ABSTRACT
Objectives: To evaluate COVID-19 vaccines in primary prevention against infections and lessening the severity of illness following the most recent outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in Shanghai. Method(s): To investigate whether inactivated vaccines were effective in protecting against COVID-19 infections, we estimated the odds ratio (OR) of the vaccination in COVID-19 cases vs. matched community-based healthy controls. To evaluate the potential benefits of vaccination in lowering the risk of symptomatic infection (vs. asymptomatic), we estimated the relative risk (RR) of symptomatic infections among diagnosed patients. We also applied the multivariate stepwise Logistic regression analyses to measure the risk of disease severity (symptomatic vs. asymptomatic and moderate/severe vs. mild) in COVID-19 patient cohort with vaccination status as an independent variable while controlling for potential confounding factors. Result(s): Out of the 153,544 COVID-19 patients included in the analysis, 118,124 (76.9%) patients had been vaccinated and 143,225(93.3%) were asymptomatic patients. Of the 10,319 symptomatic patients, 10,031(97.2%), 281(2.7%) and 7(0.1%) experienced mild, moderate, and severe infections, respectively. There is no evidence that the vaccination helped protect from infections (OR=0.82, p=0.613). The vaccination, however, offered a small but significant protection against symptomatic infections (RR=0.92, p < 0.001) and halved the risk of moderate/severe infections (OR=0.48, 95% CI: 0.37 - 0.61). Older age (> 60 years) and malignant tumors were significantly associated with moderate/severe infections. Gender also appeared to be a risk factor for symptomatic infections, with females being associated with a lower risk for moderate/severe illness. Conclusion(s): Inactivated COVID-19 vaccines helped provide a small but significant protection against symptomatic infections and halved risk of moderate/severe illness among symptomatic patients. The vaccination was not effective in blocking COVID-19 Omicron variant community spread.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Objectives: This study aimed to determine disease severity, clinical features, clinical outcome in hospitalized patients with the Omicron variant and evaluate the effectiveness of one-dose, two-dose, and three-dose inactivated vaccines in reducing viral loads, disease course, ICU admissions and severe diseases. Method(s): Retrospective cohort analysis was performed on 5,170 adult patients (>=18 years) identified as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 positive with Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction admitted at Shanghai Medical Center for Gerontology between March 2022 and June 2022. COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness was assessed using logistic regression models evaluating the association between the risk of vaccination and clinical outcomes, adjusting for confounders. Result(s): Among 5,170 enrolled patients, the median age was 53 years, and 2,861 (55.3%) were male. 71.0% were mild COVID-19 cases, and cough (1,137 [22.0%]), fever (592 [11.5%]), sore throat (510 [9.9%]), and fatigue (334 [6.5%]) were the most common symptoms on the patient's first admission. Ct values increased generally over time and 27.1% patients experienced a high viral load (Ct value< 20) during their stay. 105(2.0%) of these patients were transferred to the intensive care unit after admission. 97.1% patients were cured or showed an improvement in symptoms and 0.9% died in hospital. The median length of hospital stay was 8.7+/-4.5 days. In multivariate logistic analysis, booster vaccination can significantly reduce ICU admissions and decrease the severity of COVID-19 outcome when compared with less doses of vaccine (OR=0.75, 95%CI, 0.62-0.91, P<=0.005;OR=0.99, 95%CI, 0.99-1.00, p<0.001). Conclusion(s): In summary, the most of patients who contracted SARSCoV-2 omicron variant had mild clinical features and patients with vaccination took less time to lower viral loads. As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed, an older and less vaccinated population was associated with higher risk for ICU admission and severe disease.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Undoubtedly, vaccination can be one of the promising approaches to control infectious diseases such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Inactivated viral vaccines have a history of "vaccine-induced enhanced disease", which may occur when neutralizing antibodies bind to viral antigens without blocking or clearing the infection. This can cause additional inflammation through the mechanisms described for other respiratory pathogens and lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome. Since the structure and function of SARS-CoV-2 glycoproteins are well known, vaccine manufacturers appear to be careful when inactivating the virus to completely inactivate and maintain the viral epitopes necessary for protective immune induction. It seems that caution should be taken in the usage of inactivated vaccines in children to ensure they are safe and efficacious, vaccinated children should be well monitored and any symptoms should be reported immediately.
ABSTRACT
Aims and objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the immediate adverse effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (COVAXIN) in a pregnant woman with that of a nonpregnant woman. Material(s) and Method(s): It is a prospective observational study done at Vanivilas Hospital, Bangalore Medical College & Research Institute (BMCRI) for 2 months. The sample size was 100 pregnant and 100 nonpregnant women. Telephonically, patients were followed-up, and details of the side/adverse effects were collected in a proforma after 2 and 14 days. Data collected from both groups were analyzed using the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Result(s): The majority of women were in the age group of <=25 years (64.0% and 36.0%, respectively) with a mean age of 25.01 +/- 3.71 years among the pregnant and 28.52 +/- 6.00 years among nonpregnant women. About 25.0% of pregnant women and 38.0% of nonpregnant women reported side effects. About 15.0% and 22.0% had taken treatment for side effects among pregnant women and nonpregnant women, respectively. Among the pregnant women, the common side effects reported were injection site pain (17) followed by fever (5), fatigue (4), and myalgia (03). Whereas among the nonpregnant women, the common side effects reported were injection site pain (28) followed by fever (6), myalgia (3), headache (2), and fatigue (1). Conclusion(s): Side effects reported following the administration of Covaxin in pregnant and nonpregnant women are fever, fatigue, injection site pain, myalgia, and headache. The proportion of side effects was not significantly different in the pregnant and nonpregnant women following Covaxin administration. Clinical significance: Covaxin is an inactivated killed vaccine against COVID-19 by Bharat Biotech. The vaccine has been recommended for pregnant women by the Government of India during corona pandemic. Studies are lacking regarding the difference in adverse events in pregnant versus nonpregnant women, after vaccine administration.Copyright © The Author(s).
ABSTRACT
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of preclinical studies on the safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine candidate to warrant further clinical evaluation. Method(s): SARS-CoV-2 positive nasopharyngeal swab specimens were confirmed by real-time polymerase chain reaction and next-generation sequencing. The safety and immunogenicity tests of the COVID-19 vaccine were carried out in rats and Rhesus monkeys, and Balb/C mice and Rhesus monkeys, respectively. Result(s): The candidate vaccine was well tolerated and induced promising levels of SARS-CoV-2- specific IgG1, IgG2a, and Granzyme B in Balb/C mice, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG and neutralizing antibodies in Rhesus monkeys. Based on cVNT results, the inactivated vaccine in 0.5 and 1 microg/100 microL doses was able to induce a neutralizing effect against the SARS-CoV-2 virus up to a dilution of 1:512 and 1:1000. The protective efficacy of the vaccine candidate was challenged with 2 x108 PFU of live viruses and confirmed by lung CT scan and histopathological evaluations compared to the control group. Repeated intramuscular injection of the candidate vaccine was generally well-tolerated in Rats and Rhesuses. No significant side effects were observed in rats injected with ten full human doses and in the Rhesus monkeys with three full human doses. Conclusion(s): Based on the findings presented in this study, it is recommended that this vaccine be moved into human testing commencing with a phase I clinical trial.Copyright © 2021 Muslim OT et al.
ABSTRACT
Introduction In this study, we aimed to monitor anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid antibodies positivity in healthcare workers (HCWs) vaccinated with two doses of inactivated CoronaVac (Sinovac, China) vaccine. Methods Overall, 242 volunteer HCWs were included. Of the participants, 193 were HCWs without history of prior documented COVID-19 (Group 1), while 49 had history of prior documented COVID-19 before vaccination (Group 2). The participants were followed up for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies positivity at four different blood sampling time points (immediately before the second vaccine dose and at the 1st, 3rd months and 141-150 days after the second dose). We investigated the serum IgG class antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 RBD region and IgG class antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen by chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) method using commercial kits. Results We found positive serum anti-RBD IgG antibody in 76.4% of the participants (71% in Group 1;98% in Group 2) 28 days after the first dose. When the antibody levels of the groups were compared at the four blood sampling time points, Group 2 anti-RBD IgG levels were found to be significantly higher than those in Group 1 at all follow-up time points. Although anti-RBD IgG positivity persisted in 95.6% of all participants in the last blood sampling time point, a significant decrease was observed in antibody levels compared to the previous blood sampling time point. Anti-nucleocapsid IgG antibody was positive in 12 (6.2%) of participants in Group 1 and 32 (65.3%) in Group 2 at day 28 after the first dose. At the fourth blood sampling time point, anti-nucleocapsid antibodies were found to be positive in a total of 20 (9.7%) subjects, 10 (6.1%) in Group 1 and 10 (23.8%) in Group 2. Conclusions In this study, it was determined that serum antibody levels decreased in both groups after the third month after the second dose in HCWs vaccinated with CoronaVac vaccine.Copyright © GERMS 2022.
ABSTRACT
In the past few years, the continuous pandemic of COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 has placed a huge burden on public health. In order to effectively deal with the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants, it becomes meaningful to further enhance the immune responses of individuals who have completed the first-generation vaccination. To understand whether sequential administration using different variant sequence-based inactivated vaccines could induce better immunity against the forthcoming variants, we tried five inactivated vaccine combinations in a mouse model and compared their immune responses. Our results showed that the sequential strategies have a significant advantage over homologous immunization by inducing robust antigen-specific T cell immune responses in the early stages of immunization. Furthermore, the three-dose vaccination strategies in our research elicited better neutralizing antibody responses against the BA.2 Omicron strain. These data provide scientific clues for finding the optimal strategy within the existing vaccine platform in generating cross-immunity against multiple variants including previously unexposed strains.
ABSTRACT
A 72-year-old male patient was referred to our outpatient clinic with a painful left eye protrusion accompanied by marked conjunctival chemosis and external ophthalmoplegia being progressed despite topical and oral antibiotic therapy. He developed ocular symptoms 9 days after receiving his second SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (VeroCell). Of note, in previous history, 2 weeks after the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, he also developed a life-threatening laryngeal oedema treated at an emergency care unit. MRI of the orbit excluded pansinusitis as possible origin of the orbital cellulitis, and repeated COVID-19 antigen and antibody PCR tests were negative during his hospitalization. On the next day after his admittance, parenteral dexamethasone 250 mg/die treatment was commenced resulting in a quick and complete resolution of the symptoms. Due to the facts regarding this case, such as the temporal coincidence and the lack of respective comorbidity, there might be a causative relationship between the vaccination and the presented orbital cellulitis. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report on orbital cellulitis as a possible ocular adverse event following COVID-19 vaccination.
ABSTRACT
There is still controversy about whether severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination at different times of day will induce a stronger immune response. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial (ChiCTR2100045109) is conducted to investigate the impact of vaccination time on the antibody response to the inactivated vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 from April 15 to 28, 2021. Participants are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in the morning or afternoon. The primary endpoint is the change of neutralizing antibody between baseline and 28 days after the second dose. In total, 503 participants are randomized, and 469 participants (238 in the morning group and 231 in the afternoon group) complete the follow-up. There is no significant difference in the change of neutralizing antibody between baseline and 28 days after the second dose between the morning and afternoon groups (22.2 [13.2, 45.0] AU mL-1 vs 22.0 [14.4, 40.7] AU mL-1 , P = 0.873). In prespecified age and sex subgroup analyses, there is also no significant difference in the morning and afternoon group (all P > 0.05). This study demonstrates that the vaccination time does not affect the antibody response of two doses of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.
ABSTRACT
Background: Vaccines are urgently needed to handle the morbidity and mortality of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. The inactivated vaccine is widely used in Indonesia's national immunization program due to its eligibility of stock, easier to transport, and considered to be more established than newer platforms. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety profile of the inactivated vaccine and analyze the safety profile between adults and the elderly. Methods: A prospective analytical study was conducted to evaluate the safety profile of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine among healthy adults aged ≥ 18 years from September 2nd to December 28th, 2021, at ten primary health centers from 5 districts in Jakarta, Indonesia. The participants were instructed to record the symptoms after inactivated COVID-19 vaccine injection in the diary card for 28 days. Chi-square tests were carried out to analyze the relationship between the adverse event following immunization (AEFI) in adults and elderly groups. Results: Four of 1113 participants were not included in this study due to the lack of follow-up. Out of 1109 participants, there were 1044 adults (18-59 years) and 65 elderly (>59 years). There were no serious AEFI cases reported. Most AEFI cases were mild to moderate and resolved after several days of injection. Local pain, myalgia and fatigue were the most frequent adverse events reported. We found that there was no correlation between the adults and elderly age group with the incidence of AEFI (p = 0.924) for local reactions (p = 0.181) and most of the systemic reactions (p = 0.629). However, there is an increased risk of fever in the elderly group compared to the adult group (OR 4.046, 95 % CI 1.794-9.124, p = 0.003) following immunization. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine is safe, considering that all symptoms experienced were mild to moderate and resolved entirely.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The development of the COVID-19 pandemic has stimulated the scientific research aimed at studying of the mechanisms of formation the immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Currently, there is a need to develop a domestic simple and cost-effective specific method suitable for monitoring of T-cell response against SARS-CoV-2 in reconvalescents and vaccinated individuals. AIM: Development of a screening method for evaluation specific T-cell immunity against SARS-CoV-2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Total 40 individuals who had mild to moderate COVID-19 and 20 healthy volunteers who did not have a history of this disease were examined. The presence and levels of IgG and IgM antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were identified in participants sera by ELISA using the diagnostic kits from JSC Vector-Best (Novosibirsk, Russian Federation). Antigenic stimulation of mononuclear cells was carried out on commercial plates with adsorbed whole-virion inactivated SARS-CoV-2 antigen (State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR Novosibirsk, Russian Federation). The concentration of IFN- was measured in ELISA using the test systems from JSC Vector-Best (Novosibirsk, Russian Federation). The immunophenotyping of lymphocytes was performed on a flow cytometer Cytomics FC500 (Beckman Coulter, USA). Statistical data processing was carried out using the Microsoft Excel and STATISTICA 10 software package. RESULTS: Stimulation of mononuclear cells isolated from the peripheral blood with whole-virion inactivated SARS-CoV-2 antigen fixed at the bottom of the wells of a polystyrene plate showed a significantly higher median response in terms of IFN- production in 40 people who had history of COVID-19 compared to 20 healthy blood donors (172.1 [34.3575.1] pg/ml versus 15.4 [6.925.8] pg/ml, p 0.0001). There was no difference in median IFN- levels in supernatants collected from unstimulated mononuclear cells from COVID-19 reconvalescents and healthy donors (2.7 [0.411.4] pg/ml versus 0.8 [0.023.3] pg/ml, p 0.05). The overall sensitivity and specificity of this method were 73% (95% CI 5888%) and 100% (95% CI 100100%), respectively, at a cut-off of 50 pg/ml. CONCLUSION: The developed method for assessment of the cellular immune response to SARS-CoV-2 can be used as a screening method for monitoring the T-cell response in a population against a new coronavirus infection in recovered people.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , T-Lymphocytes , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Antibodies, ViralABSTRACT
The mRNA vaccines (RVs) can reduce the severity and mortality of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). However, almost only the inactivated vaccines (IVs) but no RVs had been used in mainland China until most recently, and the relaxing of its anti-pandemic strategies in December 2022 increased concerns about new outbreaks. In comparison, many of the citizens in Macao Special Administrative Region of China received three doses of IV (3IV) or RV (3RV), or 2 doses of IV plus one booster of RV (2IV+1RV). By the end of 2022, we recruited 147 participants with various vaccinations in Macao and detected antibodies (Abs) against the spike (S) protein and nucleocapsid (N) protein of the virus as well as neutralizing antibodies (NAb) in their serum. We observed that the level of anti-S Ab or NAb was similarly high with both 3RV and 2IV+1RV but lower with 3IV. In contrast, the level of anti-N Ab was the highest with 3IV like that in convalescents, intermediate with 2IV+1RV, and the lowest with 3RV. Whereas no significant differences in the basal levels of cytokines related to T-cell activation were observed among the various vaccination groups before and after the boosters. No vaccinees reported severe adverse events. Since Macao took one of the most stringent non-pharmaceutical interventions in the world, this study possesses much higher confidence in the vaccination results than many other studies from highly infected regions. Our findings suggest that the heterologous vaccination 2IV+1RV outperforms the homologous vaccinations 3IV and 3RV as it induces not only anti-S Ab (to the level as with 3RV) but also anti-N antibodies (via the IV). It combines the advantages of both RV (to block the viral entry) and IV (to also intervene the subsequent pathological processes such as intracellular viral replication and interference with the signal transduction and hence the biological functions of host cells).
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Nucleocapsid Proteins , Humans , Macau , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccines, Inactivated , COVID-19/prevention & control , Antibodies, Neutralizing , mRNA VaccinesABSTRACT
The importance of global vaccines for various infectious agents has been emphasized through our experience with the current COVID-19 vaccine. Physicians trained in allergy and immunology are considered experts in vaccines and adverse reactions from vaccines. This chapter will emphasize how to approach vaccines for various populations, including immunodeficient patients, how to determine best paths for patients who miss vaccine doses, and how to address adverse reactions to vaccines, as noted in Case 2, where the patient experienced an anaphylactic reaction to the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. In addition, mechanisms behind adverse vaccine reactions are discussed. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IMRDs) develop more severe outcomes of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Recent studies have contributed to understand the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in IMRDs, suggesting that different diseases and therapies may interfere on immunization efficacy. In this study we analyze the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with Systemic Vasculitides (VASC), the rate of COVID-19 and the frequency of disease relapse following immunization. Method(s): We included patients with VASC (n = 73), a subgroup of the SAFER study (Safety and Efficacy on COVID-19 Vaccine in Rheumatic Disease), a longitudinal, multicenter, Brazilian cohort.We analyzed the geometric means of IgG antibody against receptor-biding domain of protein spike of SARS-CoV-2 (anti-RBD) after two shots of CoronaVac (Inactivated vaccine), ChadOx-1 (AstraZeneca) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech). IgG anti-RBD was measured by chemiluminescence test. We assessed new-onset COVID-19 episodes, adverse events (AE) and disease activity for each VASC. Result(s): The sample included Behcet's disease (BD) (n = 41), Takayasu arteritis (TAK) (n = 15), antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) (n = 14), polyarteritis nodosa (n = 7) and other small vessel VASC(n = 6). The majority of patients were female (69%) without comorbidities (49%) and a median age of 37 years. The most common medication was conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, followed by biologic drugs. No patient received rituximab at baseline. Most patients received CoronaVac (n = 25) or ChadOx-1 (n = 36), while four received BNT162b2. Baseline IgG-RBD means were 1.34 BAU/mL. They increased to 3.89 and 5.29 BAU/mL after the 1st and 2nd vaccine dose, respectively. ChadOx-1 had higher antibody titers than CoronaVac (p = 0.002). There were no differences between different VASC. There were 3 cases of COVID-19 after immunization with CoronaVac. BD patients had a tendency for more cutaneous-articular activity following ChadOx-1. There were no severe relapses and no serious adverse events. Conclusion(s): Our results show the safety of different SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in VASC population. A progressive increase of IgG-RBD antibodies was observed after each dose. ChadOx-1 led to higher IgG-RBDgeometricmeans compared toCoronaVac. Finally, even though ChadOx-1 presented a tendency of triggering mild disease activity, there were no significant disease activity following vaccination in VASC patients. .
ABSTRACT
Background: Inactivated, whole-virion vaccines have been used extensively in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Its efficacy and effectiveness across regions have not been systematically evaluated. Efficacy refers to how well a vaccine performs in a controlled environment. Effectiveness refers to how well it performs in real world settings. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis reviewed published, peer-reviewed evidence on all WHO-approved inactivated vaccines and evaluated their efficacy and effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptomatic infection, severe clinical outcomes, and severe COVID-19. We searched Pubmed (including MEDLINE), EMBASE (via OVID), Web of Science Core Collection, Web of Science Chinese Science Citation Database, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Findings: The final pool included 28 studies representing over 32 million individuals reporting efficacy or effectiveness estimates of complete vaccination using any approved inactivated vaccine between January 1, 2019 and June 27, 2022. Evidence was found for efficacy and effectiveness against symptomatic infection (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16-0.27, I2 = 28% and OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.64, I2 = 98%, respectively) and infection (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.49-0.57, I2 = 90% and OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.24-0.41, I2 = 0%, respectively) for early SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoCs) (Alpha, Delta), and for waning of vaccine effectiveness with more recent VoCs (Gamma, Omicron). Effectiveness remained robust against COVID-related ICU admission (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04-1.08, I2 = 99%) and death (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.00-2.02, I2 = 96%), although effectiveness estimates against hospitalization (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37-0.53, I2 = 0%) were inconsistent. Interpretation: This study showed evidence of efficacy and effectiveness of inactivated vaccines for all outcomes, although inconsistent reporting of key study parameters, high heterogeneity of observational studies, and the small number of studies of particular designs for most outcomes undermined the reliability of the findings. Findings highlight the need for additional research to address these limitations so that more definitive conclusions can be drawn to inform SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development and vaccination policies. Funding: Health and Medical Research Fund on COVID-19, Health Bureau of the Government of the Hong Kong SAR.
ABSTRACT
The immunogenicity induced by the third dose of inactivated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in people living with HIV (PLWH) is unclear, and relevant literature is extremely scarce. It is important to add evidence on the humoral immune response induced by the third dose of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine in PLWH. We collected peripheral venous blood for spike receptor binding domain-protein specific immunoglobulin G (S-RBD-IgG) antibody tests at 28 days after the second dose (T1 ), 180 days after the second dose (T2 ) and 35 days after the third dose (T3 ) of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines in PLWH. The differences in S-RBD-IgG antibody levels and specific seroprevalence among T1 , T2 , and T3 time periods were analyzed, and the effects of age, vaccine brand, and CD4+ T cell count on the levels and specific seroprevalence of S-RBD-IgG antibody induced by the third dose in PLWH were examined. The third dose of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines induced strong S-RBD-IgG antibody responses in PLWH. The levels and specific seroprevalence of S-RBD-IgG antibody were significantly higher than those at 28 and 180 days after the second dose and were not affected by vaccine brand or CD4+ T cell count. Younger PLWH produced higher levels of S-RBD-IgG antibody. The third dose of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine showed good immunogenicity in PLWH. It is necessary to popularize the third dose in the PLWH population, especially PLWH who do not respond to two doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines. Meanwhile, the durability of the protection provided by the third dose in PLWH must be continuously monitored.
Subject(s)
Antibody Formation , COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , Seroepidemiologic Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunoglobulin G , Antibodies, Viral , Antibodies, NeutralizingABSTRACT
To compare the reactogenicity and immunogenicity between the two-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccine regimen and one or two doses of inactivated vaccine followed by an mRNA vaccine regimen in healthy children between 5 and 11 years of age, a prospective cohort study was performed at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital in Thailand between March to June 2022. Healthy children between 5 and 11 years of age were enrolled and received the two-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2) regimen or the inactivated (CoronaVac) vaccine followed by the BNT162b2 vaccine regimen. In addition, healthy children who received two doses of BBIBP-CorV between 1 and 3 months prior were enrolled to receive a heterologous BNT162b2 as a third dose (booster). Reactogenicity was assessed by a self-reported online questionnaire. Immunogenicity analysis was performed to determine binding antibodies to wild-type SARS-CoV-2. Neutralizing antibodies to Omicron variants (BA.2 and BA.5) were tested using the focus reduction neutralization test. Overall, 166 eligible children were enrolled. Local and systemic adverse events which occurred within 7 days after vaccination were mild to moderate and well-tolerated. The two-dose BNT162b2, CoronaVac followed by BNT162b2, and two-dose BBIBP-CorV followed by BNT162b2 groups elicited similar levels of anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG. However, the two-dose BNT162b2 and two-dose BBIBP-CorV followed by BNT162b2 groups elicited higher neutralizing activities against the Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 variant than the CoronaVac followed by BNT162b2 group. The CoronaVac followed by BNT162b2 group elicited low neutralizing activities against the Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 variant. A third dose (booster) mRNA vaccine should be prioritized for this group.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Prospective Studies , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Introduction. The rapid spread of a new coronavirus infection among populations in many countries worldwide has contributed to the genetic evolution of the virus, resulting in the emergence of multiple genetic variants of the SARSCoV-2 coronavirus. Mutations in the viral genome can affect the ability of the virus to bypass the immune system and complicate development of diagnostic and prophylactic drugs. Data on the neutralizing activity of the sera obtained against previously circulating genetic variants of the virus in relation to current SARS-CoV-2 strains may serve as a scientific basis for the selection of the antigens in vaccine development. The aim of this work was to study cross-reactivity of SARSCoV-2 coronavirus strains belonging to different genetic variants, which were isolated in the territory of the Russian Federation during 2020-2022 in the neutralization reaction using mouse hyperimmune sera. Materials and methods. Ten strains of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus belonging to different genetic variants were used (three non-VOC strains, alpha, beta, gamma, delta, delta+AY, omicron 1 and omicron 2). The hCoV-19/Australia/VIC01/2020 strain (Wuhan) was included in the study as a prototypical variant. BALBc mice were immunized with inactivated concentrated antigen mixed with a 1:1 adjuvant, which was a virus-like immunostimulatory complex based on Quillaja saponaria (Quillaja saponaria). The antibody titer was determined in the neutralization reaction. Results. Essential decrease of neutralizing ability of antibodies specific to non-vOC genetic variants of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus was revealed against beta VOC and to a lesser degree against alpha and gamma VOC variants. The differences in the neutralizing activity level of antibodies for alpha and beta VOC variants are not significant among themselves, and with gamma VOC variants - there are no significant differences. Neutralizing ability of antibodies specific to delta VOC against alpha and beta VOC variants decreased 4-fold. Neutralizing activity of sera obtained to omicron 1 and 2 variants in relation to the prototype coronavirus variant was reduced 18-fold, to the gamma variant - 12-fold, to delta variants - more than 30-fold;for other variants it was even lower. Conclusions. The results obtained testify to the presence of cross-reactivity between strains of coronavirus belonging to genetic lines Wuhan, alpha, beta, gamma;it is weaker for delta variants. Mutations in the genome of VOC omicron variants led to a significant decrease in antigenic cross-links with earlier genetic variants of the coronavirus. These findings explain the low efficacy of vaccines based on the Wuhan strain, synthetic immunogens, and recombinant proteins based on it against omicron VOC variants, which have caused a rise in morbidity since early 2022, as well as cases of re-infection of humans with new genetic variants of the coronavirus.Copyright © 2023 Saint Petersburg Pasteur Institute. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
In the global drive to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2, millions of people have received at least one dose of a COVID- 19 vaccine. Vaccination safety is the key to the success of immunisation programs and in combating vaccine hesitancy among the public. Post-licensure safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines is essential to detect rare or severe vaccine-associated adverse events in the population and provide ongoing data of safety issues. Passive surveillance is the primary method most widely used to collect adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) via voluntary reporting. Monitoring through active surveillance is strongly encouraged to improve vaccine safety monitoring and provide more robust data. The SAFECOVAC project was initiated to evaluate risk of serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination. It leverages on the availability of nationwide COVID- 19 vaccine registry, hospital admission database, and other data sources to create a large-linked database. Uniquely for Malaysia, diverse vaccine portfolio was used and we are able to compare the risk estimate for the three major vaccine types of different platform i.e., mRNA-based vaccine (BNT162b2), inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac), and adenovirus vector-based vaccine (ChAdOx1). Current data shows that safety of COVID-19 vaccine is assured and findings are fairly consistent with data from other countries.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 inactivated vaccine-induced humoral responses in patients with lung cancer (LCs) to SARS-CoV-2 wild-type (WT) strain and variants BA.4/5 after the primary 2-dose and booster vaccination remained unknown. We conducted a cross-sectional study in 260 LCs, 140 healthy controls (HC) and additional 40 LCs with serial samples by detecting total antibodies, IgG anti-RBD and neutralizing antibodies (NAb) toward WT and BA.4/5. SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses were augmented by the booster dose of inactivated vaccines in LCs, whereas they were lower than that in HCs. Enhanced humoral responses waned over time after triple injection, notably in NAb against WT and BA.4/5. The NAb against BA.4/5 was much lower than WT. Age ≥ 65 was risk factor for immunization of NAb to WT. Undergoing treatment resulted in a lower antibody response than those without and radiotherapy was a also risk factor for seroconversion of NAb to WT. Lower lymphocyte counts contributed to a lower titer of IgG anti-RBD and NAb against BA.4/5 in LCs than HCs. Specifically, total B cells, CD4+T cells and CD8+T counts were correlated with the humoral response. These results should be taken into consideration for the elderly patients under treatment.