Search

Lung transplant recipients (LTRs) are particularly at risk of developing severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), but are also difficult to protect by vaccination due to their immunocompromised state. Here, we investigated the immunogenicity of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines in LTRs who had a prior natural SARS-CoV-2 infection. At a median of 184 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection, LTRs were vaccinated twice with the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine, with a 28-day interval. Blood samples were obtained pre-vaccination, 28 days after the first dose, and 28 days and 6 months after the second dose. Spike (S-) and nucleocapsid (N-) specific antibodies were measured, as well as neutralization of the ancestral and Omicron BA.5 variant. S-specific T cell responses were evaluated using IFN-γ ELISpot，IGRA, and activation markers by flow cytometry. Phenotyping of T cells was performed by using high-resolution spectral flow cytometry. Most LTRs with prior infection had detectable S-specific antibodies and T cells at baseline. After the first vaccination, S-specific antibody levels increased significantly; an additional increase was observed after the second vaccination. N-specific antibodies decreased during the study period, indicative of the fact that no further breakthrough infections occurred. An increase in IFN-γ producing T cells was observed after the first vaccination, but no additional boost could be detected after the second vaccination. Antibody levels and virus-specific T cell responses remained significantly higher compared to pre-vaccination levels at 6 months post-vaccination, indicating an additive and durable effect of vaccination after infection in LTRs. Neutralizing antibodies were detected against the ancestral strain and retained cross-reactivity with Omicron BA.5, albeit at lower levels. Moreover, the quantity and phenotype of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific T cells were similar in LTRs compared to controls with hybrid immunity. In conclusion, mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are immunogenic in LTRs with prior immunity, and antibody and T cell responses are durable up to 6 months post-vaccination., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial support was received for the research. Coretta Van Leer Buter reports financial support was provided by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW), projectnumber: 10430072010003. Siqi Liu reports financial support was provided by Chinese Scholarship Council (CSC NO.201909110111). All authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Bivalent COVID-19 vaccines comprising ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 (WH1) and the Omicron BA.1 or BA.5 subvariant elicit enhanced serum antibody responses to emerging Omicron subvariants. Here, we characterized the RBD-specific memory B cell (Bmem) response following a fourth dose with a BA.1 or BA.5 bivalent vaccine, in direct comparison with a WH1 monovalent fourth dose. Healthcare workers previously immunized with mRNA or adenoviral vector monovalent vaccines were sampled before and one month after a fourth dose with a monovalent or a BA.1 or BA.5 bivalent vaccine. Serum neutralizing antibodies (NAb) were quantified, as well as RBD-specific Bmem with an in-depth spectral flow cytometry panel including recombinant RBD proteins of the WH1, BA.1, BA.5, BQ.1.1, and XBB.1.5 variants. Both bivalent vaccines elicited higher NAb titers against Omicron subvariants compared to the monovalent vaccine. Following either vaccine type, recipients had slightly increased WH1 RBD-specific Bmem numbers. Both bivalent vaccines significantly increased WH1 RBD-specific Bmem binding of all Omicron subvariants tested by flow cytometry, while recognition of Omicron subvariants was not enhanced following monovalent vaccination. IgG1 + Bmem dominated the response, with substantial IgG4 + Bmem only detected in recipients of an mRNA vaccine for their primary dose. Thus, Omicron-based bivalent vaccines can significantly boost NAb and Bmem specific for ancestral WH1 and Omicron variants and improve recognition of descendent subvariants by pre-existing, WH1-specific Bmem beyond that of a monovalent vaccine. This provides new insights into the capacity of variant-based mRNA booster vaccines to improve immune memory against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants and potentially protect against severe disease. ONE-SENTENCE SUMMARY: Omicron BA.1 and BA.5 bivalent COVID-19 boosters, used as a fourth dose, increase RBD-specific Bmem cross-recognition of Omicron subvariants, both those encoded by the vaccines and antigenically distinct subvariants, further than a monovalent booster., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest MCvZ, REO’H and PMH are inventors on a patent application related to this work. All the other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We evaluated the immunogenicity of a bivalent BA.1 COVID-19 booster vaccine in people with HIV (PWH)., Design: Prospective observational cohort study., Methods: PWH aged ≥45 years received Wuhan-BA.1 mRNA-1273.214 and those <45 years Wuhan-BA.1 BNT162b2. Participants were propensity score-matched 1 : 2 to people without HIV (non-PWH) by age, primary vaccine platform (mRNA-based or vector-based), number of prior COVID-19 boosters and SARS-CoV-2 infections, and spike (S1)-specific antibodies on the day of booster administration. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of ancestral S1-specific antibodies from day 0 to 28 in PWH compared to non-PWH. Secondary endpoints included humoral responses, T-cell responses and cytokine responses up to 180 days post-vaccination., Results: Forty PWH received mRNA-1273.214 ( N  = 35) or BNT162b2 ( N  = 5) following mRNA-based ( N  = 29) or vector-based ( N  = 11) primary vaccination. PWH were predominantly male (87% vs. 26% of non-PWH) and median 57 years [interquartile range (IQR) 53-59]. Their median CD4 + T-cell count was 775 (IQR 511-965) and the plasma HIV-RNA load was <50 copies/ml in 39/40. The GMR of S1-specific antibodies by 28 days post-vaccination was comparable between PWH [4.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.24-6.19] and non-PWH (4.07, 95% CI 3.42-4.83). S1-specific antibody responses were comparable between PWH and non-PWH up to 180 days, and T-cell responses up to 90 days post-vaccination. Interferon-γ, interleukin (IL)-2, and IL-4 cytokine concentrations increased 28 days post-vaccination in PWH., Conclusion: A bivalent BA.1 booster vaccine was immunogenic in well treated PWH, eliciting comparable humoral responses to non-PWH. However, T-cell responses waned faster after 90 days in PWH compared to non-PWH., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Waning antibody responses after COVID-19 vaccination combined with the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineage led to reduced vaccine effectiveness. As a countermeasure, bivalent mRNA-based booster vaccines encoding the ancestral spike protein in combination with that of Omicron BA.1 or BA.5 were introduced. Since then, different BA.2-descendent lineages have become dominant, such as XBB.1.5, JN.1, or EG.5.1. Here, we report post-hoc analyses of data from the SWITCH-ON study, assessing how different COVID-19 priming regimens affect the immunogenicity of bivalent booster vaccinations and breakthrough infections (NCT05471440). BA.1 and BA.5 bivalent vaccines boosted neutralizing antibodies and T-cells up to 3 months after boost; however, cross-neutralization of XBB.1.5 was poor. Interestingly, different combinations of prime-boost regimens induced divergent responses: participants primed with Ad26.COV2.S developed lower binding antibody levels after bivalent boost while neutralization and T-cell responses were similar to mRNA-based primed participants. In contrast, the breadth of neutralization was higher in mRNA-primed and bivalent BA.5 boosted participants. Combined, our data further support the current use of monovalent vaccines based on circulating strains when vaccinating risk groups, as recently recommended by the WHO. We emphasize the importance of the continuous assessment of immune responses targeting circulating variants to guide future COVID-19 vaccination policies., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Previous studies have demonstrated that the majority of patients with an inborn error of immunity (IEI) develop a spike (S)-specific IgG antibody and T-cell response after two doses of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine, but little is known about the response to a booster vaccination. We studied the immune responses 8 weeks after booster vaccination with mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines in 171 IEI patients. Moreover, we evaluated the clinical outcomes in these patients one year after the start of the Dutch COVID-19 vaccination campaign., Methods: This study was embedded in a large prospective multicenter study investigating the immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA-based vaccines in IEI (VACOPID study). Blood samples were taken from 244 participants 8 weeks after booster vaccination. These participants included 171 IEI patients (X-linked agammaglobulinemia (XLA;N=11), combined immunodeficiency (CID;N=4), common variable immunodeficiency (CVID;N=45), isolated or undefined antibody deficiencies (N=108) and phagocyte defects (N=3)) and 73 controls. SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG titers, neutralizing antibodies, and T-cell responses were evaluated. One year after the start of the COVID-19 vaccination program, 334 study participants (239 IEI patients and 95 controls) completed a questionnaire to supplement their clinical data focusing on SARS-CoV-2 infections., Results: After booster vaccination, S-specific IgG titers increased in all COVID-19 naive IEI cohorts and controls, when compared to titers at 6 months after the priming regimen. The fold-increases did not differ between controls and IEI cohorts. SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses also increased equally in all cohorts after booster vaccination compared to 6 months after the priming regimen. Most SARS-CoV-2 infections during the study period occurred in the period when the Omicron variant had become dominant. The clinical course of these infections was mild, although IEI patients experienced more frequent fever and dyspnea compared to controls and their symptoms persisted longer., Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that mRNA-based booster vaccination induces robust recall of memory B-cell and T-cell responses in most IEI patients. One-year clinical follow-up demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 infections in IEI patients were mild. Given our results, we support booster campaigns with newer variant-specific COVID-19 booster vaccines to IEI patients with milder phenotypes., Competing Interests: JP received a grant from GlaxoSmithKline for an improvement of clinical care project and received support from Prothva Biosolutions for attending meetings and cover of travel expenses. JP participates in an Advisory Board for Janssen. FV received a grant from ZonMW for a study on lanadelumab in COVID-19, and consulting fees from GSK made to his department. VD received consulting fees from GlaxoSmithKline, Pharming NV for Advisory board meetings and honoraria for lectures from Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Kedrion, AstraZeneca. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2024 van Leeuwen, Grobben, GeurtsvanKessel, Ellerbroek, de Bree, Potjewijd, Rutgers, Jolink, van de Veerdonk, van Gils, de Vries, Dalm and VACOPID Research Group.)

Background: Mucosal antibodies play a critical role in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections or reinfections by blocking the interaction of the receptor-binding domain (RBD) with the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor on the cell surface. In this study, we investigated the difference between the mucosal antibody response after primary infection and vaccination., Methods: We assessed longitudinal changes in the quantity and capacity of nasal antibodies to neutralize the interaction of RBD with the ACE2 receptor using the spike protein and RBD from ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (Wuhan-Hu-1), as well as the RBD from the Delta and Omicron variants., Results: Significantly higher mucosal IgA concentrations were detected postinfection vs postvaccination, while vaccination induced higher IgG concentrations. However, ACE2-inhibiting activity did not differ between the cohorts. Regarding whether IgA or IgG drove ACE2 inhibition, infection-induced binding inhibition was driven by both isotypes, while postvaccination binding inhibition was mainly driven by IgG., Conclusions: Our study provides new insights into the relationship between antibody isotypes and neutralization by using a sensitive and high-throughput ACE2 binding inhibition assay. Key differences are highlighted between vaccination and infection at the mucosal level, showing that despite differences in the response quantity, postinfection and postvaccination ACE2 binding inhibition capacity did not differ., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. All authors: No reported conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

The Omicron BA.1 (B.1.1.529) SARS-CoV-2 variant is characterized by a high number of mutations in the viral genome, associated with immune escape and increased viral spread. It remains unclear whether milder COVID-19 disease progression observed after infection with Omicron BA.1 in humans is due to reduced pathogenicity of the virus or due to pre-existing immunity from vaccination or previous infection. Here, we inoculated hamsters with Omicron BA.1 to evaluate pathogenicity and kinetics of viral shedding, compared to Delta (B.1.617.2) and to animals re-challenged with Omicron BA.1 after previous SARS-CoV-2 614G infection. Omicron BA.1 infected animals showed reduced clinical signs, pathological changes, and viral shedding, compared to Delta-infected animals, but still showed gross- and histopathological evidence of pneumonia. Pre-existing immunity reduced viral shedding and protected against pneumonia. Our data indicate that the observed decrease of disease severity is in part due to intrinsic properties of the Omicron BA.1 variant.

The emergence and rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants may affect vaccine efficacy substantially. The Omicron variant termed BA.2, which differs substantially from BA.1 based on genetic sequence, is currently replacing BA.1 in several countries, but its antigenic characteristics have not yet been assessed. Here, we used antigenic cartography to quantify and visualize antigenic differences between early SARS-CoV-2 variants (614G, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Zeta, Delta, and Mu) using hamster antisera obtained after primary infection. We first verified that the choice of the cell line for the neutralization assay did not affect the topology of the map substantially. Antigenic maps generated using pseudo-typed SARS-CoV-2 on the widely used VeroE6 cell line and the human airway cell line Calu-3 generated similar maps. Maps made using authentic SARS-CoV-2 on Calu-3 cells also closely resembled those generated with pseudo-typed viruses. The antigenic maps revealed a central cluster of SARS-CoV-2 variants, which grouped on the basis of mutual spike mutations. Whereas these early variants are antigenically similar, clustering relatively close to each other in antigenic space, Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 have evolved as two distinct antigenic outliers. Our data show that BA.1 and BA.2 both escape vaccine-induced antibody responses as a result of different antigenic characteristics. Thus, antigenic cartography could be used to assess antigenic properties of future SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern that emerge and to decide on the composition of novel spike-based (booster) vaccines.

The ability of SARS-CoV-2 to evolve in response to selective pressures poses a challenge to vaccine and antiviral efficacy. The S1 subunit of the spike (S) protein contains the receptor-binding domain and is therefore under selective pressure to evade neutralizing antibodies elicited by vaccination or infection. In contrast, the S2 subunit of S is only transiently exposed after receptor binding, which makes it a less efficient target for antibodies. As a result, S2 has a lower mutational frequency than S1. We recently described monomeric and dimeric SARS-CoV-2 fusion-inhibitory lipopeptides that block viral infection by interfering with S2 conformational rearrangements during viral entry. Importantly, a dimeric lipopeptide was shown to block SARS-CoV-2 transmission between ferrets in vivo. Because the S2 subunit is relatively conserved in newly emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs), we hypothesize that fusion-inhibitory lipopeptides are cross-protective against infection with VOCs. Here, we directly compared the in vitro efficacies of two fusion-inhibitory lipopeptides against VOC, in comparison with a set of seven postvaccination sera (two doses) and a commercial monoclonal antibody preparation. For the beta, delta, and omicron VOCs, it has been reported that convalescent and postvaccination sera are less potent in virus neutralization assays. Both fusion-inhibitory lipopeptides were equally effective against all five VOCs compared to ancestral virus, whereas postvaccination sera and therapeutic monoclonal antibody lost potency to newer VOCs, in particular to omicron BA.1 and BA.2. The neutralizing activity of the lipopeptides is consistent, and they can be expected to neutralize future VOCs based on their mechanism of action. IMPORTANCE SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, continues to spread globally, with waves resulting from new variants that evade immunity generated by vaccines and previous strains and escape available monoclonal antibody therapy. Fusion-inhibitory peptides may provide an intervention strategy that is not similarly affected by this viral evolution.

The severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant is spreading rapidly, even in vaccinated individuals, raising concerns about immune escape. Here, we studied neutralizing antibodies and T cell responses targeting SARS-CoV-2 D614G [wild type (WT)] and the Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants of concern in a cohort of 60 health care workers after immunization with ChAdOx-1 S, Ad26.COV2.S, mRNA-1273, or BNT162b2. High binding antibody levels against WT SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) were detected 28 days after vaccination with both mRNA vaccines (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2), which substantially decreased after 6 months. In contrast, antibody levels were lower after Ad26.COV2.S vaccination but did not wane. Neutralization assays showed consistent cross-neutralization of the Beta and Delta variants, but neutralization of Omicron was significantly lower or absent. BNT162b2 booster vaccination after either two mRNA-1273 immunizations or Ad26.COV2 priming partially restored neutralization of the Omicron variant, but responses were still up to 17-fold decreased compared with WT. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were detected up to 6 months after all vaccination regimens, with more consistent detection of specific CD4 + than CD8 + T cells. No significant differences were detected between WT- and variant-specific CD4 + or CD8 + T cell responses, including Omicron, indicating minimal escape at the T cell level. This study shows that vaccinated individuals retain T cell immunity to the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, potentially balancing the lack of neutralizing antibodies in preventing or limiting severe COVID-19. Booster vaccinations are needed to further restore Omicron cross-neutralization by antibodies.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Little is known about the interplay between preexisting immunity to endemic seasonal coronaviruses and the development of a SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG response. We investigated the kinetics, breadth, magnitude, and level of cross-reactivity of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and heterologous seasonal and epidemic coronaviruses at the clonal level in patients with mild or severe COVID-19 as well as in disease control patients. We assessed antibody reactivity to nucleocapsid and spike antigens and correlated this IgG response to SARS-CoV-2 neutralization. Patients with COVID-19 mounted a mostly type-specific SARS-CoV-2 response. Additionally, IgG clones directed against a seasonal coronavirus were boosted in patients with severe COVID-19. These boosted clones showed limited cross-reactivity and did not neutralize SARS-CoV-2. These findings indicate a boost of poorly protective CoV-specific antibodies in patients with COVID-19 that correlated with disease severity, revealing "original antigenic sin."

SARS-CoV-2 emerged in China as a zoonotic virus in December 2019. The virus proved to be human-to-human transmissible and its global spread resulted in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, associated with high morbidity and mortality. Vaccines were developed at an unprecedented speed and proved to be efficacious in preventing disease, but it remains to be determined if vaccines are able to interrupt transmission. Moreover, virus variants of concern continue to emerge that appear more transmissible and/or less sensitive to virus-specific immune responses. Here, we briefly review the role of animal models in assessing prophylactic and therapeutic options to interrupt SARS-CoV-2 transmission., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants harboring mutations in the spike (S) protein has raised concern about potential immune escape. Here, we studied humoral and cellular immune responses to wild type SARS-CoV-2 and the B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants of concern in a cohort of 121 BNT162b2 mRNA-vaccinated health care workers (HCW). Twenty-three HCW recovered from mild COVID-19 disease and exhibited a recall response with high levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific functional antibodies and virus-specific T cells after a single vaccination. Specific immune responses were also detected in seronegative HCW after one vaccination, but a second dose was required to reach high levels of functional antibodies and cellular immune responses in all individuals. Vaccination-induced antibodies cross-neutralized the variants B.1.1.7 and B.1.351, but the neutralizing capacity and Fc-mediated functionality against B.1.351 was consistently 2- to 4-fold lower than to the homologous virus. In addition, peripheral blood mononuclear cells were stimulated with peptide pools spanning the mutated S regions of B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 to detect cross-reactivity of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells with variants. Importantly, we observed no differences in CD4 + T-cell activation in response to variant antigens, indicating that the B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 S proteins do not escape T-cell-mediated immunity elicited by the wild type S protein. In conclusion, this study shows that some variants can partially escape humoral immunity induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection or BNT162b2 vaccination, but S-specific CD4 + T-cell activation is not affected by the mutations in the B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants., (Copyright © 2021, American Association for the Advancement of Science.)

Containment of the COVID-19 pandemic requires reducing viral transmission. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is initiated by membrane fusion between the viral and host cell membranes, which is mediated by the viral spike protein. We have designed lipopeptide fusion inhibitors that block this critical first step of infection and, on the basis of in vitro efficacy and in vivo biodistribution, selected a dimeric form for evaluation in an animal model. Daily intranasal administration to ferrets completely prevented SARS-CoV-2 direct-contact transmission during 24-hour cohousing with infected animals, under stringent conditions that resulted in infection of 100% of untreated animals. These lipopeptides are highly stable and thus may readily translate into safe and effective intranasal prophylaxis to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.)

Neutralizing antibodies are considered a correlate of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19, although they are not the only contributing factor to immunity: T-cell responses are considered important in protecting against severe COVID-19 and contributing to the success of vaccination effort. T-cell responses after vaccination largely mirror those of natural infection in magnitude and functional capacity, but not in breadth, as T-cells induced by vaccination exclusively target the surface spike glycoprotein. T-cell responses offer a long-lived line of defense and, unlike humoral responses, largely retain reactivity against the SARS-CoV-2 variants. Given the increasingly recognized role of T-cell responses in protection against severe COVID-19, the circulation of SARS-CoV-2 variants, and the potential implementation of novel vaccines, it becomes imperative to continuously monitor T-cell responses. In addition to "classical" T-cell assays requiring the isolation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells, simple whole-blood-based interferon-γ release assays have a potential role in routine T-cell response monitoring. These assays could be particularly useful for immunocompromised people and other clinically vulnerable populations, where interactions between cellular and humoral immunity are complex. As we continue to live alongside COVID-19, the importance of considering immunity as a whole, incorporating both humoral and cellular responses, is crucial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cytokines are regulators of the immune response against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, the contribution of cytokine-secreting CD4+ and CD8+ memory T cells to the SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral immune response in immunocompromised kidney patients is unknown. Here, we profiled 12 cytokines after stimulation of whole blood obtained 28 days post second 100 μg mRNA-1273 vaccination with peptides covering the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S)-protein from patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 4/5, on dialysis, kidney transplant recipients (KTR), and healthy controls. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering analysis revealed two distinct vaccine-induced cytokine profiles. The first profile was characterized by high levels of T-helper (Th)1 (IL-2, TNF-α, and IFN-γ) and Th2 (IL-4, IL-5, IL-13) cytokines, and low levels of Th17 (IL-17A, IL-22) and Th9 (IL-9) cytokines. This cluster was dominated by patients with CKD, on dialysis, and healthy controls. In contrast, the second cytokine profile contained predominantly KTRs producing mainly Th1 cytokines upon re-stimulation, with lower levels or absence of Th2, Th17, and Th9 cytokines. Multivariate analyses indicated that a balanced memory T cell response with the production of Th1 and Th2 cytokines was associated with high levels of S1-specific binding and neutralizing antibodies mainly at 6 months after second vaccination. In conclusion, seroconversion is associated with the balanced production of cytokines by memory T cells. This emphasizes the importance of measuring multiple T cell cytokines to understand their influence on seroconversion and potentially gain more information about the protection induced by vaccine-induced memory T cells. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: This protocol describes an innovative study to investigate the relationship between sleep, shift work and the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2; coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID‐19]) vaccination. As the COVID‐19 pandemic is a global crisis with devastating health, social and economic impacts, there is a pressing need for effective vaccination programmes. Previous influenza and hepatitis vaccination studies suggest that lack of sleep can negatively alter immune responsiveness, while circadian misalignment most likely may also play an important role in the immune response to vaccination. Our present study will be the first to address this question in actual shift workers and in relation to COVID‐19 vaccination. We hypothesise that the occurrence of recent night shifts and diminished sleep will negatively alter the immune response to vaccination in shift workers compared to dayworkers. We aim to recruit 50 shift workers and 50 dayworkers. Participants will receive an mRNA‐based vaccination, through the Dutch vaccination programme. To assess immune responsiveness, blood will be drawn at baseline (before first vaccination), 10 days after first vaccination, the day prior to the second vaccination; and 28 days, 6 and 12 months after the second vaccination. Actigraphy and daily sleep e‐diaries will be implemented for 7 days around each vaccination to assess sleep. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index will be used to monitor sleep in the long term. Optimising the efficacy of the COVID‐19 vaccines is of outmost importance and results of this study could provide insights to develop sleep and circadian‐based interventions to enhance vaccination immunity, and thereby improve global health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prime and boost vaccines are administered in a so-called "homologous" vaccination regimen, meaning that both given vaccinations are identical. SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, randomized clinical trial, Ad26.Cov2.S, BNT162.b2, mRNA1273, Homologous vaccination regimen, Heterologous vaccine regimen Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Homologous vaccination regimen; Heterologous vaccine regimen; randomized clinical trial; Ad26.Cov2.S; BNT162.b2; mRNA1273 EN SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19 Homologous vaccination regimen Heterologous vaccine regimen randomized clinical trial Ad26.Cov2.S BNT162.b2 mRNA1273 1 4 4 09/29/21 20210924 NES 210924 Currently, four COVID-19 vaccines are authorized for use in the European Union by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), i.e., Ad26.COV2.S ([1]), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 ([2]), mRNA1273 ([3]), and BNT162b2 ([4]). [Extracted from the article]

Background: The Ad26.COV2.S vaccine, which was approved as a single-shot immunization regimen, has been shown to be effective against severe coronavirus disease 2019. However, this vaccine induces lower severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein (S)-specific antibody levels than those induced by messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines. The immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a homologous or heterologous booster in persons who have received an Ad26.COV2.S priming dose are unclear.Methods: In this single-blind, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving health care workers who had received a priming dose of Ad26.COV2.S vaccine, we assessed immunogenicity and reactogenicity 28 days after a homologous or heterologous booster vaccination. The participants were assigned to receive no booster, an Ad26.COV2.S booster, an mRNA-1273 booster, or a BNT162b2 booster. The primary end point was the level of S-specific binding antibodies, and the secondary end points were the levels of neutralizing antibodies, S-specific T-cell responses, and reactogenicity. A post hoc analysis was performed to compare mRNA-1273 boosting with BNT162b2 boosting.Results: Homologous or heterologous booster vaccination in 434 participants resulted in higher levels of S-specific binding antibodies, neutralizing antibodies, and T-cell responses than a single Ad26.COV2.S vaccination. The increase in binding antibodies was significantly larger with heterologous regimens that included mRNA-based vaccines than with the homologous booster. The mRNA-1273 booster was most immunogenic and was associated with higher reactogenicity than the BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S boosters. Local and systemic reactions were generally mild to moderate in the first 2 days after booster administration.Conclusions: The Ad26.COV2.S and mRNA boosters had an acceptable safety profile and were immunogenic in health care workers who had received a priming dose of Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. The strongest responses occurred after boosting with mRNA-based vaccines. Boosting with any available vaccine was better than not boosting. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development ZonMw; SWITCH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04927936.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]