RESUMO
With the global prevalence of COVID-19 and the constant emergence of viral variants, boosters for COVID-19 vaccines to enhance antibody titers in human bodies will become an inevitable trend. However, there is a lack of data on antibody levels and the protective effects of booster injections. This study monitored and analyzed the antibody potency and the antibody responses induced by the booster injection in the subjects who received three vaccine doses. The study was conducted in a multicenter collaboration and recruited 360 healthy adults aged 20-74. Participants received the first, second, and booster doses of inactivated Sinopharm/BBIBP COVID-19 vaccine at 0, 1, and 7 months. Vaccine-induced virus-specific antibody levels (SARS-COV-2-IgA/IgM/IgG) were monitored at multiple time points, surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT), and the spatial distribution and proportion of immune cells and markers were analyzed using the CyTOF method before vaccination and a month after the second dose. The titers of SARS-CoV-2-IgA/IgM/IgG and neutralizing antibodies increased to a high level in the first month after receiving the second dose of vaccine and declined slowly after that. The antibody levels of SARS-CoV-2-IgG and sVNT were significantly increased at 0.5 months after the induction of the booster (p < 0.05). Despite a downward trend, the antibody levels were still high in the following 6 months. The B cell concentration (in humoral sample) a month after the second injection was significantly reduced compared to that before the vaccine injection (p < 0.05). The proportion of the C01 cell cluster was significantly decreased compared with that before vaccine injection (p < 0.05). Individual cell surface markers showed distinctions in spatial distribution but were not significantly different. This study has shown that serum antibody titer levels will decrease with time by monitoring and analyzing the antibody efficacy and the antibody reaction caused by the booster injection of healthy people who received the whole vaccination (completed three injections). Still, the significant peak of the antibody titer levels after booster highlights the recall immune response. It can maintain a high concentration of antibody levels for a long time, which signifies that the protection ability has been enhanced following the injection of booster immunization. Additionally, CyTOF data shows the active production of antibodies and the change in the immunity environment.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Adulto , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , Anticorpos Antivirais , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Humanos , Imunoensaio , Imunoglobulina A , Imunoglobulina G , Imunoglobulina M , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The inactivated Sinopharm/BBIBP COVID-19 vaccine has been widely used in the world and has joined the COVAX vaccine supply program for developing countries. It is also well adapted for usage in low- and middle-income nations due to their low storage requirements. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to report on the kinetics, durability, and neutralizing ability of the induced immunity of the BBIBP vaccine, and the intensified antibody response elicited by the booster. METHODS: A total of 353 healthy adult participants, aged 20-74 years, were recruited in this multicenter study. A standard dose of the BBIBP vaccine was administered (Month 0), followed by a second standard dose (Month 1), and a booster dose (after Month 7). Vaccine-induced virus-specific antibody levels (SARS-CoV-2-IgA/IgM/IgG), conventional virus neutralization test (cVNT), pseudovirus neutralization test (pVNT), and surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) were monitored over multiple time points. RESULTS: Neutralizing titers induced by the two doses of inactivated vaccine for COVID-19 peaked at Month 2 and declined to 33.89% at Month 6. Following the booster dose, elevated levels of antibodies were induced for IgA, IgG, and neutralizing antibodies, with neutralizing titer reaching 13.2 times that of before the booster. CONCLUSION: By monitoring the antibody titer levels postvaccination, this study has shown that serum antibody levels will decrease over time, but a notable spike in antibody levels postbooster highlights the anamnestic immune response. This signifies that the protection capability has increased following the injection of booster immunization.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , Anticorpos Antivirais , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Imunidade Humoral , Imunização Secundária , Imunoglobulina A , Imunoglobulina G , SARS-CoV-2 , VacinaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: This cross-sectional study aimed to identify latent sensitization profiles of asthma patients in mainland China, unveiling the association between regional differences and sensitization patterns. METHODS: 1056 asthma participants from 10 medical centers divided into eastern and western cohorts were clustered into four individual sensitization patterns, respectively, by using an unsupervised statistical modeling method, latent class analysis (LCA), based on the levels of 12 aeroallergens specific IgE reactivities. Moreover, differences in clinical characteristics and environmental exposures were compared in different sensitization patterns. RESULTS: Four distinct sensitization patterns in the two cohorts were defined as follows, respectively. Eastern cohort: Class 1: "High weed pollen and house dust mites (HDMs) sensitization" (8.87%), Class 2: "HDMs dominated sensitization" (38.38%), Class 3: "High HDMs and animal dander sensitization" (6.95%), Class 4: "Low/no aeroallergen sensitization" (45.80%). Western cohort: Class 1: "High weed pollen sensitization" (26.14%), Class 2: "High multi-pollen sensitization" (15.02%), Class 3: "HDMs-dominated sensitization" (10.33%), Class 4: "Low/no aeroallergen sensitization" (48.51%). Of note, the significant statistical difference in age, asthma control test score (ACT) and comorbidities were observed within or between different sensitization patterns. Exposure factors in different sensitization patterns were pointed out. CONCLUSIONS: Asthmatic patients with distinct sensitization patterns were clustered and identified through the LCA method, disclosing the relationship between sensitization profiles of multiple aeroallergens and geographical differences, providing novel insights and potential strategies for atopic disease monitoring, management and prevention in clinical practice.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Few risk-forecasting models of allergic rhinitis (AR) exist that may aid AR pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in clinical practice. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and validate an effective clinical model for identifying candidates for AR PrEP using a routine medical questionnaire. METHODS: This study was conducted in 10 Chinese provinces with 13 medical centers (n = 877) between 2019 and 2021. Clinical characteristics and exposure history were collected via face-to-face interviews. Well-trained physicians diagnosed patients with AR based on skin prick test results and clinical performance. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator model was used to identify potential risk factors for AR, and the logistic regression model was used to construct the risk-forecasting model. Predictive power and model reliability were assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and calibration curves, respectively. RESULTS: This study diagnosed 625 patients with AR who had positive responses to at least one indoor or outdoor allergen and 460 to at least one outdoor pollen allergen. Two nomograms were established to identify two types of AR with various sensitization patterns. Both models had an area under curve of approximately 0.7 in the development and internal validation datasets. Additionally, our findings found good agreement for the calibration curves of both models. CONCLUSION: Early identification of candidates for AR PrEP using routine medical information may improve the deployment of limited resources and effective health management. Our models showed good performance in predicting AR; therefore, they can serve as potential automatic screening tools to identify AR PrEP candidates.