Immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection with residual post COVID symptoms

BACKGROUNDIn a number of patients, post-acute COVID syndrome develops after acute infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (Long COVID [LC]). Here, we examined the immune responses and clinical characteristics of individuals with LC compared to age- and gender-matched healthy recovered COVID individuals (HC) during the Omicron pandemic. Immune responses following BNT162b2 (Pfizer) booster are also determined. METHODSThis retrospective cohort study included 292 patients (LC, 158; HC, 134) confirmed to have SARS-CoV-2 infection from January to August 2022. We determined anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain immunoglobulin G (anti-RBD IgG), surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT), T-cell subsets, and neutralization of wild-type, BA.1 and BA.5. A subset of patients was voluntarily recruited for booster vaccination with BNT162b2 vaccine and immunogenicity was assessed 4weeks after vaccination. RESULTSCycle thresholds were higher in the HC group than in the LC group (20.7 vs. 19.7; P<0.039). Anti-RBD IgG was higher at [≤]56 days after COVID-19 onset (PC) in 3-dose vaccines compared with 2-dose vaccines in the LC group (P=0.02) and after 57-84 days PC in 3-dose vaccines in the HC group (P<0.001). The sVNT in LC was significantly high against Wuhan and sVNT was 30% lower against the Omicron than the Wuhan. sVNT was relatively sustained in 3-dose vaccines than [≤] 2-dose vaccines. sVNT in the HC group reached its peak at 57-84 days PC as compared with the LC group. CONCLUSIONSThese findings imply that LC produced increased neutralizing antibody responses than those with HC. During the Omicron pandemic, immunity after LC has still waned; therefore, a booster vaccine may be needed after 2-3 months from last infection. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05484700)

Immune responses of the third dose of AZD1222 vaccine or BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine after two doses of CoronaVac vaccines against Delta and Omicron variants

SummaryHalf-dose AZD1222 or BNT162b2 boosters maintained immunogenicity and safety, and were non-inferior to full doses. All doses elicited high immunogenicity and best with extended post-CoronaVac primary-series intervals (120-180 days) and high-transmissibility Omicron. MethodsAt 60-to-<90, 90-to-<120, or 120-to-180 days ( intervals) post-CoronaVac primary-series, participants were randomized to full-dose or half-dose AZD1222 or BNT162b2, and followed up at day-28, -60 and -90. Vaccination-induced immunogenicity to Ancestral, Delta and Omicron BA.1 strains were evaluated by assessing anti-spike ( anti-S), anti-nucleocapsid antibodies, pseudovirus neutralization ( PVNT), micro-neutralization titers, and T-cells assays. Descriptive statistics and non-inferiority cut-offs were reported as geometric mean concentration (GMC) or titer (GMT) and GMC/GMT ratios comparing baseline to day-28 and day-90 seroresponses, and different intervals post-CoronaVac primary-series. Omicron immunogenicity was only evaluated in full-dose recipients. FindingsNo serious or severe vaccine-related safety events occurred. All assays and intervals showed non-inferior immunogenicity between full-doses and half-doses. However, full-dose vaccines and/or longer, 120-to-180-day intervals substantially improved immunogenicity (in GMC measured by anti-S assays or GMT measured by PVNT50; p <0.001). Within platforms and regardless of dose or platform, seroconversions were over 97%, and over 90% for pseudovirus neutralizing antibodies, but similar against the SARS-CoV-2 strains. Immunogenicity waned more quickly with half-doses than full-doses between day 60-to-90 follow-ups, but remained high against Ancestral or Delta strains. Against Omicron, the day-28 immunogenicity increased with longer intervals than shorter intervals for full-dose vaccines. InterpretationCombining heterologous schedules, fractional dosing, and extended post-second dose intervals, broadens population-level protection and prevents disruptions, especially in resource-limited settings. FundingFunding was provided by the Program Management Unit for Competitiveness Enhancement (PMU-C) National research, National Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation Policy Council, Thailand through Clinixir Ltd. Research in ContextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSO_LIAlthough nAb titers from CoronaVac primary series waned after 3-4 months, nAb were more increased when boosted at 8 months than at 2 months post-primary series. C_LIO_LISix months post-vaccination with a one-fourth dose of primary mRNA-1273, nAb responses were half as robust as full doses, but VE was over 80% of that of full-dose vaccinations. C_LIO_LIThai adults boosted with 30g-BNT162b2 and 15g-BNT162b2 at 8-12 weeks after two-dose CoronaVac or AZD1222 had high antibodies to the virus receptor-binding domain, nAb titers against all variants, and T-cell responses. C_LIO_LIThird-dose boosting at a 44-45-week interval significantly increased antibody levels compared to boosting at 15-25-week or 8-12-week intervals. C_LIO_LIA third dose of CoronaVac administered eight months after the second dose increased antibody levels more than when administered at two months, while antibody responses were two-fold higher with a booster dose of AZD1222 administered at a 12-weeks or longer interval than a 6-weeks or shorter interval.Error! Bookmark not defined. C_LIO_LIIn the UK, third doses of AZD1222 led to higher antibody levels that correlated with high efficacy and T-cell responses, after a prolonged, dose-stretched interval between vaccine doses, than shorter intervals. C_LIO_LIOmicron-neutralizing antibodies were detected in only 56% of short-interval vaccine recipients versus all (100%) prolonged-interval vaccine recipients, 69% of whom also demonstrated Omicron-neutralizing antibodies at 4-6 months post-booster. C_LIO_LIIsraeli studies noted a restoration of antibody levels and enhanced immunogenic protection against severe disease when a second booster (fourth dose) was given 4 months or longer after a first booster, with no new safety concerns. C_LI Added value of this studyThere were no studies designed specifically aimed to analyzed non inferiority between the full dose and half dose of AZD1222 or BNT162b2 boosters after CoronaVac two doses which is important research question when we started the study and the situation of limited vaccine supply, global inequity and high disease burden in the Lower middle-income countries Data on the optimal prime-boost interval is limited, especially data that combines lower (fractional) dosing from resource-limited countries, which is provided by our study. Implications of all the available evidenceWe confirm the feasibility of a booster strategy that accounts for the needs of resource-limitations, through the use of fractional dosing, dose-stretching and heterologous schedules, which can broaden population-level protection and prevent vaccination disruptions.

A measles-vectored COVID-19 vaccine induces long-term immunity and protection from SARS-CoV-2 challenge in mice

In light of the expanding SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, developing efficient vaccines that can provide sufficient coverage for the world population is a global health priority. The measles virus (MV)-vectored vaccine is an attractive candidate given the measles vaccines extensive safety history, well-established manufacturing process, and induction of strong, long-lasting immunity. We developed an MV-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine using either the full-length spike (S) or S2 subunit as the antigen. While the S2 antigen failed to induce neutralizing antibodies, the prefusion-stabilized, full-length S (MV-ATU2-SF-2P-dER) construct proved to be an attractive vaccine candidate, eliciting strong Th1-dominant T-cell and neutralizing antibody responses against the S antigen while minimizing reactivity to the vector itself. Neutralizing antibody titers remained high three months after homologous prime-boost immunization, and infectious virus was undetectable in all animals after challenge with a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Immunogenicity and adverse events of priming with inactivated whole SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) followed by boosting the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine

BackgroundResponding to SARS-CoV-2 Delta variants escaped the vaccine-induced immunity and waning immunity from the inactivated whole virus vaccine, Thailand recently proposed a heterologous inactivated whole virus vaccine (CoronaVac) viral vector vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) prime-boost vaccine regimen(I/V). This study aims to evaluate the immunogenicity and adverse events of this regimen by comparison with homologous CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and convalescent serum. MethodImmunogenicity was evaluated by the level of IgG antibodies against the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S1 subunit) (anti-S RBD). At 2 weeks following the second dosage, a selection of random samples was tested for plaque reduction neutralisation (PRNT) and Pseudotype-Based Microneutralization test (PVNT) against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs). The safety profile of heterologous CoronaVac-ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 prime-boost vaccine regimen was described by interviewing at the 1-month visit. ResultBetween April to August 2021,426 participants were included in the study, with 155 obtaining CoronaVac-ChAdOx1 nCoV-19(I/V),32 obtaining homologous CoronaVac(I/I),47 obtaining homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19(V/V),169 with history covid-19 infection. Geometric mean titers (GMTs) of anti-S RBD level in the I/V group compare 2wks and 4 wks (873.9 vs 639,p=0.00114).At 4 wks, GMTs of anti-S RBD level in I/V group was 639, 95% CI 63-726,and natural infection group 177.3, 95% CI 42-221, and V/V group 211.1, 95% CI 77-152, and I/I group 108.2, 95% CI 77-152; all p<0.001).At 2 wks, The GMTs of 50%PRNT of 19 sampling from the I/V group is 434.5, 95% CI 326-579, against wild type and 80.4, 95% CI 56-115, against alpha and 67.4, 95% CI 48-95, against delta and 19.8, 95% CI 14-30, against beta; all p<0.001. At 2 wks, The GMTs of 50%PVNT of 15 sampling from the I/V group is 597.8, 95% CI 368-970, against wild type and 163.9, 95% CI 89-301, against alpha and 157.7, 95% CI 66-378, against delta. The AEs in the I/V schedule were well tolerated and generally unremarkable. ConclusionThe I/V vaccination is a mixed regimen that induced higher immunogenicity and shall be considered for responding to Delta Variants when only inactivated whole virus vaccine and viral vector vaccine was available.

Immunogenicity and Protective Efficacy of a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine Encoding Secreted Non-Stabilized Spike Protein in Mice

Establishment of an mRNA vaccine platform in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is important to enhance vaccine accessibility and ensure future pandemic preparedness. Here, we describe the preclinical studies of a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA encoding prefusion-unstabilized ectodomain spike protein encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles (LNP) "ChulaCov19". In BALB/c mice, ChulaCov19 at 0.2, 1, 10, and 30 g given 2 doses, 21 days apart, elicited robust neutralizing antibody (NAb) and T cells responses in a dose-dependent relationship. The geometric mean titer (GMT) of micro-virus neutralizing (micro-VNT) antibody against wild-type virus was 1,280, 11,762, 54,047, and 62,084, respectively. Higher doses induced better cross-neutralizing antibody against Delta and Omicron variants. This elicited specific immunogenicity was significantly higher than those induced by homologous prime-boost with inactivated (CoronaVac) or viral vector (AZD1222) vaccine. In heterologous prime-boost study, mice primed with either CoronaVac or AZD1222 vaccine and boosted with 5 g ChulaCov19 generated NAb 7-fold higher against wild-type virus (WT) and was also significantly higher against Omicron (BA.1 and BA.4/5) than homologous CoronaVac or AZD1222 vaccination. AZD1222-prime/mRNA-boost had mean spike-specific IFN{gamma} positive T cells of 3,725 SFC/106 splenocytes, which was significantly higher than all groups except homologous ChulaCov19. Challenge study in human-ACE-2-expressing transgenic mice showed that ChulaCov19 at 1 g or 10 g protected mice from COVID-19 symptoms, prevented SARS-CoV-2 viremia, significantly reduced tissue viral load in nasal turbinate, brain, and lung tissues 99.9-100%, and without anamnestic of Ab response which indicated its protective efficacy. ChulaCov19 is therefore a promising mRNA vaccine candidate either as a primary or a boost vaccination and has entered clinical development.

A Phase1 Results of a Non-Stabilized Spike-Encoding mRNA Vaccine in Adults

BackgroundEffective COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are mainly available in high-income countries. ChulaCov19, a prefusion non-stabilized Spike protein-encoding, nucleoside-modified mRNA, lipid nanoparticle encapsulated vaccine development, aims to enhance accessibility of mRNA vaccine and future pandemic preparedness for low- to middle-income countries. MethodsSeventy-two eligible volunteers, 36 aged 18-55 (adults) followed by 36 aged 56-75 (elderly) enrolled in a dose escalation study of ChulaCov19 mRNA vaccine. Two doses of vaccine were given 21 days apart at 10, 25, or 50 {micro}g/dose (12/group). Safety was the primary and immunogenicity the secondary outcome. Human convalescents (HCS) and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccinees sera provided comparison panels. ResultsAll three doses of ChulaCov19 were well tolerated and elicited robust dose-dependent and age- dependent B- and T-cell responses. Transient mild/moderate injection site pain, fever, chills, fatigue, and headache were more common after the second dose. Four weeks after the second ChulaCov19: dose at 10, 25, and 50 {micro}g dose, MicroVNT-50 Geometric mean titer (GMT) against wild-type was 848, 736 and 1,140 IU/mL, respectively, versus 267 IU/mL for HCS. All dose levels elicited 100% seroconversion, with GMT ratio 4-8-fold higher than for HCS (p<0.01), and high IFN{gamma} spot-forming cells/million peripheral blood mononuclear cells. The 50 {micro}g dose induced better cross-neutralization against Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants than lower doses. ConclusionsChulaCov19 at 50 {micro}g/dose is well tolerated and elicited higher neutralizing antibodies than HCS with strong T-cell responses. These antibodies cross neutralized four variants of concern and ChulaCov19 has therefore proceeded to phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04566276 Graphical Abstract O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=112 SRC="FIGDIR/small/22274989v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (41K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@3f6e6corg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@6aa1b7org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@9f0c29org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1d75e38_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG C_FIG

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of a nasal spray solution containing broadly potent neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variants in healthy volunteers

Successful COVID-19 prevention requires additional measures beyond vaccination, social distancing, and masking. A nasal spray solution containing human IgG1 antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 (COVITRAP) was developed to strengthen other COVID-19 preventive arsenals. Here, we evaluated its pseudovirus neutralization potencies, preclinical and clinical safety profiles, and intranasal SARS-CoV-2 inhibitory effects in healthy volunteers (NCT05358873). COVITRAP exhibited broadly potent neutralizing activities against SARS-CoV-2 with PVNT50 values ranging from 0.0035 to 3.1997 g/ml for the following variants of concern (ranked from lowest to highest): Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Ancestral, Delta, Omicron BA.1, Omicron BA.2, Omicron BA.4/5, and Omicron BA.2.75. It demonstrated satisfactory preclinical safety profiles based on evaluations of in vitro cytotoxicity, skin sensitization, intracutaneous reactivity, and systemic toxicity. Its intranasal administration in rats did not yield any detected circulatory levels of the human IgG1 anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at any time point during the 120 hours of follow-up. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RCT) was conducted on 36 healthy volunteers who received either COVITRAP or a normal saline nasal spray at a 3:1 ratio. Safety of the thrice-daily intranasal administration for 7 days was assessed using nasal sinuscopy, adverse event recording, and self-reporting questionnaires. COVITRAP was well tolerated, with no significant adverse effects in healthy volunteers for the entire 14 days of the study. The intranasal SARS-CoV-2 inhibitory effects of COVITRAP were evaluated in nasal fluids taken from volunteers pre- and post-administration using a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization test. SARS-CoV-2 inhibitory effects in nasal fluids collected immediately or six hours after COVITRAP application were significantly increased from baseline for all three variants tested, including Ancestral, Delta, and Omicron BA.2. In conclusion, COVITRAP was safe for intranasal use in humans to provide SARS-CoV-2 inhibitory effects in nasal fluids that lasted at least six hours. Therefore, COVITRAP can be considered an integral instrument for COVID-19 prevention.