Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Emerg Microbes Infect ; 12(1): 2202263, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2295932

ABSTRACT

The adaptive immunity against SARS-CoV-2 prototype strain and Omicron sublineages induced by BA.1 breakthrough infection in vaccinees of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines have not been well characterized. Here, we report that BA.1 breakthrough infection induced mucosal sIgA and resulted in higher IgG titers against prototype strain and Omicron sublineages in vaccinees than in vaccine naïve-infected individuals. BA.1 breakthrough infection boosted antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis to prototype strain and BA.1, BA.1.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, and BA.2.75 but not BA.4/5 and induced neutralization against prototype strain and BA.1, BA.1.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.2.75, and BA.4/5 but not BF.7, BQ.1, and XBB. In total, BA.1 breakthrough infection individuals produced less extensive sIgA, plasma IgG and NAb responses against Omicron sublineages compared with those against prototype strain. Further, BA.1 breakthrough infection induced recall B cell response to prototype strain and Omicron variant, primarily targeting memory B cells producing conserved epitopes. Memory T cell responses against Omicron is largely preserved. Individuals with vaccine booster did not induce more beneficial immune responses to Omicron sublineages upon BA.1 breakthrough infection than those with primary vaccine dose only. The breakthrough infection individuals produced stronger adaptive immunity than those of inactivated vaccine-healthy individuals. These data have important implications for understanding the vaccine effectiveness and adaptive immunity to breakthrough infection in individuals fully immunized with inactivated vaccines. Omicron sublineages, especially for those emerged after BA.4/5 strain, evade NAb responses induced by BA.1 breakthrough infection. It is urgent to optimize the vaccine immunogen design and formulations to SARS-CoV-2 variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , Breakthrough Infections , SARS-CoV-2 , T-Lymphocytes , Immunoglobulin A, Secretory , Immunoglobulin G , Antibodies, Viral , Antibodies, Neutralizing
2.
Lancet Microbe ; 3(5): e348-e356, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1984300

ABSTRACT

Background: The memory immune response is crucial for preventing reinfection or reducing disease severity. However, the robustness and functionality of the humoral and T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 remains unknown 12 months after initial infection. The aim of this study is to investigate the durability and functionality of the humoral and T-cell response to the original SARS-CoV-2 strain and variants in recovered patients 12 months after infection. Methods: In this longitudinal cohort study, we recruited participants who had recovered from COVID-19 and who were discharged from the Wuhan Research Center for Communicable Disease Diagnosis and Treatment at the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Wuhan, China, between Jan 7 and May 29, 2020. Patients received a follow-up visit between Dec 16, 2020, and Jan 27, 2021. We evaluated the presence of IgM, IgA, and IgG antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein, Spike protein, and the receptor-binding domain 12 months after initial infection, using ELISA. Neutralising antibodies against the original SARS-CoV-2 strain, and the D614G, beta (B.1.351), and delta (B.1.617.2) variants were analysed using a microneutralisation assay in a subset of plasma samples. We analysed the magnitude and breadth of the SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T-cell responses using the interferon γ (IFNγ) enzyme-linked immune absorbent spot (ELISpot) assay and intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) assay. The antibody response and T-cell response (ie, IFN-γ, interleukin-2 [IL-2], and tumour necrosis factor α [TNFα]) were analysed by age and disease severity. Antibody titres were also analysed according to sequelae symptoms. Findings: We enrolled 1096 patients, including 289 (26·4%) patients with moderate initial disease, 734 (67·0%) with severe initial disease, and 73 (6·7%) with critical initial disease. Paired plasma samples were collected from 141 patients during the follow-up visits for the microneutralisation assay. PBMCs were collected from 92 of 141 individuals at the 12-month follow-up visit, of which 80 were analysed by ELISpot and 92 by ICS assay to detect the SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T-cell responses. N-IgG (899 [82·0%]), S-IgG (1043 [95·2%]), RBD-IgG (1032 [94·2%]), and neutralising (115 [81·6%] of 141) antibodies were detectable 12 months after initial infection in most individuals. Neutralising antibodies remained stable 6 and 12 months after initial infection in most individuals younger than 60 years. Multifunctional T-cell responses were detected for all SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins tested. There was no difference in the magnitude of T-cell responses or cytokine profiles in individuals with different symptom severity. Moreover, we evaluated both antibody and T-cell responses to the D614G, beta, and delta viral strains. The degree of reduced in-vitro neutralising antibody responses to the D614G and delta variants, but not to the beta variant, was associated with the neutralising antibody titres after SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also found poor neutralising antibody responses to the beta variant; 83 (72·2%) of 115 patients showed no response at all. Moreover, the neutralising antibody titre reduction of the recovered patient plasma against the delta variant was similar to that of the D614G variant and lower than that of the beta variant. By contrast, T-cell responses were cross-reactive to the beta variant in most individuals. Importantly, T-cell responses could be detected in all individuals who had lost the neutralising antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 12 months after the initial infection. Interpretation: SARS-CoV-2-specific neutralising antibody and T-cell responses were retained 12 months after initial infection. Neutralising antibodies to the D614G, beta, and delta viral strains were reduced compared with those for the original strain, and were diminished in general. Memory T-cell responses to the original strain were not disrupted by new variants. This study suggests that cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses could be particularly important in the protection against severe disease caused by variants of concern whereas neutralising antibody responses seem to reduce over time. Funding: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, National Natural Science Foundation, and UK Medical Research Council.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Cytokines , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , Longitudinal Studies , T-Lymphocytes
3.
J Med Virol ; 94(12): 5746-5757, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1976742

ABSTRACT

We evaluated and compared humoral immune responses after inactivated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination among naïve individuals, asymptomatically infected individuals, and recovered patients with varying severity. In this multicenter, prospective cohort study, blood samples from 666 participants were collected before and after 2 doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccination. Among 392 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-naïve individuals, the seroconversion rate increased significantly from 51.8% (median antispike protein pan-immunoglobulins [S-Igs] titer: 0.8 U/ml) after the first dose to 96% (median S-Igs titer: 79.5 U/ml) after the second dose. Thirty-two percent of naïve individuals had detectable neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against the original strain but all of them lost neutralizing activity against the Omicron variant. In 274 individuals with natural infection, humoral immunity was significantly improved after a single vaccine dose, with median S-Igs titers of 596.7, 1176, 1086.5, and 1828 U/ml for asymptomatic infections, mild cases, moderate cases, and severe/critical cases, respectively. NAb titers also improved significantly. However, the second dose did not substantially increase antibody levels. Although a booster dose is needed for those without infection, our findings indicate that recovered patients should receive only a single dose of the vaccine, regardless of the clinical severity, until there is sufficient evidence to confirm the benefits of a second dose.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Vaccines, Inactivated
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL