Vaccine-induced humoral response of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 against BA.1, BA.5, and XBB.1.5. (sub)variants 6 months after a homologous booster: is immunogenicity equivalent?

Introduction: Some studies suggest that the monovalent mRNA-1273 vaccine is more effective than BNT162b2 in producing higher levels of antibodies. However, limited data are available, and the methods used are not directly comparable. Material and methods: Blood samples were obtained before the booster (third dose) and after 14, 90, and 180 days in two similar cohorts who received the original BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine designed to target wild type SARS-CoV-2. The aim of our study is to compare their effectiveness by assessing the levels of binding and neutralizing antibodies specifically against each of the BA.1 variant, BA.5 variant, and the XBB.1.5 subvariant. Results: Once the peak was reached after two weeks, a drastic decline in binding and neutralizing antibodies was observed up to 6 months after the homologous booster administration. The humoral response was however more sustained with the mRNA-1273 booster, with half-lives of 167, 55, and 48 days for binding, BA.1, and BA.5 neutralizing antibodies compared to 144, 30, and 29 days for the BNT162b2 booster, respectively. Compared to the BA.1 variant, the neutralizing capacity was significantly decreased at 6 months with the BA.5 variant (fold-decrease: 1.67 to 3.20) and the XBB.1.5. subvariant (fold-decrease: 2.86 to 5.48). Conclusion: Although the decrease in the humoral response was observed with both mRNA vaccines over time, a more sustained response was observed with the mRNA-1273 vaccine. Moreover, the emergence of Omicron-based variants causes a reduced neutralizing capacity, notably with the XBB.1.5. subvariant. The administration of subsequent boosters would therefore be needed to restore a sufficiently high neutralizing response.

Evaluation of Neutralizing Capacity of Tixagevimab plus Cilgavimab (AZD7442) against Different SARS-CoV-2 Variants: A Case Report Study with Comparison to a Vaccinated Population.

AZD7442 (150 mg of tixagevimab plus 150 mg of cilgavimab) has been approved for the preexposure prophylaxis of COVID-19 and for the treatment of adults and adolescents with COVID-19 who do not require supplemental oxygen and who are at increased risk of severe COVID-19. Thus, the aim of the present study is to evaluate the neutralizing capacity of tixagevimab and cilgavimab across different SARS-CoV-2 variants in two patients who received AZD7442 for immunoprophylaxis. A cohort of subjects (n = 45) who had received the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has been included to compare these two preventive strategies. Neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers against several variants were assessed against the wild-type, alpha, beta, gamma, delta, omicron BA.5, and XBB.1.5 variants. Binding antibodies have also been measured. NAbs T 1/2 for AZD7442 was 8.1 days (95% CI: 5.1-19.5 days) and was 11.8 days (95% CI: 7.9-23.7 days) for the primo-vaccination cohort. The time to reach neutralization negativity was 108.3 days (95% CI: 66.9-130.7) for AZD7442 compared to 95.4 days (95% CI: 31.0-119.7 days) for the primo-vaccination cohort. The time to reach NAbs' negativity differs between variants with the maximum value obtained for alpha (i.e., 101.1 days (95% CI: 30.0-135.4 days)) and the minimum obtained for beta (i.e., 61.2 days (95% CI: 37.8-77.1 days)). Our results reinforce the need of reviewing the use of AZD7442 in relation to variants of concern and potentially adapting its administration schedule. AZD7442 could be indicated for short-term prophylaxis in frail patients who may be acutely exposed to SARS-CoV-2.

Are natural estrogens used in contraception at lower risk of venous thromboembolism than synthetic ones? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) poses a significant global health challenge, notably exacerbated by the use of combined oral contraceptives (COCs). Evidence mainly focuses on the type of progestogen used in COCs to establish the increased risk of VTE with less data assessed on the type of estrogen used. This meta-analysis aims to assess the risk of VTE associated with COCs containing synthetic estrogens like ethinylestradiol (EE) versus natural estrogens like estradiol (E2). Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Literature searches were performed in December 2023 in MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify clinical studies comparing the VTE risk between COCs containing synthetic versus natural estrogens. Studies were selected through rigorous screening, and data extraction followed standardized protocols, with statistical analyses employing a random effects model. Results: The search yielded five relevant studies, involving over 560,000 women/time, demonstrating a significant 33% reduction in VTE risk among users of natural estrogen-based COCs compared to synthetic estrogen-based COCs (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.87). Stratification analyses using adjusted hazard ratios (HR) of the main observationnal studies showed a 49% reduced VTE risk of E2-based pills compared to EE in association with levonorgestrel. Discussion and conclusion: Despite the longstanding use of EE-based COCs, emerging evidence supports a lower thrombotic risk associated with natural estrogens. This meta-analysis substantiates the lower VTE risk associated with natural estrogen-based COCs compared to synthetic alternatives, advocating for a re-evaluation of contraceptive guidelines to prioritize patient safety and reduce thrombotic risks.

Assessment of the neutralizing antibody response in Omicron breakthrough cases in healthcare workers who received the homologous booster of Moderna mRNA-1273.

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 were developed during the pandemic including the BNT162b2 and the mRNA-1273. We evaluated the levels of binding antibodies against the receptor binding domain and the levels of NAbs in individuals who developed a breakthrough infection after having received three doses of mRNA-1273. A total of 51 participants were included. The breakthrough group was compared to a 1:1 matched-control group. Among the 51 individuals, 18 (35%) developed a breakthrough infection. The GMT of NAbs against the BA.1 in the BK population was 278.1 (95%CI: 168.1-324.1). This titer was significantly lower compared to the matched-control group when considering all data (GMT = 477.4; 95%CI: 316.2-541.0; p = 0.0057). Results were similar for the BA.5 (GMT = 152.0 (95%CI: 76.9-172.9) for breakthrough and 262.0 (95%CI: 171.3-301.8) for control (p = 0.0043)). Our study found that individuals receiving the mRNA-1273 booster and who developed a breakthrough infection presented lower levels of binding antibodies and NAbs before the infection as compared to a matched-control group.

Neutralizing antibody response to XBB.1.5, BA.2.86, FL.1.5.1, and JN.1 six months after the BNT162b2 bivalent booster.

OBJECTIVES: An increase evasion of the SARS-CoV-2 virus toward vaccination strategies and natural immunity has been rapidly described notably because of the mutations in the spike receptor binding domain and the N-terminal domain. METHODS: Participants of the CRO-VAX HCP study who received the bivalent booster were followed up at 6 months. A pseudovirus-neutralization test was used to assess the neutralization potency of antibodies against D614G, Delta, BA.1, BA.5, XBB.1.5, BA.2.86, FL.1.5.1, and JN-1. RESULTS: The neutralizing capacity of antibodies against the Omicron variant or its subvariants was significantly reduced compared with D614G and Delta (P <0.0001). The lowest neutralizing response that was observed with JN-1 (geometric mean titers [GMTs] = 22.1) was also significantly lower than XBB.1.5 (GMT = 29.5, P <0.0001), BA.2.86 (GMT = 29.6, P <0.0001), and FL.1.5.1 (GMT = 25.2, P <0.0001). Participants who contracted a breakthrough infection because of XBB.1.5 had significantly higher neutralizing antibodies against all variants than uninfected participants, especially against the Omicron variant and its subvariants. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that JN.1 is one of the most immune-evading variants to date and that the BA.2.86 subvariant did not show an increased immunity escape compared with XBB.1.5. The stronger response in breakthrough infection cases with the Omicron variant and its subvariants supports the need to use vaccine antigens that target circulating variants.

Durability of humoral and cellular immunity six months after the BNT162b2 bivalent booster.

Studies about the duration of the humoral and cellular response following the bivalent booster administration are still scarce. We aimed at assessing the humoral and cellular response in a cohort of healthcare workers that received this booster. Blood samples were collected before the administration of the bivalent booster from Pfizer-BioNTech and after 14, 28, 90, and 180 days. Neutralizing antibodies against either the D614G strain, the delta variant, the BA.5 variant, or the XBB.1.5 subvariant were measured. The cellular response was assessed by measurement of the release of interferon gamma from T cells in response to an in vitro SARS-CoV-2 stimulation. A substantial waning of neutralizing antibodies was observed after 6 months (23.1-fold decrease), especially considering the XBB.1.5 subvariant. The estimated T1/2 of neutralizing antibodies was 16.1 days (95% CI = 10.2-38.4 days). Although most participants still present a robust cellular response after 6 months (i.e., 95%), a significant decrease was also observed compared to the peak response (0.95 vs. 0.41 UI/L, p = 0.0083). A significant waning of the humoral and cellular response was observed after 6 months. These data can also help competent national authorities in their recommendation regarding the administration of an additional booster.

An Exploratory Study of the Impact of COVID-19 Vaccine Spontaneous Reporting on Masking Signal Detection in EudraVigilance.

INTRODUCTION: During the signal detection process, statistical methods are used to identify drug-event combinations (DECs) which are disproportionately reported when compared with other drugs and events in the entire database. We hypothesise that the high volume of COVID-19 vaccine adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports transmitted to EudraVigilance may have affected the performance of disproportionality statistics used in routine signal detection, potentially resulting in signals either being masked, or false associations being flagged as potential signals. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to study the impact of COVID-19 vaccine spontaneous reporting on statistical signal detection in EudraVigilance. METHODS: We recalculated the reporting odds ratio (ROR) for signals that were previously discussed at the level of the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee, or signals that were retrieved from EudraVigilance, by omitting COVID-19 vaccine reports from the standard ROR calculation and then comparing the lower confidence interval (LCI) of the recalculated ROR to the LCI of the actual ROR in EudraVigilance. RESULTS: In total, 52 signals for 38 active substances were reviewed. For 35 signals, the LCI of the recalculated ROR value was lower than the LCI of the actual ROR (suggesting that COVID-19 vaccine ADR reporting had a positive effect on the strength of the signal) while for 15 signals the LCI of the recalculated ROR value was higher than the LCI of the actual ROR (suggesting that COVID-19 vaccine ADR reporting had an attenuating effect on the strength of the signal). For two signals, no change in the ROR was observed. In our analysis, six significant results were found. Five DECs were found to be masked: bleomycin and immune thrombocytopenia (actual ROR LCI = 0.94, recalculated ROR LCI = 1.02), vortioxetine and heavy menstrual bleeding (actual ROR LCI = 0.3, recalculated ROR LCI = 1.06), caplacizumab and heavy menstrual bleeding (actual ROR LCI = 0.98, recalculated ROR LCI = 3.47), ziprasidone and amenorrhoea (actual ROR LCI = 0.84, recalculated ROR LCI = 1.67), and azacitidine and pericarditis (actual ROR LCI = 0.81, recalculated ROR LCI = 2.01). For the DEC of adalimumab and immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome, the LCI of the actual ROR value was 1.14 and removing COVID-19 vaccine reporting resulted in an LCI of the recalculated ROR value of 0.94 (below threshold). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated five cases of masking and one case of false-positive association due to the influence of COVID-19 vaccine spontaneous reporting on the ROR. This suggests that the high number of adverse drug reaction reports for COVID-19 vaccines in EudraVigilance has the potential to affect routine statistical signal detection activities. The impact of COVID-19 vaccine ADR reports on current signal detection practices requires further evaluation and solutions to tackle masking issues in EudraVigilance may need to be developed.

Challenges in Assessing COVID-19 Vaccines Safety Signals-The Case of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine and Corneal Graft Rejection.

The rapid and large-scale roll-out of new COVID-19 vaccines has led to unprecedented challenges in assessing vaccine safety. In 2021, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) processed about 1.7 million safety reports related to COVID-19 vaccines in the EudraVigilance (EV) database and identified more than 900 potential signals. Beyond the large amount of information to be processed, the evaluation of safety signals has faced several difficulties and limitations, both in the assessment of case reports and in the investigation of databases. The evaluation of a signal of corneal graft rejection (CGR) with Vaxzevria® was no exception to this. In this commentary, we present the challenges encountered in making regulatory decisions in the context of evolving evidence and knowledge. The pandemic crisis emphasised the importance of quick and proactive communication to address the many questions and, above all, to ensure the transparency of safety data.

Immunovirological and environmental screening reveals actionable risk factors for fatal COVID-19 during post-vaccination nursing home outbreaks.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination has resulted in excellent protection against fatal disease, including in older adults. However, risk factors for post-vaccination fatal COVID-19 are largely unknown. We comprehensively studied three large nursing home outbreaks (20-35% fatal cases among residents) by combining severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) aerosol monitoring, whole-genome phylogenetic analysis and immunovirological profiling of nasal mucosa by digital nCounter transcriptomics. Phylogenetic investigations indicated that each outbreak stemmed from a single introduction event, although with different variants (Delta, Gamma and Mu). SARS-CoV-2 was detected in aerosol samples up to 52 d after the initial infection. Combining demographic, immune and viral parameters, the best predictive models for mortality comprised IFNB1 or age, viral ORF7a and ACE2 receptor transcripts. Comparison with published pre-vaccine fatal COVID-19 transcriptomic and genomic signatures uncovered a unique IRF3 low/IRF7 high immune signature in post-vaccine fatal COVID-19 outbreaks. A multi-layered strategy, including environmental sampling, immunomonitoring and early antiviral therapy, should be considered to prevent post-vaccination COVID-19 mortality in nursing homes.

Kinetics and ability of binding antibody and surrogate virus neutralization tests to predict neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant following BNT162b2 booster administration.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term humoral immunity induced by booster administration, as well as the ability of binding antibody and surrogate virus neutralization tests (sVNT) to predict neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. METHODS: A total of 269 sera samples were analyzed from 64 healthcare workers who had received a homologous booster dose of BNT162b2. Neutralizing antibodies assessed by sVNT and anti-RBD IgG measured with the sCOVG assay (Siemens Healthineers®) were analyzed at five timepoints; before and up to 6 months following the booster. Antibody titers were correlated with neutralizing antibodies against the Omicron BA.1 variant obtained by pseudovirus neutralization test (pVNT) as a reference method. RESULTS: While Wild-type sVNT percentage of inhibition (POI) remained above 98.6% throughout the follow-up period after booster administration, anti-RBD IgG and NAbs assessed by Omicron BA.1 pVNT showed respectively a 3.4-fold and 13.3-fold decrease after 6 months compared to the peak reached at day 14. NAbs assessed by Omicron sVNT followed a steady decline until reaching a POI of 53.4%. Anti-RBD IgG and Omicron sVNT assays were strongly correlated (r=0.90) and performed similarly to predict the presence of neutralizing antibodies with Omicron pVNT (area under the ROC: 0.82 for both assays). In addition, new adapted cut-off values of anti-RBD IgG (>1,276 BAU/mL) and Omicron sVNT (POI>46.6%) were found to be better predictors of neutralizing activity. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a significant drop in humoral immunity 6 months after booster administration. Anti-RBD IgG and Omicron sVNT assays were highly correlated and could predict neutralizing activity with moderate performance.

Clinical performance evaluation of the Fluorecare® SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B & RSV rapid antigen combo test in symptomatic individuals.

BACKGROUND: A SARS-CoV-2+Flu A/B+RSV Combo Rapid test may be more relevant than Rapid Antigen Diagnostic (RAD) tests targeting only SARS-CoV-2 since we are facing a concurrent circulation of these viruses during the winter season. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical performance of a SARS-CoV-2+Flu A/B+RSV Combo test in comparison to a multiplex RT-qPCR. STUDY DESIGN: Residual nasopharyngeal swabs issued from 178 patients were included. All patients, adults and children, were symptomatic and presented at the emergency department with flu-like symptoms. Characterization of the infectious viral agent was done by RT-qPCR. The viral load was expressed as cycle threshold (Ct). Samples were then tested using the multiplex RAD test Fluorecare®à¸ SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B & RSV Antigen Combo Test. Data analysis was carried out using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the test varies according to the virus, with the highest sensitivity observed for Influenza A (80.8.% [95%CI: 67.2 - 94.4]) and the lowest sensitivity observed for RSV (41.5% [95%CI: 26.2 - 56.8]). Higher sensitivities were observed for samples with high viral loads (Ct < 20) and decrease with low viral loads. The specificity for SARS-CoV-2, RSV and Influenza A and B was >95%. CONCLUSIONS: The Fluorecare® combo antigenic presents satisfying performance in real-life clinical setting for Influenza A and B in samples with high viral load. This could be useful to allow a rapid (self-)isolation as the transmissibility of these viruses increase with the viral load. According to our results, its use to rule-out SARS-CoV-2 and RSV infection is not sufficient.