Literature DB >> 35118680

Third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: A systematic review of 30 published studies.

Fausto Petrelli1, Andrea Luciani1, Karen Borgonovo1, Mara Ghilardi1, Maria Chiara Parati1, Daniela Petrò1, Veronica Lonati1, Angelo Pesenti2, Mary Cabiddu1.   

Abstract

We analyzed published studies on the efficacy and safety of the third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in various general population settings. We conducted systematic searches of PubMed and EMBASE for series published in the English language through November 15, 2021, using the search terms "third" or "booster" or "three" and "dose" and "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2." All articles were selected according to the MOOSE guidelines. The seroconversion risk after third doses was descriptively expressed as a pooled rate ratio ([seroconversion rate after the third dose]/[seroconversion rate after the second dose]). The search returned 30 studies that included a total of 2 734 437 vaccinated subjects. In more than 2 700 000 Israeli patients extracted from the general population, the reduction in the risk of infection ranged from 88% to 92%. Conversion rates for IgG anti-spike ranged from 95% to 100%. In cancer or immunocompromised patients, mean IgG seroconversion was 39.4% before and 66.6% after third doses. A third dose seems necessary to protect against all COVID-19 infection, severe disease, and death risk.
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; booster; third dose; vaccination

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35118680      PMCID: PMC9015523          DOI: 10.1002/jmv.27644

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Virol        ISSN: 0146-6615            Impact factor:   20.693


INTRODUCTION

The fourth wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic is ongoing around the world. Despite new approved antiviral drugs and established supportive therapies, the role of vaccination remains crucial, particularly for at‐risk populations. In particular, cancer patients, elderly or frail subjects, and other immunocompromised people (e.g., organ transplant patients on immunosuppressive agents) may still be at risk despite full‐dose vaccination. , A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, based on data from the Israeli Ministry of Health, shows that cases of infection and serious illness dropped “substantially” after a third booster dose of the Pfizer vaccine was administered to more than 3 million subjects in the general population. We analyzed published reports about the efficacy and safety of the third dose of the COVID‐19 vaccine in various settings in 2021.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This review was performed following Meta‐analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. We conducted a systematic search in PubMed and EMBASE for series published in the English language through November 15, 2021, using the terms (“third” or “booster” or “three”) and “dose” and (“COVID‐19” or “SARS‐CoV‐2”). Studies were included if they reported the efficacy of the third dose in terms of infection rates and/or mortality. Seroconversion rates before and after booster were also reported. Both observational and retrospective studies and clinical trials were analyzed. References of eligible studies were also screened for any other potential publication suitable for inclusion in this review. Data were extracted from two reviewers (F. P. and M. C.). Information extracted regarded type of study, year and country of origin, type and number of boosted patients, type of initial two‐dose vaccine received, type and timing of third doses, median anti‐spike IgG titers before and after the booster, seroconversion rates, effectiveness, and safety. Descriptive statistic was used to explain results. The primary immunogenicity outcome of anti‐spike IgG was reported for each study before and after the third dose. In particular, the ratio of seroconversion rates after third and second doses (rate ratios) where this value was not reported directly. Other outcomes were infection rates and mortality due to COVID‐19. Informed consent was not necessary in this paper because it provides a review of the literature. The risk of bias was evaluated with Nottingham–Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

The search process identified 30 studies (Table 1; Supporting Informations S1, S2, and S3), including four population‐based observational studies from Israel, one retrospective analysis of the US Phase 1–3 trials in which 23 patients received third doses of the Pfizer‐BioNTech vaccine after the recommendation released by health authorities, one Chinese Phase 1–2 study in which patients were randomized to two different vaccine doses (or placebo), an additional cohort of 80 subjects from two previous trials who received third doses of the Astra Zeneca vaccine. Two studies that reported safety data alone were excluded. A third study reported relative viral loads of Delta‐variant in unvaccinated and boosted subjects was not included. Twenty‐one publications were retrospective or prospective case series in different high‐risk populations (hemodialyzed, transplant, or cancer patients). Finally, two other series reported effects in health care workers and volunteers. Only seven studies reported the rate of infections as the outcome. The others reported seroconversion rates after the third dose and IgG titers before and after the third dose, as well as safety data (Table 2). Abbott or Roche assays were used in almost all studies. Samples for all serologic tests were attained within 1 month after the third dose date. Overall, 2 734 437 received three COVID‐19 vaccine doses (range: 10–1 137 804).
Table 1

Characteristics of included studies

Author/yearType of study/NOS scoreCountry/n° pts received three dosesSetting/median follow‐upImmunosoppressive therapiesPrevious vaccine type/n° doses (%)Third dose timing from second doseThird dose type
Barda/2021Observational (vs. matched‐control with two doses) Ministry of Health criteria/9Israel/728 321General population/13 days3.6%‐/2 (100)≥5 monthsBNT162b2
Bar‐on/2021Retrospective/9Israel (Ministry of Health)/1 137 804≥60 years/7 days0%‐/2 (100)≥5 monthsBNT162b2
Benotmane/2021Retrospectkive/7France/159Kidney transplant100%mRNA‐1273 (Moderna)/2 (100)≥1 month and <50 AU/mlmRNA‐1273
Bensouna/2021Prospective case series/7French/69Hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis/30 days13%BNT162b2/2 (100)≥1 monthBNT162b2
Bertrand/2021Retrospective/7France/80Kidney transplant/‐100% (various)BNT162b2/2 (100)≥1 monthBNT162b2
Chavarot/2021Retrospective/7France/62Kidney transplant/44 days100% (betalacept + steroids)BNT162b2/2 (100)69.5 days (median)BNT162b2
Dekervel/2021Two prospective cohorts/6France/66 + 34Hemodialysis/NR11%BNT162b2/2 (100)≥1 monthBNT162b2
Del Bello/2021Retrospective/8France/396Solid organ transplant100%BNT162b2/2 (100)BNT162b2
Eliakim‐Raz/2021Retrospective (Israel, Rabin Medical Center)/7Israel/97≥60 years/NR0%‐/2 (100)BNT162b2
Falsey/2021Retrospective analysis of a Phase 1‐2‐3 trial/7US/11 + 12 (two cohorts)≥18 years/30 days0%BNT162b2/2 (100)7.9–8.8 monthsBNT162b2
Flaxman/2021Retrospective analysis of UK COV001 and COV002/7UK/75≥18 years/‐0%ChAdOx1 nCoV‐19/2 (100)20–38 weeksAZD1222
Gounant/2021Retrospective/7France/30Cancer patients/‐100%BNT162b2/2 (100)4 weeksBNT162b2
Hall/2021Randomized study (vaccine vs. placebo)/‐Canada/60Transplant patients/‐100%mRNA‐1273/2 (100)2 monthsmRNA‐1273
Karaba/2021Retrospective/6US/47Transplant recipients/‐77%64% BNT162b2 or mRNA‐1273/2 (100)≥2 months70% mRNA, 30% Ad26. COV2.S
Keskin/2021Retrospective/6Turkey/45Healthcare workers/‐0%CoronaVac/2 (100)≥1 monthCoronaVac or BNT162b2
Le Bourgeois/2021Retrospective/7France/80Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant/119 days23.7%BNT162b2/2 (100)≥1 monthBNT162b2
Marlet/2021Retrospective/8France/180Kidney transplant (160) and CLL (20)/NR100%BNT162b2 and mRNA‐1273/2 (100)≥1 monthBNT162b2 or mRNA‐1273
Massa/2021Prospective longitudinal study/6France/61Kidney transplant/‐100% (various)BNT162b2/2 (100)1 monthBNT162b2
Masset/2021Retrospective/6France/71Kidney transplant/‐100%BNT162b2/2 (100)BNT162b2
Westhoff/2021Retrospective/5Germany/10Kidney transplant/‐100%BNT162b2/2 (100)4–12 weeksmRNA‐1273
Peled/2021Retrospective/7Israel/96Heart transplant/18 days b 79%BNT162b2/2 (100)168 daysBNT162b2
Redjoul/2021Retrospective/7France/42Allogenic HSCT/53 daysNRBNT162b2/2 (100)2 monthsBNT162b2
Robert/2021Retrospective/6France/18Hemodialysis/28 daysNRBNT162b2/2 (100)BNT162b2
Saciuk/2021Retrospective cohort study/8Israel/865 887General population/70 days0%BNT162b2/2 (100)6 monthsBNT162b2
Schmiedeberg/2021Retrospective/7Switzerland/17Rheumatoid arthritis/2 weeksTemporarily discontinuedmRNA‐1273 and BNT162b2/2 (100)≥4 monthsmRNA‐based from the same manufacturer
Shroff/2021Retrospective/6US/20 (Third dose)Cancer patients/5–11 days100%BNT162b2/2 (100)BNT162b2
Tillmann/2021Prospective cohort/5Germany/10Hemodialysis/‐29.4%mRNA (94%)/2 (100)mRNA
Werbel/2021Retrospective series/5US/30Organ transplant/‐100%mRNA(100%)/2 (100)67 days (median)mRNA (50%) and Ad26. COV2.S (50%)
Yang/2021Phase 1 and randomized Phase 2 studies/‐China/40 + 450a 18–59 years/‐0%‐/2 (100)1 monthZF2001 Ab targeting receptor binding domain (RBD) of the SARS‐CoV‐2 S protein
Yuer/2021Retrospective/7China/67Cohort voluntarily/1 month b NAInactivated vaccine/2 (100)8 monthsInactivated vaccine

Abbreviations: NA, not applicable; NOS, Nottingham–Ottawa Scale; ‐, not reported.

Patients that received three doses in Phase 1 + Phase 2 studies.

Time to serum collection.

Table 2

Efficacy and of booster dose studies

Author/yearPrevious COVID‐19Median neutralizing Ab anti‐spike concentration pre‐third dose (timing)Median neutralizing Ab anti‐spike concentration post‐third dose (timing)Siero‐conversion rate after second dose (%)Siero‐conversion rate after third dose (%)Rate of infection after third doseMain toxicities
Barda/2021−93%, −91%, −88%, −81% ↓ in risk in hospital admission, severe disease, infection, and death
Bar‐On/2021Noa −91.2% and −95% less infection and severe cases
Benotmane/2021No<50 AU/ml (1 month) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA)586 AU/ml in responders (1 month)0490%
Bensouna/2021No284 AU/ml (NR) Roche Elecsys Assay7554 AU/ml (≥21 days) Roche Elecsys Assay7891.3 (increase of Ab levels)Pain (27%), systemic (23%)
Bertrand/2021217.1 AU/ml (‐) IgG II Quant test (Abbott, USA)2238.3 AU/ml (1 month) IgG II Quant test (Abbott, USA)37.561.22.5%0%
Chavarot/2021No0 (‐) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA)298 AU/ml^ (1 month) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA)06.41%0%
Dekervel/20211056 UI/ml and 17.8 U/mL in two cohorts (≥21 days) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA) and Roche Elecsys Assay6464 UI/ml and 1180 U/ml in two cohorts (≥21 days) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA) and Roche Elecsys Assay83.3 and 85.3 (n = 66 and 34)92.4 and 97.1 (n = 66 and 34)00% (two deaths for sepsis reported)
Del Bello/2021No41.467.90%
Eliakim‐Raz/2021440 AU/ml (‐) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA)25 468 AU/ml (10–19 days) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA)971000%
Falsey/2021No83–41 AU/ml for wt variant in two cohorts (NR) Roche Elecsys Assay2119–2032 for wt variant in two cohorts (1 month) Roche Elecsys AssayLocal pain 82 and 67% (fever, fatigue, headache, chills, muscle pain <20% moderate‐severe)
Flaxman/2021No1792 EUs (1 month) IgG ELISA3746 EUs (1 month) IgG ELISA81% local symptoms
Gounant/2021No≤300 AU/ml IgG II Quant test (Abbott, USA)> 3500 AU/ml in 73% IgG II Quant test (Abbott, USA)Low titer88.5
Hall/2021No0.37 U/ml (‐) Roche Elecsys Assay313.8 U/ml (4 months) Roche Elecsys Assay11.7b 55b 0No G3‐4 AEs
Karaba/2021NoNR (EUROIMMUN anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG ELISA)NR (EUROIMMUN anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG ELISA)2372
Keskin/2021Abbott Architect i2000 (Abbott Laboratories)Abbott Architect i2000 (Abbott Laboratories)1.8 and 46.6 higher IgG titers with CoronaVac or BNT162b2 vaccine
Le Bourgeois/2021NoRoche Elecsys (Rotkreuz, Switzerland)Roche Elecsys (Rotkreuz, Switzerland)50810
Marlet/2021YesIn kidney transplant recipients 0.19 BAU/ml; in CLL 0.63 BAU/ml (median 43 days) SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG II Quant assay on an Alinity i system (Abbott)In kidney transplant recipients 5.28 BAU/ml; in CLL 10.7 BAU/ml (median 44 days) SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG II Quant assay on an Alinity i system (Abbott)30 and 5739 and 50
Massa/2021No1620 AU/ml (1 month after second dose) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA)8772 AU/ml (1 month after third dose) IgG II Quanttest (Abbott, USA)44.362.3No SAE
Masset/2021No>cutoff (1 month after second dose) Roche Elecsys Assay>cutoff (1 month) Roche Elecsys Assay5070
Westhoff/2021No<0.8 U/ml Roche Elecsys Assay76 U/ml (median) 14 days Roche Elecsys Assay060
Peled/2021NoIgG >3‐fold of the range achieved after the two primary doses (ELISA Test “in‐house”) (17.5 days)236760% local and 20% systemic. No SAEs
Redjoul/20214.160 AU/ml (28 days after 2nd dose) SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG Quant II assay (Abbott, Sligo, Ireland)11.099 AU/mL (1 month after third dose) SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG Quant II assay50480No SAEs
Robert/2021YesIn partial responder 776.7 138.3 to 3038] BAU/ml at 3 months; (‐)55.566.6
Saciuk/2021No−92.9% less infection
Schmiedeberg/202119.5 U/ml (before 2 weeks) Roche Elecsys Assay2500 U/ml (after 2 weeks) Roche Elecsys Assay35 and 53% of local and systemic effects
Shroff/202180% of the cancer cohort had detectable neutralizing antibodies, with a median titer of 60 (‐) University of Arizona COVID‐19 ELISA pan‐Ig Antibody Test3‐fold increase in median virus‐neutralizing antibody titers (1 week after 3rd dose) University of Arizona COVID‐19 ELISA pan‐Ig Antibody TestNo SAEs were noted (fig. 5a), with nine (45%) participants experiencing injection site pain
Tillmann/2021No4.3 AU/ml median (4–5 weeks after second dose) anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 S‐RBD IgG (Snibe Diagnostics, New Industries Biomedical Engineering Co., Ltd. Snibe)>100 median (1 month) anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 S‐RBD IgG (Snibe Diagnostics, New Industries Biomedical Engineering Co., Ltd. Snibe)070
Werbel/2021No‐ (‐) EUROIMMUN anti‐S1 IgG assay or Roche Elecsys anti‐RBD pan‐Ig assay‐ (9 days) EUROIMMUN anti‐S1 IgG assay or Roche Elecsys anti‐RBD pan‐Ig assay04050% mild or moderate local symptoms and fatigue
Yang/2021No1077–825 (Phase 1) and 419–344 (Phase 2) (1 month) ELISA kits (Wantai BioPharm, Beijing, China)2719–2776 (Phase 1) and 1782–1140 (Phase 2) (1 month) ELISA kits (Wantai BioPharm, Beijing, China)100% (Phase 1) 95%–97% (Phase 2)100% (Phase 1) 99%–97% (Phase 2)45% any AEs (3.5% G3‐5)
Yue/2021No86.695.5

Abbreviations: AU, arbitrary units; CLL, chronic lymphocytic leukemia; ELISA, enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay; RBD, receptor‐binding domain; SAE: serious adverse events; °, at median follow‐up of 30 days post‐third dose; ^, only in seroconverted patients; ‐, not reported.

aAfter ≥12 days from third dose.

At least 100 UI/ml of serum antibodies.

Characteristics of included studies Abbreviations: NA, not applicable; NOS, Nottingham–Ottawa Scale; ‐, not reported. Patients that received three doses in Phase 1 + Phase 2 studies. Time to serum collection. Efficacy and of booster dose studies Abbreviations: AU, arbitrary units; CLL, chronic lymphocytic leukemia; ELISA, enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay; RBD, receptor‐binding domain; SAE: serious adverse events; °, at median follow‐up of 30 days post‐third dose; ^, only in seroconverted patients; ‐, not reported. aAfter ≥12 days from third dose. At least 100 UI/ml of serum antibodies.

General population (infection rate reduction)

In more than 2 700 000 Israeli patients extracted from the general population, the reduction in the risk of infection ranged from 88% to 92%.

General population (seroconversion rate)

Conversion rates for IgG anti‐spike ranged from 95% to 100%, including a non‐mRNA Chinese vaccine (ZF2001) assessed in a Phase 2 study by Yang et al. These were studies in the uninfected population that received two previous doses of anti‐COVID vaccines.

Special populations (seroconversion rate)

In cancer patients or the immunocompromised (e.g., transplant recipients), mean IgG seroconversion was 39.4% before and 66.6% after third dose administration (rate ratio IgG titers of pre‐and post‐third‐dose vaccination 1.69).

Adverse events

Safety was usually satisfactory with no serious adverse effects and usually mild to moderate local and general side effects (adverse events are reported in Table 2).

Risk of bias and quality of evidence

The overall risk of bias was moderate‐good for all studies except three publications that scored 5 with NOS score (see Table 1 for details). Quality of evidence was moderate for seroconversion rate with a booster. Data from two observational cohorts and one case‐control study showed high evidence of a reduction in the risk of infection with a third versus no third dose vaccination against COVID‐19.

DISCUSSION

Despite the vaccines' decline in effectiveness against infection over time, as shown in the large‐scale veteran analysis, vaccination against COVID‐19 remains the most effective means of fighting the pandemic. In the paper recently published in Science, Cohn et al. in fact demonstrated that the vaccines' effectiveness against infection declined from 87% to 48% from February to October 2021, but they remained protective against death. Protection levels against variants and the ancestral virus is expected to decline over time. However, boosting with mRNA vaccines may lead to high titers of neutralizing antibodies, which may protect from symptomatic infection with variants, probably during the first year. Despite a progressive decline over time, neutralization strongly correlated with protection from symptomatic infections with variants. Overall, the effectiveness of the third dose of the vaccines was about 90% for the infection rate in the general population; for immunocompromised patients, the rate of seroconversion increased from 39% to 66% and effective IgG concentrations increased post booster by about 69%. This overview can be summarized in three main messages, given the limitations of limited follow‐up, different vaccines administered, and the various cut‐off values used to validate serologic response with antibodies. First, there is good evidence from prospective and randomized studies (one with Moderna and one with a Chinese vaccine) that seroconversion increased with a three‐dose program compared to the standard two‐dose schedule, with only a minor increase in local and systemic adverse events. In the transplant recipient trial conducted by Hall et al, the increase in serologic response was characterized by an anti‐receptor‐binding domain (RBD) antibody level of at least 100 U/ml 4 months after the third dose (Moderna), a 5‐fold increase compared to placebo. In the general Chinese population (median age 43 years), the serologic response was excellent either before and after the third (two levels) doses of an anti‐RBD vaccine: from 95%–97% to 97%–99%. This response was confirmed in two large studies in the general Israeli population, in which the effectiveness of a third dose (given at least 5 months after the second) was higher compared to that of the initial two doses (reductions of 91% and 95% and 88% and 91% for infection and severe disease, respectively). Second, immunocompromised patients have less robust serologic responses after booster vaccination but still attain a significant benefit from the third dose. Finally, safety data were scarce but with no indication of the new or added burden of toxicity compared to data reported by other authors for two‐dose regimens. , The limited observation period represents the main limitation of the published literature in verifying the effectiveness (reduction in the risk of infection compared to those vaccinated with the two‐dose regimen) of a third dose against, in particular, the Delta‐variant. Other significant limitations include (1) the lack of data on the booster effect magnitude in those who previously received a non mRNA vaccine (e.g., Astra Zeneca) and on the safety and effectiveness in children and adolescents; (2) the retrospective and observational nature of included studies with lack of large, well‐conducted, Phase III trials; (3) absence of data about Omicron emergent infection type. In conclusion, a third‐dose booster seems necessary, despite not providing complete protection at all against the risk of COVID‐19 infection, severe disease, and death. We confirmed the efficacy of mRNA vaccine boosters for the general population not previously exposed to COVID‐19 infection, particularly in those over 40 years of age with few or no comorbidities (from one large observational study conducted in Israel), in those over 60 (from over 1 million vaccinated patients in the real‐world Israeli population), in those over 18 (from a retrospective cohort study of >800 000 Israeli subjects), and those at risk for severe COVID‐19 because of comorbidities (from several small studies conducted in transplant, hemodialyzed, or oncologic patients). In particular, a weaker immune response may occur in these frail patients compared to the response in healthy subjects (median increase of 70% in seroconversion rates). However, how long the increased antibody response from the third dose will last remains uncertain. Continuous monitoring of the vaccines' effectiveness is also warranted.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors declare no conflict of interest. Supplementary information. Click here for additional data file. Supplementary information. Click here for additional data file. Supplementary information. Click here for additional data file.
  8 in total

1.  SARS-CoV-2 vaccine protection and deaths among US veterans during 2021.

Authors:  Barbara A Cohn; Piera M Cirillo; Caitlin C Murphy; Nickilou Y Krigbaum; Arthur W Wallace
Journal:  Science       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Neutralising antibody titres as predictors of protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants and the impact of boosting: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Deborah Cromer; Megan Steain; Arnold Reynaldi; Timothy E Schlub; Adam K Wheatley; Jennifer A Juno; Stephen J Kent; James A Triccas; David S Khoury; Miles P Davenport
Journal:  Lancet Microbe       Date:  2021-11-15

3.  Safety and efficacy of the mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in five groups of immunocompromised patients and healthy controls in a prospective open-label clinical trial.

Authors:  Peter Bergman; Ola Blennow; Lotta Hansson; Stephan Mielke; Piotr Nowak; Puran Chen; Gunnar Söderdahl; Anders Österborg; C I Edvard Smith; David Wullimann; Jan Vesterbacka; Gustaf Lindgren; Lisa Blixt; Gustav Friman; Emilie Wahren-Borgström; Anna Nordlander; Angelica Cuapio Gomez; Mira Akber; Davide Valentini; Anna-Carin Norlin; Anders Thalme; Gordana Bogdanovic; Sandra Muschiol; Peter Nilsson; Sophia Hober; Karin Loré; Margaret Sällberg Chen; Marcus Buggert; Hans-Gustaf Ljunggren; Per Ljungman; Soo Aleman
Journal:  EBioMedicine       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 8.143

4.  Third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: A systematic review of 30 published studies.

Authors:  Fausto Petrelli; Andrea Luciani; Karen Borgonovo; Mara Ghilardi; Maria Chiara Parati; Daniela Petrò; Veronica Lonati; Angelo Pesenti; Mary Cabiddu
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2022-02-12       Impact factor: 20.693

  8 in total
  10 in total

1.  SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody titers 6 months after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination among patients undergoing hemodialysis in Japan.

Authors:  Daisuke Kanai; Hiromichi Wakui; Tatsuya Haze; Kengo Azushima; Sho Kinguchi; Shunichiro Tsukamoto; Tomohiko Kanaoka; Shingo Urate; Yoshiyuki Toya; Nobuhito Hirawa; Hideaki Kato; Fumimasa Watanabe; Kanako Hanaoka; Masaaki Hanaoka; Hiroshi Mitsuhashi; Satoshi Yamaguchi; Toshimasa Ohnishi; Kouichi Tamura
Journal:  Clin Exp Nephrol       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 2.617

2.  SARS-CoV-2 Spike S1-specific IgG kinetic profiles following mRNA or vector-based vaccination in the general Dutch population show distinct kinetics.

Authors:  Lotus L van den Hoogen; Marije K Verheul; Eric R A Vos; Cheyenne C E van Hagen; Michiel van Boven; Denise Wong; Alienke J Wijmenga-Monsuur; Gaby Smits; Marjan Kuijer; Debbie van Rooijen; Marjan Bogaard-van Maurik; Ilse Zutt; Jeffrey van Vliet; Janine Wolf; Fiona R M van der Klis; Hester E de Melker; Robert S van Binnendijk; Gerco den Hartog
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Will People Accept a Third Booster Dose of the COVID-19 Vaccine? A Cross-Sectional Study in China.

Authors:  Yufang Sun; Hang Dai; Ping Wang; Xiaodong Zhang; Dongliang Cui; Yongping Huang; Jimei Zhang; Tao Xiang
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-07-12

4.  Immunogenicity and safety of different platforms of COVID-19 vaccines given as a third (booster) dose in healthy adults.

Authors:  Zemin Lin; Mengnan Cheng; Fenghua Zhu; Xiaoqian Yang; Jianping Zuo; Shijun He
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 20.693

5.  Improved immune response to the third COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose in hemodialysis patients.

Authors:  Daisuke Kanai; Hiromichi Wakui; Tatsuya Haze; Kengo Azushima; Sho Kinguchi; Tomohiko Kanaoka; Yoshiyuki Toya; Nobuhito Hirawa; Hideaki Kato; Kazushi Uneda; Fumimasa Watanabe; Kanako Hanaoka; Masaaki Hanaoka; Hiroshi Mitsuhashi; Satoshi Yamaguchi; Toshimasa Ohnishi; Kouichi Tamura
Journal:  Kidney Int Rep       Date:  2022-09-11

6.  Long-Term Longitudinal Analysis of Neutralizing Antibody Response to Three Vaccine Doses in a Real-Life Setting of Previously SARS-CoV-2 Infected Healthcare Workers: A Model for Predicting Response to Further Vaccine Doses.

Authors:  Saverio Giuseppe Parisi; Carlo Mengoli; Monica Basso; Ilaria Vicenti; Francesca Gatti; Renzo Scaggiante; Lia Fiaschi; Federica Giammarino; Marco Iannetta; Vincenzo Malagnino; Daniela Zago; Filippo Dragoni; Maurizio Zazzi
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-02

7.  Ongoing Mycophenolate Treatment Impairs Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Response in Patients Affected by Chronic Inflammatory Autoimmune Diseases or Liver Transplantation Recipients: Results of the RIVALSA Prospective Cohort.

Authors:  Erika Zecca; Manuela Rizzi; Stelvio Tonello; Erica Matino; Martina Costanzo; Eleonora Rizzi; Giuseppe Francesco Casciaro; Giulia Francesca Manfredi; Antonio Acquaviva; Ileana Gagliardi; Elisa Calzaducca; Venkata Ramana Mallela; Davide D'Onghia; Rosalba Minisini; Mattia Bellan; Luigi Mario Castello; Francesco Gavelli; Gian Carlo Avanzi; Filippo Patrucco; Annalisa Chiocchetti; Mario Pirisi; Cristina Rigamonti; Daniele Lilleri; Daniele Sola; Pier Paolo Sainaghi
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 5.818

8.  Reactogenicity to the mRNA-1273 Booster According to Previous mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination.

Authors:  Oleguer Parés-Badell; Ricardo Zules-Oña; Lluís Armadans; Laia Pinós; Blanca Borrás-Bermejo; Susana Otero; José Ángel Rodrigo-Pendás; Martí Vivet-Escalé; Yolima Cossio-Gil; Antònia Agustí; Cristina Aguilera; Magda Campins; Xavier Martínez-Gómez
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-29

9.  The third dose of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines enhances the spike-specific antibody and memory B cell response in myelofibrosis patients.

Authors:  Fabio Fiorino; Annalisa Ciabattini; Anna Sicuranza; Gabiria Pastore; Adele Santoni; Martina Simoncelli; Jacopo Polvere; Sara Galimberti; Claudia Baratè; Vincenzo Sammartano; Francesca Montagnani; Monica Bocchia; Donata Medaglini
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 8.786

10.  Third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: A systematic review of 30 published studies.

Authors:  Fausto Petrelli; Andrea Luciani; Karen Borgonovo; Mara Ghilardi; Maria Chiara Parati; Daniela Petrò; Veronica Lonati; Angelo Pesenti; Mary Cabiddu
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2022-02-12       Impact factor: 20.693

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.