9-122.3), p = 0.024), 2-3 weeks after the second ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 dose (629.5 (451.5-926.5) vs. 555.0 (287.3-926.0), p = 0.049), and 3 months after the second ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 dose (274.5 (160.5-655.3) vs. 176.0 (94.3-255.3), p = 0.033). In the absence of pre-existing adenovirus immunity, systemic events were observed with higher frequency, especially chills (73.7% vs. 31.9%, p = 0.002). In conclusion, individuals without pre-existing adenovirus immunity showed a higher immune response to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination and a higher frequency of reactogenicity to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination was observed.

Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine in South Korean Healthcare Workers.

PURPOSE: The association between reactogenicity and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 is controversial. We aimed to evaluate this association among South Korean healthcare workers (HCWs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants received two doses of the ChAdOx1vaccine 12 weeks apart. Blood samples were tested for anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein receptor binding domain antibodies about 2 months after the first and second doses using the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay kits. Adverse events were noted using an online self-reporting questionnaire. RESULTS: Among the 232 HCWs, pain (85.78% after the first dose vs. 58.62% after the second dose, p<0.001) was the most prominent local reaction, and myalgia or fatigue (84.05% vs. 53.02%, p<0.001) was the most prominent systemic reaction. The frequency of all adverse events was significantly reduced after the second dose. After the first dose, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 S showed significantly higher titer in the group with swelling, itching, fever, and nausea. Also, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 S titer significantly increased as the grade of fever (p=0.007) and duration of fever (p=0.026) increased; however, there was no significant correlation between immunogenicity and adverse event after the second dose. The group with pain after the first dose showed a greater increase in the anti-SARS-CoV-2 S difference between the second and first doses compared to the group without pain (542.2 U/mL vs. 363.8 U/mL, p=0.037). CONCLUSION: The frequency of adverse events occurring after the first dose of the ChAdOx1 was significantly reduced after the second dose. Interestingly, the elevation of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S titer was significantly increased in the group with pain after the first dose.

Estimation of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Activity and Protective Immunity in Different Vaccine Types Using Three Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test Assays and Two Semiquantitative Binding Assays Targeting the Receptor-Binding Domain.

Estimating neutralizing activity in vaccinees is crucial for predicting the protective effect against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). As the plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) requires a biosafety level 3 facility, it would be advantageous if surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) assays and binding assays could predict neutralizing activity. Here, five different assays were evaluated with respect to the PRNT in vaccinees: three sVNT assays from GenScript, Boditech Med, and SD Biosensor and two semiquantitative binding assays from Roche and Abbott. The vaccinees were subjected to three vaccination protocols: homologous ChAdOx1, homologous BNT162b2, and heterologous administration. The ability to predict a 50% neutralizing dose (ND50) of ≥20 largely varied among the assays, with the binding assays showing substantial agreement (kappa, ~0.90) and the sVNT assays showing relatively poor performance, especially in the ChAdOx1 group (kappa, 0.33 to 0.97). The ability to predict an ND50 value of ≥118.25, indicating a protective effect, was comparable among different assays. Applying optimal cutoffs based on Youden's index, the kappa agreements were greater than 0.60 for all assays in the total group. Overall, relatively poor performance was demonstrated in the ChAdOx1 group, owing to low antibody titers. Although there were intra-assay differences related to the vaccination protocols, as well as interassay differences, all assays demonstrated fair performance in predicting the protective effect using the new cutoffs. This study demonstrates the need for a different cutoff for each assay to appropriately determine a higher neutralizing titer and suggests the clinical feasibility of using various assays for estimation of the protective effect. IMPORTANCE The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to last, despite high COVID-19 vaccination rates. As many people experience breakthrough infection after prior infection and/or vaccination, estimating the neutralization activity and predicting the protective effect are major issues of concern. However, since standard neutralization tests are not available in most clinical laboratories, it would be beneficial if commercial assays could predict these aspects. In this study, we evaluated the performance of three sVNT assays and two semiquantitative binding assays targeting the receptor-binding domain with respect to the PRNT. Our results suggest that these assays could be used for predicting the protective effect by adjusting the cutoffs.

Kinetics of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody titers and estimated protective immunity against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant: A prospective nationwide cohort study comparing three COVID-19 vaccination protocols in South Korea.

Introduction: Despite vaccine development, the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing due to immunity-escaping variants of concern (VOCs). Estimations of vaccine-induced protective immunity against VOCs are essential for setting proper COVID-19 vaccination policy. Methods: We performed plaque-reduction neutralizing tests (PRNTs) using sera from healthcare workers (HCWs) collected from baseline to six months after COVID-19 vaccination and from convalescent COVID-19 patients. The 20.2% of the mean PRNT titer of convalescent sera was used as 50% protective value, and the percentage of HCWs with protective immunity for each week (percent-week) was compared among vaccination groups. A correlation equation was deduced between a PRNT 50% neutralizing dose (ND50) against wild type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 and that of the Delta variant. Results: We conducted PRNTs on 1,287 serum samples from 297 HCWs (99 HCWs who received homologous ChAdOx1 vaccination (ChAd), 99 from HCWs who received homologous BNT162b2 (BNT), and 99 from HCWs who received heterologous ChAd followed by BNT (ChAd-BNT)). Using 365 serum samples from 116 convalescent COVID-19 patients, PRNT ND50 of 118.25 was derived as 50% protective value. The 6-month cumulative percentage of HCWs with protective immunity against WT SARS-CoV-2 was highest in the BNT group (2297.0 percent-week), followed by the ChAd-BNT (1576.8) and ChAd (1403.0) groups. In the inter-group comparison, protective percentage of the BNT group (median 96.0%, IQR 91.2-99.2%) was comparable to the ChAd-BNT group (median 85.4%, IQR 15.7-100%; P =0.117) and significantly higher than the ChAd group (median 60.1%, IQR 20.0-87.1%; P <0.001). When Delta PRNT was estimated using the correlation equation, protective immunity at the 6-month waning point was markedly decreased (28.3% for ChAd group, 52.5% for BNT, and 66.7% for ChAd-BNT). Conclusion: Decreased vaccine-induced protective immunity at the 6-month waning point and lesser response against the Delta variant may explain the Delta-dominated outbreak of late 2021. Follow-up studies for newly-emerging VOCs would also be needed.

Heterologous ChAdOx1 and Bnt162b2 vaccination induces strong neutralizing antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 including delta variant with tolerable reactogenicity.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed humoral responses and reactogenicity following the heterologous vaccination compared to the homologous vaccination groups. METHODS: We enrolled healthcare workers (HCWs) who were either vaccinated with ChAdOx1 followed by BNT162b2 (heterologous group) or 2 doses of ChAdOx1 (ChAdOx1 group) or BNT162b2 (BNT162b2 group). Immunogenicity was assessed by measuring antibody titers against receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in all participants and neutralizing antibody titer in 100 participants per group. Reactogenicity was evaluated by a questionnaire-based survey. RESULTS: We enrolled 499 HCWs (ChAdOx1, n = 199; BNT162b2, n = 200; heterologous ChAdOx1/BNT162b2, n = 100). The geometric mean titer of anti-receptor-binding domain antibody at 14 days after the booster dose was significantly higher in the heterologous group (11 780.55 binding antibody unit (BAU)/mL [95% CI, 10 891.52-12 742.14]) than in the ChAdOx1 (1561.51 [95% CI, 1415.03-1723.15]) or BNT162b2 (2895.90 [95% CI, 2664.01-3147.98]) groups (both p < 0.001). The neutralizing antibody titer of the heterologous group (geometric mean ND50, 2367.74 [95% CI, 1970.03-2845.74]) was comparable to that of the BNT162b2 group (2118.63 [95% CI, 1755.88-2556.32]; p > 0.05) but higher than that of the ChAdOx1 group (391.77 [95% CI, 326.16-470.59]; p < 0.001). Compared with those against wild-type SARS-CoV-2, the geometric mean neutralizing antibody titers against the Delta variant at 14 days after the boosting were reduced by 3.0-fold in the heterologous group (geometric mean ND50, 872.01 [95% CI, 685.33-1109.54]), 4.0-fold in the BNT162b2 group (337.93 [95% CI, 262.78-434.57]), and 3.2-fold in the ChAdOx1 group (206.61 [95% CI, 144.05-296.34]). The local or systemic reactogenicity after the booster dose in the heterologous group was higher than that of the ChAdOx1 group but comparable to that of the BNT162b2 group. DISCUSSION: Heterologous ChAdOx1 followed by BNT162b2 vaccination with a 12-week interval induced a robust humoral immune response against SARS-CoV-2, including the Delta variant, that was comparable to the homologous BNT162b2 vaccination and stronger than the homologous ChAdOx1 vaccination, with a tolerable reactogenicity profile.

Safety and immunogenicity of two recombinant DNA COVID-19 vaccines containing the coding regions of the spike or spike and nucleocapsid proteins: an interim analysis of two open-label, non-randomised, phase 1 trials in healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of two recombinant DNA vaccines for COVID-19: GX-19 containing plasmid DNA encoding the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and GX-19N containing plasmid DNA encoding the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) foldon, nucleocapsid protein, and plasmid DNA encoding the spike protein. METHODS: Two open-label non-randomised phase 1 trials, one of GX-19 and the other of GX-19N were done at two hospitals in South Korea. We enrolled healthy adults aged 19-49 years for the GX-19 trial and healthy adults aged 19-54 years for the GX-19N trial. Participants who tested positive by serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 were excluded. At 4-week intervals, the GX-19 trial participants received two vaccine doses (either 1·5 mg or 3·0 mg), and the GX-19N trial participants received two 3·0 mg doses. The vaccines were delivered intramuscularly using an electroporator. The participants were followed up for 52 weeks after first vaccination. Data collected up to day 57 after first vaccination were analysed in this interim analysis. The primary outcome was safety within 28 days after each vaccination measured in the intention-to-treat population. The secondary outcome was vaccine immunogenicity using blood samples collected on day 43 or 57 after first vaccination measured in the intention-to-treat population. The GX-19 (NCT044445389) and GX-19N (NCT04715997) trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. FINDINGS: Between June 17 and July 30, 2020, we screened 97 individuals, of whom 40 (41%) participants were enrolled in the GX-19 trial (20 [50%] in the 1·5 mg group and 20 [50%] in the 3·0 mg group). Between Dec 28 and 31, 2020, we screened 23 participants, of whom 21 (91%) participants were enrolled on the GX-19N trial. 32 (52%) of 61 participants reported 80 treatment-emergent adverse events after vaccination. All solicited adverse events were mild except one (2%) case of moderate fatigue in the 1·5 mg GX-19 group; no serious vaccine-related adverse events were detected. Binding antibody responses increased after second dose of vaccination in all groups (p=0·0002 in the 1·5 mg GX-19 group; p<0·0001 in the 3·0 mg GX-19; and p=0·0004 for the spike protein and p=0·0001 for the RBD in the 3·0 mg GX-19N group). INTERPRETATION: GX-19 and GX-19N are safe and well tolerated. GX-19N induces humoral and broad SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses. GX-19N shows lower neutralising antibody responses and needs improvement to enhance immunogenicity. FUNDING: The Korea Drug Development Fund, funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT, Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy, and Ministry of Health and Welfare.

Comparative genome analysis of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) from different geographical locations and the effect of mutations on major target proteins: An in silico insight.

A novel severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing COVID-19 pandemic in humans, recently emerged and has exported in more than 200 countries as a result of rapid spread. In this study, we have made an attempt to investigate the SARS-CoV-2 genome reported from 13 different countries, identification of mutations in major coronavirus proteins of these different SARS-CoV-2 genomes and compared with SARS-CoV. These thirteen complete genome sequences of SARS-CoV-2 showed high identity (>99%) to each other, while they shared 82% identity with SARS-CoV. Here, we performed a very systematic mutational analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomes from different geographical locations, which enabled us to identify numerous unique features of this viral genome. This includes several important country-specific unique mutations in the major proteins of SARS-CoV-2 namely, replicase polyprotein, spike glycoprotein, envelope protein and nucleocapsid protein. Indian strain showed mutation in spike glycoprotein at R408I and in replicase polyprotein at I671T, P2144S and A2798V,. While the spike protein of Spain & South Korea carried F797C and S221W mutation, respectively. Likewise, several important country specific mutations were analyzed. The effect of mutations of these major proteins were also investigated using various in silico approaches. Main protease (Mpro), the therapeutic target protein of SARS with maximum reported inhibitors, was thoroughly investigated and the effect of mutation on the binding affinity and structural dynamics of Mpro was studied. It was found that the R60C mutation in Mpro affects the protein dynamics, thereby, affecting the binding of inhibitor within its active site. The implications of mutation on structural characteristics were determined. The information provided in this manuscript holds great potential in further scientific research towards the design of potential vaccine candidates/small molecular inhibitor against COVID19.