| Literature DB >> 36016132 |
Rudy Foddis1, Riccardo Marino1, Roberto Silvestri2, Poupak Fallahi1, Salvio Perretta3, Christian Garaffa4, Riccardo Morganti5, Martina Corsi3, Jonathan Mennucci1, Francesco Porciatti1, Gianluca Nerli1, Rodolfo Buselli3, Antonello Veltri3, Fabrizio Caldi3, Giovanni Guglielmi3, Grazia Luchini6, Silvia Briani6, Donatella Talini7, Francesco Cipriani8.
Abstract
With the development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, many authors started evaluating the immunization efficacy of the available vaccines mainly through sero-positivity tests or by a quantitative assessment of the IgG against the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 virus in vaccinated subjects. In this work, we compared the titers resulting from vaccination and tried to understand the potential factors affecting the immune response to the available SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. This study was conducted on 670 volunteers employed at the University of Pisa and undergoing a health surveillance program at the University Hospital of Pisa. For each participant, 10 mL of blood, information about contacts with confirmed cases of COVID-19, age, sex, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptoms, type of vaccine and the date of administration were collected. In the multivariate analysis, the type of vaccine, the presence of symptoms in SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals, and the distance from the second dose significantly affected the antibody titer; the combined vaccination resulted in a faster decay over time compared with the other types of vaccination. No significant differences were observed between Spikevax and Comirnaty (p > 0.05), while the antibody levels remain more stable in subjects undergoing Vaxzevria vaccination (p < 0.01) compared with mRNA-based ones.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2 infection; healthcare workers; occupational medicine; vaccines
Year: 2022 PMID: 36016132 PMCID: PMC9416074 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10081244
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vaccines (Basel) ISSN: 2076-393X
Study population characteristics. Statistics: frequency (%) or median (interquartile range).
| Factor | Statistics |
|---|---|
|
| 50 (41–57) |
|
| |
| M | 279 (41.6) |
| F | 391 (58.4) |
|
| 205.2 (106.3–454.9) |
|
| 1444.8 (748.7–3203.5) |
|
| 42 (34–74) |
|
| |
|
| 3 (0.4) |
|
| 493 (73.6) |
|
| 142 (21.2) |
|
| 16 (2.4) |
|
| 16 (2.4) |
|
| 667 (99.6) |
|
| 76 (11.3) |
|
| 19 (2.8) |
Univariate analysis of the factors influencing “anti SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer”, expressed in UA/mL.
| Factor | Univariate Analysis | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.046 | 0.239 |
|
| 0.078 | 0.045 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.624 | |
| M | 1435.7 (759.1–2728.5) | |
| F | 1454.0 (748.4–3319.4) | |
|
| <0.001 | |
| (1) Unvaccinated | 1287.1 (820.5–1988.0) | |
| (2) Vaxzevria | 1141.9 (642.0–2208.2) | |
| (3) Comirnaty | 2933.0 (1438.2–6704.2) | |
| (4) Combined | 7935.7 (4854.0–13,602.5) | |
| (5) Spikevax | 12,127.5 (8167.8–18,624.8) | |
|
| 0.002 | |
| No | 1390.8 (742.3–3132.2) | |
| Yes | 3003.0 (1759.8–8685.2) | |
|
| 0.06 | |
| Unvaccinated | 1287.1 (820.5–1988.0) | |
| Vaccinated | 5656.6 (2302.4–11,006.1) | |
|
| <0.001 | |
| No | 1373 (737–2869) | |
| Yes | 6336 (2691–11,780) | |
Comparison between “anti SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer”, expressed in UA/mL and several symptoms among the SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals.
| Factor | Median (IQR) | |
|---|---|---|
|
| 0.047 | |
| No | 591.5 (413.6–769.4) | |
| Yes | 5415.6 (2410.0–10,232.0) | |
|
| 0.254 | |
| No | 2846.9 (1405.2–8207.5) | |
| Yes | 8122.6 (5405.7–31,526.0) | |
|
| 0.536 | |
| No | 2846.9 (1405.2–8207.5) | |
| Yes | 5415.6 (2625.1–26,463.8) | |
|
| 0.604 | |
| No | 2658.0 (680.4–13,862.7) | |
| Yes | 5415.6 (2224.3–7729.9) | |
|
| 0.109 | |
| No | 2846.9 (1405.3–7785.6) | |
| Yes | 26,463.8 (14,576.3–40,696.6) | |
|
| 0.701 | |
| No | 2688.9 (1028.2–14,398.3) | |
| Yes | 4450.3 (2458.1–8025.9) | |
|
| 1.000 | |
| No | 2690.9 (1482.1–14,398.3) | |
| Yes | 5656.6 (1641.6–8025.9) | |
|
| 0.592 | |
| No | 2690.9 (769.4–8685.2) | |
| Yes | 4209.3 (2302.4–17,114.2) |
Multiple comparisons by Bonferroni method for the antibody titer among different types of vaccine.
| Vaccine | Median | Vaccine | Median | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vaxzevria | 1141.9 | Comiranty | 2933.0 | <0.001 |
| Spikevax | 12,127.5 | <0.001 | ||
| Combined | 7935.7 | <0.001 | ||
| Comiranty | 2933.0 | Spikevax | 12,127.5 | 0.018 |
| Combined | 7935.7 | 0.003 | ||
| Spikevax | 12,127.5 | Combined | 7935.7 | 0.653 |
Multivariate analysis of the factors influencing “anti SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer”. Vaccine types have been numbered from 1 to 5 based on the median antibody titer (Table 4). RC: regression coefficient; SE: standard error; Beta: beta coefficient. Durbin–Watson parameter is equal to 1.9 indicating absence of autocorrelation in the residuals due to the model.
| Factor | RC | 95% CI | SE | Beta | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 4020 | 3507; 4534 | 261 | 0.525 | <0.001 |
|
| −28 | −37; −19 | 4.6 | −0.210 | <0.001 |
|
| −1053 | −6776; 4669 | 2914 | −0.033 | 0.718 |
|
| 9914 | 3806; 16,024 | 3111 | 0.288 | 0.002 |
|
| −4775 | −5961; −3589 | 604 | <0.001 |
Figure 1Antibody titer decreasing over time. Purple represents Combined Vaccination, red Moderna, green Pfizer and blue Astrazeneca.