Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Vaccines ; 10(5):649, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1792355

ABSTRACT

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.

2.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 2022 Mar 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1783259

ABSTRACT

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.

3.
Front Immunol ; 13: 811020, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1674341

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , /immunology , Immunization, Secondary/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Age Factors , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibody Formation/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin A/blood , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Male , Middle Aged , Sex Factors , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Vaccination , Young Adult
4.
Ophthalmologe ; 2022 Jan 28.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1653449

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are only few reports on ocular symptoms and manifestations in association with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe ocular manifestations in the anterior and posterior segments of the eye and to analyze viral prevalence in tears of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated from 16 April 2020 to 7 January 2021 at this hospital were screened for ocular manifestations in the anterior and posterior segments. Conjunctival swabs were analyzed for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients were enrolled in this study. In the anterior segment we found chemosis of the conjunctiva (5), hyposphagma (2) and conjunctivitis (1). In 11 patients vascular alterations and potentially disease-specific manifestations of the fundus were found in one or both eyes: retinal hemorrhages (5), cotton wool spots (5) and tortuosity (5). One patient demonstrated branch artery occlusion, one had branch retinal vein occlusion and two patients had positive conjunctival swab results in one or both eyes. CONCLUSION: Our findings of the anterior segment are commonly known, although not specific for COVID-19. Various vascular fundus abnormalities were found in the study; however, it is unclear whether these were correlated to systemic comorbidities or whether they were caused or exacerbated by COVID-19. This study suggests that the risk of viral transmission via tears is low.

5.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(5): 701-709, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1415295

ABSTRACT

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.

6.
Int J Infect Dis ; 110: 114-122, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1349465

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationship between antibody status and cycle threshold (Ct) values, the prognostic value of the latter for COVID-19 patients, and the inter-assay comparability of SARS-CoV-2 Ct values. METHODS: In 347 COVID-19 inpatients, SARS-CoV-2 Ct values (via reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction) on admission were compared between 2 assays and correlated with the antibody response (in the course of the disease), the clinical course and the time since onset of symptoms. RESULTS: Ct values for 2 of 3 target genes showed significant differences between the 2 assays used (P=0.012 and P<0.0001). Ct values were significantly higher for antibody positive patients (P<0.0001) and positively correlated with the amount of time since onset of symptoms (R: 0.332-0.363; P<0.001). Patients with fatal outcomes showed higher viral loads than survivors (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Ct values depend strongly on assay used and target gene examined and should not be used as quantitative values to guide therapeutic or diagnostic decisions. The inverse association between antibody status and viral load suggests that antibodies contribute to the elimination of the virus, independent of the outcome, which is influenced by the viral load on admission and might depend more strongly on other parts of the immune response.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Incidence , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Reverse Transcription , Viral Load
7.
Immunity ; 53(6): 1258-1271.e5, 2020 12 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-988080

ABSTRACT

CD4+ T cells reactive against SARS-CoV-2 can be found in unexposed individuals, and these are suggested to arise in response to common cold coronavirus (CCCoV) infection. Here, we utilized SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+ T cell enrichment to examine the antigen avidity and clonality of these cells, as well as the relative contribution of CCCoV cross-reactivity. SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+ memory T cells were present in virtually all unexposed individuals examined, displaying low functional avidity and multiple, highly variable cross-reactivities that were not restricted to CCCoVs. SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+ T cells from COVID-19 patients lacked cross-reactivity to CCCoVs, irrespective of strong memory T cell responses against CCCoV in all donors analyzed. In severe but not mild COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells displayed low functional avidity and clonality, despite increased frequencies. Our findings identify low-avidity CD4+ T cell responses as a hallmark of severe COVID-19 and argue against a protective role for CCCoV-reactive T cells in SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell/metabolism , Rhinovirus/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Antigens, Viral/immunology , Cells, Cultured , Cross Reactions , Disease Progression , Environmental Exposure , Humans , Immunologic Memory , Lymphocyte Activation , Protein Binding , Severity of Illness Index , T-Cell Antigen Receptor Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL