Kelsey L Corallo1, Sarah M Lyle, Michael A Carlock, Ted M Ross, Katherine B Ehrlich. 1. From the Department of Psychology (Corallo, Lyle), Center for Vaccines and Immunology (Carlock), Center for Vaccines and Immunology and Department of Infectious Diseases (Ross), and Department of Psychology and Center for Family Research (Ehrlich), University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore how both ongoing emotional distress and the experience of a targeted rejection over the past 6 months are associated with adolescents' antibody response to influenza virus vaccination. We predicted that experiencing a targeted rejection would amplify the hypothesized negative association between emotional distress and antibody response after vaccination. METHODS: Adolescent participants (N = 148) completed two study visits (mean [standard deviation] days between visits = 27.4 [1.8]). At the first visit, they provided blood samples, were administered the seasonal (2018-2019) quadrivalent influenza vaccine (Fluzone, Sanofi Pasteur), completed questionnaires, and participated in a semistructured interview. At the second visit, they provided another blood sample. Hemagglutination-inhibition assays were conducted to determine prevaccination and postvaccination antibody titers. Targeted rejection experiences were coded from adolescents' interviews. RESULTS: The emotional distress by targeted rejection interaction predicted antibody response to the two A strains and the composite of all vaccine strains (b values = -0.451 to -0.843, p values < .05), but not the two B strains. Results suggested that, among adolescents who experienced a targeted rejection over the past 6 months, emotional distress was negatively associated with vaccine response (however, this finding did not reach statistical significance). Conversely, among adolescents who did not experience a targeted rejection, emotional distress was positively associated with vaccine response (b = 0.173, p = .032). CONCLUSIONS: The current study highlights the importance of evaluating both acute life events and ongoing distress as they relate to adaptive immune functioning in adolescence.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore how both ongoing emotional distress and the experience of a targeted rejection over the past 6 months are associated with adolescents' antibody response to influenza virus vaccination. We predicted that experiencing a targeted rejection would amplify the hypothesized negative association between emotional distress and antibody response after vaccination. METHODS: Adolescent participants (N = 148) completed two study visits (mean [standard deviation] days between visits = 27.4 [1.8]). At the first visit, they provided blood samples, were administered the seasonal (2018-2019) quadrivalent influenza vaccine (Fluzone, Sanofi Pasteur), completed questionnaires, and participated in a semistructured interview. At the second visit, they provided another blood sample. Hemagglutination-inhibition assays were conducted to determine prevaccination and postvaccination antibody titers. Targeted rejection experiences were coded from adolescents' interviews. RESULTS: The emotional distress by targeted rejection interaction predicted antibody response to the two A strains and the composite of all vaccine strains (b values = -0.451 to -0.843, p values < .05), but not the two B strains. Results suggested that, among adolescents who experienced a targeted rejection over the past 6 months, emotional distress was negatively associated with vaccine response (however, this finding did not reach statistical significance). Conversely, among adolescents who did not experience a targeted rejection, emotional distress was positively associated with vaccine response (b = 0.173, p = .032). CONCLUSIONS: The current study highlights the importance of evaluating both acute life events and ongoing distress as they relate to adaptive immune functioning in adolescence.
Authors: Thomas G O'Connor; Hongyue Wang; Jan A Moynihan; Peter A Wyman; Jennifer Carnahan; Gerry Lofthus; Sally A Quataert; Melissa Bowman; Anne S Burke; Mary T Caserta Journal: Brain Behav Immun Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 7.217
Authors: Anna C Phillips; Victoria E Burns; Douglas Carroll; Christopher Ring; Mark Drayson Journal: Brain Behav Immun Date: 2004-12-15 Impact factor: 7.217
Authors: Stephen Gallagher; Anna C Phillips; Alastair J Ferraro; Mark T Drayson; Douglas Carroll Journal: Brain Behav Immun Date: 2007-12-19 Impact factor: 7.217
Authors: W T Boyce; M Chesney; A Alkon; J M Tschann; S Adams; B Chesterman; F Cohen; P Kaiser; S Folkman; D Wara Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 1995 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Ivette A Nuñez; Michael A Carlock; James D Allen; Simon O Owino; Krissy K Moehling; Patricia Nowalk; Michael Susick; Kensington Diagle; Kristen Sweeney; Sophia Mundle; Thorsten U Vogel; Simon Delagrave; Moti Ramgopal; Richard K Zimmerman; Harry Kleanthous; Ted M Ross Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Michael A Carlock; John G Ingram; Emily F Clutter; Noah C Cecil; Moti Ramgopal; Richard K Zimmerman; William Warren; Harry Kleanthous; Ted M Ross Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2019-08-08 Impact factor: 3.452