Literature DB >> 35678117

Immunological evaluation of an mRNA vaccine booster in individuals fully immunized with an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

Xingli Xu1, Yun Liao1, Guorun Jiang1, Weiguo Yao2, Suqin Duan1, Kang Xiao3, Xuefeng Ding1, Heng Zhao1, Yujian Zhang2, Aihua Zhang2, Jingsi Yang1, Yanchun Che1, Jun Zhang2, Fanfan Zhao2, Xiaopin Ma2, Zhimei Zhao1, Pingfang Cui1, Xiaolei Yang1, Xiaorui Lin1, Wei Cai1, Jiao Yan1, Zhenqing Yang1, Heng Qiu1, Jing Zhang2, Lei Huang2, Mingyun Shen2, Guofeng Zhao2, Li Yu1, Dandan Li1, Shengtao Fan1, Ying Zhang1, Lichun Wang1, Licun He1, Fei Dong1, Wenbo Xu3, Hangwen Li2, Qihan Li1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35678117      PMCID: PMC9178391          DOI: 10.1002/ctm2.875

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Transl Med        ISSN: 2001-1326


× No keyword cloud information.
Dear Editor, More than 5.75 million deaths and 396.55 million cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) have been reported, including those caused by at least five variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). This situation has caused public concern about the effectiveness of immune responses to emerging variants elicited by boosters of different vaccines in previously immunized populations. , Our study, based on a cohort immunized with two doses of the inactivated vaccine and boosted with the messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine at an interval of 6 months, investigates immunity of heterologous vaccination. The inactivated and mRNA vaccines used in this study were developed based upon the sequence of the Wuhan strain. , In total, 288 healthy adult volunteers were immunized with an inactivated vaccine (150 U/dose) at an interval of 14 days; neutralizing antibodies were identified as having a geometric mean titer (GMT) of 2.1 and as negative in 52% of this population at 6 months after full immunization. Among them, 118 and 97 immunized subjects were boosted with the inactivated (150 U/dose) or mRNA (25 μg/dose) vaccine, and 73 immunized subjects were monitored as non‐boosted controls. The average ages of the three groups were 43.04 ± 13.05, 31.86 ± 7.62 and 30.05 ± 7.03 years, respectively (Table S1). Immunological observation was until day 180 post‐boost, which was available for 60, 61 and 68 subjects in the inactivated vaccine boost, mRNA vaccine boost and nonboosted groups, respectively (Figure S1). Antibody assays performed at days 14 and 180 post‐boost showed GMTs of 829 and 455 on days 14 and 180, respectively, against the Wuhan strain in the mRNA boost group, in comparison to GMTs of 39 and 19, respectively, in the inactivated vaccine boost group (Figure 1). Binding antibody titers reached 71864 and 29675 and 3162 and 1993 on days 14 and 180, respectively, in the mRNA and inactivated vaccine boost groups (Figure 1). Further cross‐neutralization for the B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains suggested that sera from the mRNA vaccine boost group possess a strong neutralizing antibody titer against the B.1.617.2 strain, with GMTs reaching 540 and 335 at days 14 and 180 post‐boost, respectively. The data are close to those against the Wuhan strain; sera showed GMTs of 108 and 33 against the B.1.1.529 strain at the same times (Figure 2). Analysis of dynamic variation of these neutralizing antibodies against variants in 17 subjects from the three groups suggested that non‐boosted individuals displayed a continuous decline in neutralizing antibodies during the study to titers of 1 (Figure 3) and that the inactivated vaccine‐ and mRNA vaccine‐boosted groups presented a tendency to decline from high levels (Figure 3). However, there was distinct differential variation in the neutralizing antibody titer in the inactivated vaccine‐boosted and mRNA vaccine‐boosted groups. The antibody titer in individuals boosted by the mRNA vaccine showed only a slight decline and even remained stable in one individual (Figure 3), whereas the titer variation among those boosted by the inactivated vaccine presented the same slope as those of the non‐boosted group. Importantly, these tendencies were similar among antibodies against the Wuhan, B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains (Figure 3). These data highlight a possible vaccine strategy that might achieve an increased antibody response against current variants in inactivated vaccine‐immunized individuals with mRNA vaccine booster immunization that might be capable of maintaining effective immunity for at least 6 months, enhancing confidence in the defence against the COVID‐19 pandemic, even though the immunological mechanism underlying this phenomenon is currently unclear.
FIGURE 1

Production of antibodies against the Wuhan strain and binding antibodies was induced in all individuals immunized. (A) Neutralizing antibodies against the Wuhan strain at 14 and 180 days after booster immunization. (B) Binding antibodies (IgG) against the S1 protein at 14 and 180 days after booster immunization. A non‐boosted group, an inactivated vaccine‐boosted group and an mRNA vaccine‐boosted group were included. GMT denotes the geometric mean titers of the antibody. *.01 < p < .05; **.001 < p < .01; ***p < .001; ****p < .0001; GMT, geometric mean titer; ns, not significant. *Significant when compared between groups

FIGURE 2

Cross‐neutralizing antibodies against the B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains in randomly selected immunized individuals. (A) Neutralizing antibodies against the B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains at 14 days after booster immunization. (B) Neutralizing antibodies against the B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains at 180 days after booster immunization. GMT denotes the geometric mean titers of the antibody.*.01 < p < .05; **.001 < p < .01; ***p < .001; ****p < .0001; GMT, geometric mean titer; ns, not significant. *Significant if compared between groups

FIGURE 3

Dynamic alteration of neutralizing antibodies against the Wuhan, B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains in the same individuals. A non‐boosted group (n = 6), an inactivated vaccine‐boosted group (n = 5) and an mRNA vaccine‐boosted group (n = 6) were included

Production of antibodies against the Wuhan strain and binding antibodies was induced in all individuals immunized. (A) Neutralizing antibodies against the Wuhan strain at 14 and 180 days after booster immunization. (B) Binding antibodies (IgG) against the S1 protein at 14 and 180 days after booster immunization. A non‐boosted group, an inactivated vaccine‐boosted group and an mRNA vaccine‐boosted group were included. GMT denotes the geometric mean titers of the antibody. *.01 < p < .05; **.001 < p < .01; ***p < .001; ****p < .0001; GMT, geometric mean titer; ns, not significant. *Significant when compared between groups Cross‐neutralizing antibodies against the B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains in randomly selected immunized individuals. (A) Neutralizing antibodies against the B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains at 14 days after booster immunization. (B) Neutralizing antibodies against the B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains at 180 days after booster immunization. GMT denotes the geometric mean titers of the antibody.*.01 < p < .05; **.001 < p < .01; ***p < .001; ****p < .0001; GMT, geometric mean titer; ns, not significant. *Significant if compared between groups Dynamic alteration of neutralizing antibodies against the Wuhan, B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 strains in the same individuals. A non‐boosted group (n = 6), an inactivated vaccine‐boosted group (n = 5) and an mRNA vaccine‐boosted group (n = 6) were included The S protein‐specific T cell response assay using viral receptor‐binding domain (RBD) peptides with specific mutations identified in the B.1.1.7, B.1.617, B.1.617.2, B.1.351, B.1.1.529.BA.1 and Wuhan strains suggest higher spot numbers for the wild‐type RBD of the S protein than for the RBDs derived from the variants at day 28 post‐boost in individuals boosted with the mRNA vaccine (Figure 4A). However, spot counting in the assay at day 180 post‐boost indicated similar effective T cell responses against the RBD peptide with the mutations of B.1.1.529.BA.1 in comparison to those against RBD peptides with characterized mutations of previous variants (Figure 4B). These results suggest that activated immune memory is definite in individuals primarily immunized with an inactivated vaccine and boosted with an mRNA vaccine. According to clinical monitoring for 28 days after boosting, mild (grade 1) to moderate (grade 2) pain, redness, swelling and pruritus at the injection site were reported as the main local adverse events over 7 days. Approximately 26 subjects reported severe pain (Table S2). Transient fatigue was the most common systemic event, with 21% of the participants in this group reporting this adverse event. Nine subjects reported transient fever (grade 2) with general weakness or headache. The incidence rate of adverse reactions in the mRNA group was obviously lower than the rates reported in clinical studies of other mRNA vaccines.
FIGURE 4

Antigen‐specific effective T cell responses (IFN‐γ ELISpot) against several RBD proteins in randomly selected immunized individuals. IFN‐γ‐positive effective T cell responses against the wild‐type RBD peptide of Wuhan strain, an RBD peptide containing the N501Y mutation of B.1.1.7, an RBD peptide containing the L452R and E484Q mutations of B.1.617, an RBD peptide containing the L452R and T478K mutations of B.1.617.2, an RBD peptide containing the K417N, E484K and N501Y mutations of B.1.351, an RBD peptide containing the G339D, S371L, S373P, S375F, K417N, N440K, G446S, S477N,T478K, E484A, Q493R, G496S, Q498R, N501Y and Y505H mutations of B.1.1.529.BA.1 strain in different groups. (A) IFN‐γ‐positive effective T cell responses against different mutant proteins at 28 days after booster immunization. (B) IFN‐γ‐positive effective T cell responses against different mutant proteins at 180 days after booster immunization. *.01 < p < .05; **.001 < p < .01; ***p < .001; ****p < .0001; IFN, interferon; ns, not significant; RBD, receptor‐binding domain

Antigen‐specific effective T cell responses (IFN‐γ ELISpot) against several RBD proteins in randomly selected immunized individuals. IFN‐γ‐positive effective T cell responses against the wild‐type RBD peptide of Wuhan strain, an RBD peptide containing the N501Y mutation of B.1.1.7, an RBD peptide containing the L452R and E484Q mutations of B.1.617, an RBD peptide containing the L452R and T478K mutations of B.1.617.2, an RBD peptide containing the K417N, E484K and N501Y mutations of B.1.351, an RBD peptide containing the G339D, S371L, S373P, S375F, K417N, N440K, G446S, S477N,T478K, E484A, Q493R, G496S, Q498R, N501Y and Y505H mutations of B.1.1.529.BA.1 strain in different groups. (A) IFN‐γ‐positive effective T cell responses against different mutant proteins at 28 days after booster immunization. (B) IFN‐γ‐positive effective T cell responses against different mutant proteins at 180 days after booster immunization. *.01 < p < .05; **.001 < p < .01; ***p < .001; ****p < .0001; IFN, interferon; ns, not significant; RBD, receptor‐binding domain Clinical trials of inactivated vaccines report antigen‐specific humoural and cellular immune responses and protective efficacy against pandemics caused by the Wuhan strain. , However, subsequent studies on the duration of immunity elicited by the vaccine against the Wuhan strain and other variants indicate dramatic declines in neutralizing and binding antibody titers, suggesting that a booster vaccination is needed to maintain neutralizing antibodies in this vaccinated population. In this study, a dose of 25 μg of mRNA vaccine as a clinical‐stage product was used for booster immunization in individuals previously immunized with an inactivated vaccine, eliciting robust enhancement of antigen‐specific antibody titers and cellular immune responses, which is similar to the data that heterologous boosting is associated with more robust immune responses than homologous boosting. Indeed, they were substantially greater than those achieved with booster immunization with the inactivated vaccine in our previous work and, importantly, also exhibited cross‐reactivity with an antigen carrying the mutations of the delta and omicron variants, showing not only positive specific effective T cell responses against S antigens with various mutations but also high neutralizing antibody titers against the B.1.617.2 and B.1.1.529 and Wuhan strains. In conclusion, all of these data support the conclusion that boosting previously inactivated vaccine‐immunized individuals with an mRNA vaccine is a promising strategy for increasing population‐level immunity against the rising pandemic caused by variants.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no competing interests. Supporting Information Click here for additional data file.
  10 in total

1.  Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Phase 2 Trial of an Inactivated Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Vaccine in Healthy Adults.

Authors:  Yanchun Che; Xiaoqiang Liu; Yi Pu; Meijian Zhou; Zhimei Zhao; Ruiju Jiang; Zhifang Yin; Mingjue Xu; Qiongzhou Yin; Jianfeng Wang; Jing Pu; Heng Zhao; Ying Zhang; Lichun Wang; Ya Jiang; Jin Lei; Yan Zheng; Yun Liao; Runxiang Long; Li Yu; Pingfang Cui; Huijuan Yang; Yuehui Zhang; Jingyu Li; Weiwu Chen; Zhanlong He; Kaili Ma; Chao Hong; Dandan Li; Guorun Jiang; Donglan Liu; Xingli Xu; Shengtao Fan; Chen Cheng; Hongling Zhao; Jianbo Yang; Yan Li; Yanxiang Zou; Youshuai Zhu; Yaling Zhou; Yingqiu Guo; Ting Yang; Hongbo Chen; Zhongping Xie; Changgui Li; Qihan Li
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 9.079

2.  Association of Homologous and Heterologous Vaccine Boosters With COVID-19 Incidence and Severity in Singapore.

Authors:  Sharon Hui Xuan Tan; Rachael Pung; Lin-Fa Wang; David Chien Lye; Benjamin Ong; Alex R Cook; Kelvin Bryan Tan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 157.335

3.  A core-shell structured COVID-19 mRNA vaccine with favorable biodistribution pattern and promising immunity.

Authors:  Ren Yang; Yao Deng; Baoying Huang; Lei Huang; Ang Lin; Yuhua Li; Wenling Wang; Jingjing Liu; Shuaiyao Lu; Zhenzhen Zhan; Yufei Wang; Ruhan A; Wen Wang; Peihua Niu; Li Zhao; Shiqiang Li; Xiaopin Ma; Luyao Zhang; Yujian Zhang; Weiguo Yao; Xingjie Liang; Jincun Zhao; Zhongmin Liu; Xiaozhong Peng; Hangwen Li; Wenjie Tan
Journal:  Signal Transduct Target Ther       Date:  2021-05-31

4.  Intensified antibody response elicited by boost suggests immune memory in individuals administered two doses of SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine.

Authors:  Yun Liao; Ying Zhang; Heng Zhao; Jing Pu; Zhimei Zhao; Dandan Li; Shengtao Fan; Li Yu; Xingli Xu; Lichun Wang; Guorun Jiang; Longding Liu; Qihan Li
Journal:  Emerg Microbes Infect       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 7.163

5.  An mRNA Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 - Preliminary Report.

Authors:  Lisa A Jackson; Evan J Anderson; Nadine G Rouphael; Paul C Roberts; Mamodikoe Makhene; Rhea N Coler; Michele P McCullough; James D Chappell; Mark R Denison; Laura J Stevens; Andrea J Pruijssers; Adrian McDermott; Britta Flach; Nicole A Doria-Rose; Kizzmekia S Corbett; Kaitlyn M Morabito; Sijy O'Dell; Stephen D Schmidt; Phillip A Swanson; Marcelino Padilla; John R Mascola; Kathleen M Neuzil; Hamilton Bennett; Wellington Sun; Etza Peters; Mat Makowski; Jim Albert; Kaitlyn Cross; Wendy Buchanan; Rhonda Pikaart-Tautges; Julie E Ledgerwood; Barney S Graham; John H Beigel
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  The safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in Chinese adults aged 18-59 years: A phase I randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial.

Authors:  Jing Pu; Qin Yu; Zhifang Yin; Ying Zhang; Xueqi Li; Qiongzhou Yin; Hongbo Chen; Runxiang Long; Zhimei Zhao; Tangwei Mou; Heng Zhao; Shiyin Feng; Zhongping Xie; Lichun Wang; Zhanlong He; Yun Liao; Shengtao Fan; Ruiju Jiang; Jianfeng Wang; Lingli Zhang; Jing Li; Huiwen Zheng; Pingfang Cui; Guorun Jiang; Lei Guo; Mingjue Xu; Huijuan Yang; Shan Lu; Xuanyi Wang; Yang Gao; Xingli Xu; Linrui Cai; Jian Zhou; Li Yu; Zhuo Chen; Chao Hong; Dan Du; Hongling Zhao; Yan Li; Kaili Ma; Yunfei Ma; Donglan Liu; Shibao Yao; Changgui Li; Yanchun Che; Longding Liu; Qihan Li
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 3.641

Review 7.  Will SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern affect the promise of vaccines?

Authors:  Ravindra K Gupta
Journal:  Nat Rev Immunol       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 53.106

Review 8.  Novel SARS-CoV-2 variants: the pandemics within the pandemic.

Authors:  Erik Boehm; Ilona Kronig; Richard A Neher; Isabella Eckerle; Pauline Vetter; Laurent Kaiser
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 8.067

9.  Reduced neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617 by vaccine and convalescent serum.

Authors:  Chang Liu; Helen M Ginn; Wanwisa Dejnirattisai; Piyada Supasa; Beibei Wang; Aekkachai Tuekprakhon; Rungtiwa Nutalai; Daming Zhou; Alexander J Mentzer; Yuguang Zhao; Helen M E Duyvesteyn; César López-Camacho; Jose Slon-Campos; Thomas S Walter; Donal Skelly; Sile Ann Johnson; Thomas G Ritter; Chris Mason; Sue Ann Costa Clemens; Felipe Gomes Naveca; Valdinete Nascimento; Fernanda Nascimento; Cristiano Fernandes da Costa; Paola Cristina Resende; Alex Pauvolid-Correa; Marilda M Siqueira; Christina Dold; Nigel Temperton; Tao Dong; Andrew J Pollard; Julian C Knight; Derrick Crook; Teresa Lambe; Elizabeth Clutterbuck; Sagida Bibi; Amy Flaxman; Mustapha Bittaye; Sandra Belij-Rammerstorfer; Sarah C Gilbert; Tariq Malik; Miles W Carroll; Paul Klenerman; Eleanor Barnes; Susanna J Dunachie; Vicky Baillie; Natali Serafin; Zanele Ditse; Kelly Da Silva; Neil G Paterson; Mark A Williams; David R Hall; Shabir Madhi; Marta C Nunes; Philip Goulder; Elizabeth E Fry; Juthathip Mongkolsapaya; Jingshan Ren; David I Stuart; Gavin R Screaton
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 41.582

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.