SARS-CoV-2-infection- and vaccine-induced antibody responses are long lasting with an initial waning phase followed by a stabilization phase.

It is thought that mRNA-based vaccine-induced immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) wanes quickly, based mostly on short-term studies. Here, we analyzed the kinetics and durability of the humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination using >8,000 longitudinal samples collected over a 3-year period in New York City. Upon primary immunization, participants with pre-existing immunity mounted higher antibody responses faster and achieved higher steady-state antibody titers than naive individuals. Antibody kinetics were characterized by two phases: an initial rapid decay, followed by a stabilization phase with very slow decay. Booster vaccination equalized the differences in antibody concentration between participants with and without hybrid immunity, but the peak antibody titers decreased with each successive antigen exposure. Breakthrough infections increased antibodies to similar titers as an additional vaccine dose in naive individuals. Our study provides strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses are long lasting, with initial waning followed by stabilization.

Carrier-free mRNA vaccine induces robust immunity against SARS-CoV-2 in mice and non-human primates without systemic reactogenicity.

Carrier-free naked mRNA vaccines may reduce the reactogenicity associated with delivery carriers; however, their effectiveness against infectious diseases has been suboptimal. To boost efficacy, we targeted the skin layer rich in antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and utilized a jet injector. The jet injection efficiently introduced naked mRNA into skin cells, including APCs in mice. Further analyses indicated that APCs, after taking up antigen mRNA in the skin, migrated to the lymph nodes (LNs) for antigen presentation. Additionally, the jet injection provoked localized lymphocyte infiltration in the skin, serving as a physical adjuvant for vaccination. Without a delivery carrier, our approach confined mRNA distribution to the injection site, preventing systemic mRNA leakage and associated systemic proinflammatory reactions. In mouse vaccination, the naked mRNA jet injection elicited robust antigen-specific antibody production over 6 months, along with germinal center formation in LNs and the induction of both CD4- and CD8-positive T cells. By targeting the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, this approach provided protection against viral challenge. Furthermore, our approach generated neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in non-human primates at levels comparable to those observed in mice. In conclusion, our approach offers a safe and effective option for mRNA vaccines targeting infectious diseases.

Immunogenicity and Safety of Heterologous Omicron BA.1 and Bivalent SARS-CoV-2 Recombinant Spike Protein Booster Vaccines: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Mutations present in emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants permit evasion of neutralization with prototype vaccines. A novel Omicron BA.1 subvariant-specific vaccine (NVX-CoV2515) was tested alone or as a bivalent preparation with the prototype vaccine (NVX-CoV2373) to assess antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Participants aged 18 to 64 years immunized with 3 doses of prototype mRNA vaccines were randomized 1:1:1 to receive a single dose of NVX-CoV2515, NVX-CoV2373, or the bivalent mixture in a phase 3 study investigating heterologous boosting with SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein vaccines. Immunogenicity was measured 14 and 28 days after vaccination for the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 sublineage and ancestral strain. Safety profiles of vaccines were assessed. RESULTS: Of participants who received trial vaccine (N = 829), those administered NVX-CoV2515 (n = 286) demonstrated a superior neutralizing antibody response to BA.1 vs NVX-CoV2373 (n = 274) at day 14 (geometric mean titer ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.33-2.03). Seroresponse rates were 73.4% (91/124; 95% CI, 64.7-80.9) for NVX-CoV2515 vs 50.9% (59/116; 95% CI, 41.4-60.3) for NVX-CoV2373. All formulations were similarly well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: NVX-CoV2515 elicited a superior neutralizing antibody response against the Omicron BA.1 subvariant as compared with NVX-CoV2373 when administered as a fourth dose. Safety data were consistent with the established safety profile of NVX-CoV2373. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05372588).

Phase 3 Study Assessing Lot-to-lot Consistency of RSVPreF3 Vaccine and its Immune Response, Safety, and Reactogenicity When Co-administered with FLU-D-QIV.

BACKGROUND: A single-dose investigational respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine, RSV prefusion protein F3 (RSVPreF3), was co-administered with a single-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (FLU-D-QIV) in a phase 3, randomized, controlled, multicenter study in healthy, non-pregnant women aged 18-49 years. METHODS: The study was observer-blind to evaluate the lot-to-lot consistency of RSVPreF3, and single-blind to evaluate the immune response, safety, and reactogenicity of RSVPreF3 co-administered with FLU-D-QIV. RESULTS: A total of 1415 participants were included in the per-protocol set. There was a robust immune response at day 31 across each of the 3 RSVPreF3 vaccine lots; adjusted geometric mean concentration ratios (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 1.01 (0.91, 1.12), 0.93 (0.84, 1.03), and 0.92 (0.83, 1.02) for RSV1/RSV2, RSV1/RSV3, and RSV2/RSV3, respectively. For FLU-D-QIV co-administered with RSVPreF3, versus FLU-D-QIV alone at day 31, noninferiority was satisfied for 3 of 4 strains assessed, with the lower limit of the 95% CI for geometric mean ratio >0.67. CONCLUSIONS: Immunogenic consistency was demonstrated for 3 separate lots of RSVPreF3. Immunogenic noninferiority was demonstrated when comparing FLU-D-QIV administered alone, versus co-administered with RSVPreF3, for 3 strains of FLU-D-QIV. Co-administration was well tolerated, and both vaccines had clinically acceptable safety and reactogenicity profiles. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT05045144; EudraCT, 2021-000357-26.

This was a phase 3 study that compared antibodies against respiratory syncytial virus (or RSV for short) between women who were given 3 different production batches of RSV prefusion protein F3 (known as RSVPreF3) vaccine. The study also compared the antibodies between women who received either an RSV vaccine together with a flu vaccine (known as FLU-D-QIV), or a flu vaccine alone. The flu vaccine contained 4 different strains of flu virus. The study involved 1415 healthy, non-pregnant women aged 18­49 years. The antibodies checked after 31 days showed strong immune responses for all 3 RSV vaccine production batches, and similar immune responses between each of the 3 RSV vaccine production batches. The immune response of 3 of the 4 flu strains was not less when the flu vaccine was given together with the RSV vaccine than the immune response when flu vaccine was given alone and both vaccines were well tolerated.

A localizing nanocarrier formulation enables multi-target immune responses to multivalent replicating RNA with limited systemic inflammation.

RNA vaccines possess significant clinical promise in counteracting human diseases caused by infectious or cancerous threats. Self-amplifying replicon RNA (repRNA) has been thought to offer the potential for enhanced potency and dose sparing. However, repRNA is a potent trigger of innate immune responses in vivo, which can cause reduced transgene expression and dose-limiting reactogenicity, as highlighted by recent clinical trials. Here, we report that multivalent repRNA vaccination, necessitating higher doses of total RNA, could be safely achieved in mice by delivering multiple repRNAs with a localizing cationic nanocarrier formulation (LION). Intramuscular delivery of multivalent repRNA by LION resulted in localized biodistribution accompanied by significantly upregulated local innate immune responses and the induction of antigen-specific adaptive immune responses in the absence of systemic inflammatory responses. In contrast, repRNA delivered by lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) showed generalized biodistribution, a systemic inflammatory state, an increased body weight loss, and failed to induce neutralizing antibody responses in a multivalent composition. These findings suggest that in vivo delivery of repRNA by LION is a platform technology for safe and effective multivalent vaccination through mechanisms distinct from LNP-formulated repRNA vaccines.

Safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of different doses of 10-valent Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia Coli (ExPEC10V) bioconjugate vaccine (VAC52416) in healthy Japanese adults aged 60-85 years in a randomized, double-blind, phase 1 study.

AIM: This phase 1 study (NCT04306302) evaluated the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of ExPEC10V (VAC52416) in healthy Japanese adults. METHOD: The randomized, double-blind, single-center study included 28-day screening, vaccination (Day 1), 30-day safety and immunogenicity follow-up and 181-day serious adverse events (SAEs) follow-up. Participants (60-85 years) were enrolled in dose-ascending approach and randomized to medium- and high-doses of ExPEC10V (n = 8 in each dose group) and placebo (n = 8). Incidence of adverse events: solicited AEs (until Day 15), unsolicited AEs (until Day 30), SAEs (until Day 181) and immunogenicity (electrochemiluminescent-based assay [ECL] and multiplex opsonophagocytic assay [MOPA]) were assessed on Day 15 and Day 30. RESULTS: Total of 24 participants were included (median age, 66.5 years; 50.0 % female). Incidence of solicited AEs was 81.3 % (local) and 18.8 % (systemic) for pooled ExPEC10V group (medium-dose ExPEC10V: 75.0 % [local], 12.5 % [systemic]; high-dose ExPEC10V: 87.5 % [local], 25.0 % [systemic]). One SAE, not vaccine-related, was reported in high-dose ExPEC10V group after Day 30, which was resolved during study. The ECL demonstrated increase in binding antibody titers, which was maintained from Day 15 to Day 30. For all serotypes, the geometric mean fold increases from baseline on Day 15 ranged from 2.51 to 10.60 and 1.97-5.23 for medium- and high-dose groups, respectively. The MOPA demonstrated increase in functional antibody responses for all serotypes (except O8) at Day 15 which was maintained from Day 15 to Day 30. CONCLUSIONS: ExPEC10V medium- and high-doses were well tolerated with an acceptable safety profile without any significant safety issues in healthy Japanese participants.

Physiological Response to the COVID-19 Vaccine: Insights From a Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blinded, Crossover Trial.

BACKGROUND: Rapid development and implementation of vaccines constituted a crucial step in containing the COVID-19 pandemic. A comprehensive understanding of physiological responses to these vaccines is important to build trust in medicine. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate temporal dynamics before and after COVID-19 vaccination in 4 physiological parameters as well as the duration of menstrual cycle phases. METHODS: In a prospective trial, 17,825 adults in the Netherlands wore a medical device on their wrist for up to 9 months. The device recorded their physiological signals and synchronized with a complementary smartphone app. By means of multilevel quadratic regression, we examined changes in wearable-recorded breathing rate, wrist skin temperature, heart rate, heart rate variability, and objectively assessed the duration of menstrual cycle phases in menstruating participants to assess the effects of COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: The recorded physiological signals demonstrated short-term increases in breathing rate and heart rate after COVID-19 vaccination followed by a prompt rebound to baseline levels likely reflecting biological mechanisms accompanying the immune response to vaccination. No sex differences were evident in the measured physiological responses. In menstruating participants, we found a 0.8% decrease in the duration of the menstrual phase following vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: The observed short-term changes suggest that COVID-19 vaccines are not associated with long-term biophysical issues. Taken together, our work provides valuable insights into continuous fluctuations of physiological responses to vaccination and highlights the importance of digital solutions in health care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s13063-021-05241-5.

The Novavax Heterologous COVID Booster Demonstrates Lower Reactogenicity Than mRNA: A Targeted Review.

COVID-19 continues to be a global health concern and booster doses are necessary for maintaining vaccine-mediated protection, limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Despite multiple COVID vaccine options, global booster uptake remains low. Reactogenicity, the occurrence of adverse local/systemic side effects, plays a crucial role in vaccine uptake and acceptance, particularly for booster doses. We conducted a targeted review of the reactogenicity of authorized/approved mRNA and protein-based vaccines demonstrated by clinical trials and real-world evidence. It was found that mRNA-based boosters show a higher incidence and an increased severity of reactogenicity compared with the Novavax protein-based COVID vaccine, NVX-CoV2373. In a recent NIAID study, the incidence of pain/tenderness, swelling, erythema, fatigue/malaise, headache, muscle pain, or fever was higher in individuals boosted with BNT162b2 (0.4 to 41.6% absolute increase) or mRNA-1273 (5.5 to 55.0% absolute increase) compared with NVX-CoV2373. Evidence suggests that NVX-CoV2373, when utilized as a heterologous booster, demonstrates less reactogenicity compared with mRNA vaccines, which, if communicated to hesitant individuals, may strengthen booster uptake rates worldwide.

Superior Boosting of Neutralizing Titers Against Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Variants by Heterologous SCB-2019 Vaccine vs a Homologous Booster in CoronaVac-Primed Adults.

BACKGROUND: We compared homologous and heterologous boosting in adults in the Philippines primed with 2 or 3 doses of CoronaVac, with recombinant protein vaccine, SCB-2019. METHODS: CoronaVac-immunized adults (18-72 years) received a homologous or heterologous full or half dose SCB-2019 booster. We assessed all neutralizing antibody (NAb) responses against prototype SARS-CoV-2 after 15 days and NAb against SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron variants in subsets (30‒50 per arm). Participants recorded adverse events. RESULTS: In 2-dose CoronaVac-primed adults prototype NAb geometric mean titers (GMT) were 203 IU/mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 182-227) and 939 IU/mL (95% CI, 841-1049) after CoronaVac and SCB-2019 boosters; the GMT ratio (4.63; 95% CI, 3.95-5.41) met predefined noninferiority and post-hoc superiority criteria. After 3-dose CoronaVac-priming prototype NAb GMTs were 279 IU/mL (95% CI, 240-325), 1044 IU/mL (95% CI, 898-1213), and 668 IU/mL (95% CI, 520-829) following CoronaVac, full and half-dose SCB-2019 boosters, respectively. NAb GMT ratios against Delta and Omicron comparing SCB-2019 with CoronaVac were all greater than 2. Mild to moderate reactogenicity was evenly balanced between groups. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Full or half dose SCB-2019 boosters were well tolerated with superior immunogenicity than homologous CoronaVac, particularly against newly emerged variants. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT05188677.

Immunogenicity and safety of heterologous Omicron BA.1 and bivalent SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein booster vaccines: a phase 3, randomized, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Mutations present in emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants permit evasion of neutralization with prototype vaccines. A novel Omicron BA.1 subvariant-specific vaccine (NVX-CoV2515) was tested alone, or as a bivalent preparation in combination with the prototype vaccine (NVX-CoV2373), to assess antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Participants aged 18 to 64 years immunized with 3 doses of prototype mRNA vaccines were randomized 1:1:1 to receive a single dose of NVX-CoV2515, NVX-CoV2373, or bivalent mixture in a phase 3 study investigating heterologous boosting with SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein vaccines. Immunogenicity was measured 14 and 28 days after vaccination for the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 sublineage and ancestral strain. Safety profiles of vaccines were assessed. RESULTS: Of participants who received trial vaccine (N = 829), those administered NVX-CoV2515 (n = 286) demonstrated superior neutralizing antibody response to BA.1 versus NVX-CoV2373 (n = 274) at Day 14 (geometric mean titer ratio [95% CI]: 1.6 [1.33, 2.03]). Seroresponse rates [n/N; 95% CI] were 73.4% [91/124; 64.7, 80.9] for NVX-CoV2515 versus 50.9% [59/116; 41.4, 60.3] for NVX-CoV2373. All formulations were similarly well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: NVX-CoV2515 elicited a superior neutralizing antibody response against the Omicron BA.1 subvariant compared with NVX-CoV2373 when administered as a fourth dose. Safety data were consistent with the established safety profile of NVX-CoV2373.

Associations of Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity After Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 mRNA-1273 Vaccine in the COVE and TeenCOVE Trials.

BACKGROUND: The reactogenicity and immunogenicity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are well studied. Little is known regarding the relationship between immunogenicity and reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: This study assessed the association between immunogenicity and reactogenicity after 2 mRNA-1273 (100 µg) injections in 1671 total adolescent and adult participants (≥12 years) from the primary immunogenicity sets of the blinded periods of the Coronavirus Efficacy (COVE) and TeenCOVE trials. Associations between immunogenicity through day 57 and solicited adverse reactions (ARs) after the first and second injections of mRNA-1273 were evaluated among participants with and without solicited ARs using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: mRNA-1273 reactogenicity in this combined analysis set was similar to that reported for these trials. The vaccine elicited high neutralizing antibody (nAb) geometric mean titers (GMTs) in evaluable participants. GMTs at day 57 were significantly higher in participants who experienced solicited systemic ARs after the second injection (1227.2 [1164.4-1293.5]) than those who did not (980.1 [886.8-1083.2], P = .001) and were associated with fever, chills, headache, fatigue, myalgia, and arthralgia. Significant associations with local ARs were not found. CONCLUSIONS: These data show an association of systemic ARs with increased nAb titers following a second mRNA-1273 injection. While these data indicate systemic ARs are associated with increased antibody titers, high nAb titers were observed in participants after both injections, consistent with the immunogenicity and efficacy in these trials. These results add to the body of evidence regarding the relationship of immunogenicity and reactogenicity and can contribute toward the design of future mRNA vaccines.

Reactogenicity and safety of COVID-19 primary immunisation and booster vaccination regimens: a comparative observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, recommendations regarding the vaccination have been very dynamic. Although the safety and efficacy of different vaccines have been analysed, data were scarce for vaccine regimens combining different vaccines. We therefore aimed to evaluate and compare the perceived reactogenicity and need for medical consultation after the most frequently applied homologous and heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens. METHODS: In an observational cohort study, reactogenicity and safety were assessed within a maximum follow-up time of 124 days using web-based surveys. Reactogenicity was assessed for different vaccination regimens 2 weeks after a vaccination (short-term survey). The following surveys, long-term and follow-up surveys, focused on the utilisation of medical services, including those that were not suspected to be vaccine-related. RESULTS: Data of 17,269 participants were analysed. The least local reactions were seen after a ChAdOx1 - ChAdOx1 regimen (32.6%, 95% CI [28.2, 37.2]) and the most after the first dose with mRNA-1273 (73.9%, 95% CI [70.5, 77.2]). Systemic reactions were least frequent in participants with a BNT162b2 booster after a homologous primary immunisation with ChAdOx1 (42.9%, 95% CI [32.1, 54.1]) and most frequent after a ChAdOx1 - mRNA-1273 (85.5%, 95% CI [82.9, 87.8]) and mRNA-1273/mRNA-1273 regimen (85.1%, 95% CI [83.2, 87.0]). In the short-term survey, the most common consequences were medication intake and sick leave (after local reactions 0% to 9.9%; after systemic reactions 4.5% to 37.9%). In the long-term and follow-up surveys, between 8.2 and 30.9% of participants reported consulting a doctor and between 0% and 5.4% seeking hospital care. The regression analyses 124 days after the first and after the third dose showed that the odds for reporting medical consultation were comparable between the vaccination regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis revealed differences in reactogenicity between the COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination regimens in Germany. The lowest reactogenicity as reported by participants was seen with BNT162b2, especially in homologous vaccination regimens. However, in all vaccination regimens reactogenicity rarely led to medical consultations. Small differences in seeking any medical consultation after 6 weeks diminished during the follow-up period. In the end, none of the vaccination regimens was associated with a higher risk for medical consultation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS DRKS00025881 ( https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00025373 ). Registered on 14 October 2021. DRKS DRKS00025373 ( https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00025881 ). Registered on 21 May 2021. Registered retrospectively.

Patient-reported reactogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccinations vs. comparator vaccinations: a comparative observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In the course of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, multiple vaccines were developed. Little was known about reactogenicity and safety in comparison to established vaccines, e.g. influenza, pneumococcus, or herpes zoster. Therefore, the present study aimed to compare self-reported side effects in persons vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 with the incidence of side effects in persons receiving one of the established vaccines. METHODS: A longitudinal observational study was conducted over a total of 124 days using web-based surveys. Persons receiving either a vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 or one of the established vaccines (comparator group) were included. In the first questionnaire (short-term survey), 2 weeks after vaccination, mainly local and systemic complaints were evaluated. The long-term survey (42 days after vaccination) and follow-up survey (124 weeks after vaccination) focused on medical consultations for any reason. Multivariate analyses were conducted to determine the influence of the vaccine type (SARS-CoV-2 vs. comparator) and demographic factors. RESULTS: In total, data from 16,636 participants were included. Self-reported reactogenicity was lowest in the comparator group (53.2%) and highest in the ChAdOx1 group (85.3%). Local reactions were reported most frequently after mRNA-1273 (73.9%) and systemic reactions mainly after vector-based vaccines (79.8%). Almost all SARS-CoV-2 vaccines showed increased odds of reporting local or systemic reactions. Approximately equal proportions of participants reported medical consultations. None in the comparator group suspected a link to vaccination, while this was true for just over one in 10 in the mRNA-1273 group. The multivariate analysis showed that people with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were not more likely to report medical consultations; patients who had received a regimen with at least one ChAdOx1 were even less likely to report medical consultations. Younger age, female gender and higher comorbidity were mostly associated with higher odds of medical consultations. CONCLUSION: The rate of adverse reactions after established vaccinations was roughly comparable to previous studies. Two weeks after vaccination, participants in the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination group reported more local and systemic local reactions than participants in the comparator group. In the further course, however, there were no higher odds of medical consultations in either of the two groups. Thus, altogether, we assume comparable safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS-ID DRKS00025881 and DRKS-ID DRKS00025373.

Reactogenicity within the first week after Sinopharm, Sputnik V, AZD1222, and COVIran Barekat vaccines: findings from the Iranian active vaccine surveillance system.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the reactogenicity effects of COVID-19 vaccines, used in Iran. METHODS: At least 1000 people were followed up with phone calls or self-report in a mobile application within 7 days after vaccination. Local and systemic reactogenicities were reported overall and by subgroups. RESULTS: The presence of one or more local and systemic adverse effects after the first dose of vaccines was 58.9% [(95% Confidence Intervals): 57.5-60.3)] and 60.5% (59.1-61.9), respectively. These rates were reduced to 53.8% (51.2-55.0) and 50.8% (48.8-52.7) for the second dose. The most common local adverse effect reported for all vaccines was pain in the injection site. During the first week after the first dose of vaccines, the frequency of the pain for Sinopharm, AZD1222, Sputnik V, and Barekat was 35.5%, 86.0%, 77.6%, and 30.9%, respectively. The same rates after the second dose were 27.3%, 66.5%, 63.9%, and 49.0%. The most common systemic adverse effect was fatigue. In the first dose, it was 30.3% for Sinopharm, 67.4% for AZD1222, 47.6% for Sputnik V, and 17.1% for Barekat. These rates were reduced to 24.6%, 37.1%, 36.5%, and 19.5%, in the second dose of vaccines. AZD1222 had the highest local and systemic adverse effects rates. The odds ratio of local adverse effects of the AZD1222 vaccine compared to the Sinopharm vaccine were 8.73 (95% CI 6.93-10.99) in the first dose and 4.14 (95% CI 3.32-5.17) in the second dose. Barekat and Sinopharm had the lowest frequency of local and systemic adverse effects. Compared to Sinopharm, systemic adverse effects were lower after the first dose of Barekat (OR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.46-0.67). Reactogenicity events were higher in women and younger people. Prior COVID-19 infection increased the odds of adverse effects only after the first dose of vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: Pain and fatigue were the most common reactogenicities of COVID-19 vaccination. Reactogenicities were less common after the second dose of the vaccines. The adverse effects of AZD1222 were greater than those of other vaccines.

Personalized health and the coronavirus vaccines-Do individual genetics matter?

Vaccines represent preventative interventions amenable to immunogenetic prediction of how human variability will influence their safety and efficacy. The genetic polymorphism among individuals within any population can render possible that the immunity elicited by a vaccine is variable in length and strength. The same immune challenge (virus and/or vaccine) could provoke partial, complete or even failed protection for some individuals treated under the same conditions. We review genetic variants and mechanistic relationships among chemokines, chemokine receptors, interleukins, interferons, interferon receptors, toll-like receptors, histocompatibility antigens, various immunoglobulins and major histocompatibility complex antigens. These are the targets for variation among macrophages, dendritic cells, natural killer cells, T- and B-lymphocytes, and complement. The technology platforms (mRNA, viral vectors, proteins) utilized to produce vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infections may each trigger genetically distinct immune reactogenic profiles. With DNA biobanking and immunoprofiling of recipients, global COVID-19 vaccinations could launch a new era of personalized healthcare.

Examining the association between vaccine reactogenicity and antibody titer dynamics after the third dose of BNT162b2 vaccine using a mixed-effects model.

BACKGROUND: To mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries have recommended the use of booster vaccinations. The relationship between the degree of adverse vaccine reactions and elevated antibody titers is of interest; however, no studies have investigated the temporal changes in antibody titers based on repeated measurements after a third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. METHODS: This prospective longitudinal cohort study was conducted with 62 healthcare workers who received a third dose of the BNT162b2 at Okayama University Hospital, Japan. Venous blood draw and fingertip whole blood test sample collection were conducted at the early (3-13 days) and 1-month time points; only FWT sample collection was conducted at the 2-month time point. Information on adverse reactions within 1 week after vaccination was also obtained. The association between fever of 37.5 °C or higher and antibody titers after the third dose of BNT162b2 was examined using a mixed-effects model and Poisson regression with robust variance. RESULTS: A trend toward higher antibody titers in the early period after vaccination was observed in the febrile individuals, but the differences were not significant at 1 and 2 months post-vaccination (the partial regression coefficient for fever was 8094.3 [-1910.2, 18,098.8] at 1 month after vaccination, and 1764.1 [-4133.9, 7662.1] at 2 months after vaccination in the adjusted models). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that the presence of fever after the third vaccine does not predict a sustained elevation in serum antibody titers.

Correlation of adverse effects and antibody responses following homologous and heterologous COVID19 prime-boost vaccinations.

BACKGROUND: Studies correlating reactogenicity and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines are limited to BNT162b2, with inconsistent results. We investigated whether adverse reactions after other COVID-19 vaccines reliably predict humoral responses. METHODS: Adult volunteers were recruited for homologous or heterologous prime-boost vaccinations with adenoviral (ChAdOx1, AstraZeneca) and/or mRNA (mRNA-1273, Moderna) vaccines administered either 4 or 8 weeks apart. Adverse effects were routinely solicited and recorded by subjects in a standard diary card for up to 84 days post booster vaccination. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers were measured pre- (visit 1), and post-booster dose at days 14 (visit 2) and 28 (visit 3). RESULTS: A total of 399 participants (75% women) with a median age of 41 (interquartile range, 33-48 IQR) years were included. Vaccine-induced antibody titers at days 14 and 28 were significantly higher among subjects who reported local erythema, swelling, pain, as well as systemic fever, chills, headache, myalgia, arthralgia, fatigue compared to those who did not experience local or systemic reactogenicity. Post-vaccination humoral responses did not correlate with the occurrence of skin rash and correlated weakly with gastrointestinal symptoms. A significant correlation between post-vaccination peak body temperature and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG at Day 14, independent of vaccine type and schedule, was found. CONCLUSION: Specific symptoms of reactogenicity such as post-vaccination injection site pain, swelling, erythema and fever, myalgia and fatigue are significantly predictive of the magnitude of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response.

Cohort event monitoring for safety signal detection in adult individuals 18 years and above after immunisation with coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines in Nigeria.

Introduction: In Nigeria, immunisation with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines commenced in March 2021. COVISHIELD from AstraZeneca (AZ), a viral vector vaccine, was the brand administered in the first phase of vaccinations for pre-determined eligible adults 18 years and above. As more brands of COVID-19 vaccines have been introduced in Nigeria, identifying effective and safe vaccine brands is essential to pharmacovigilance and public health. The current study assessed the safety of the AZ-AZD1222 (ChAdOx1) COVID-19 vaccine in adults during the first phase of the vaccination exercise in Nigeria. Methodology: We conducted a descriptive analysis of safety data from selected vaccination sites across six states in Nigeria between June 2021 and September 2021. Respondents were monitored over 3 months for local and systemic reactions, as well as hospitalisation and mortality. Measures obtained from respondents include age, sex, pre-existing comorbidity, local and systemic reactions to vaccines, timing onset of reactions, hospitalisation and mortality. Bivariate and multivariable regression models were used to assess factors associated with vaccine reactogenicity. Results: A total of 1284 individuals were enrolled in the cohort study from the six selected states (Anambra, Borno, Edo, Katsina, Lagos and Plateau) representing the geopolitical zones of Nigeria. A total of 675 individuals or 52.6% of enrolees reported non-serious adverse effects, and only one individual or 0.08% reported a serious adverse event following immunisation in the first 7 days after vaccination. None of the enrolled participants reported adverse events requiring hospitalisation. The most common self-reported symptoms amongst vaccine recipients were tenderness at the injection site 20.9% and fever 20.3%. A majority of symptoms (55.5%) occurred on or before the 3rd day after vaccination. Multivariable logistic regression model showed that age 60 years or above (vs. 18-24 years) was significantly associated with a lower likelihood of a vaccine-related symptomatic reaction (adjusted odds ratio: 0.35; 95% confidence interval: 0.20-0.61). There was no reported mortality amongst all the enrolled and followed-up vaccine recipients. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the safety profile of the AZ vaccine is acceptable, and the observed symptoms were mild and mostly within the first 3 days following vaccination. Vaccine recipients will benefit from counselling about potential transient reactions, and improving public awareness can potentially encourage the uptake of vaccines and reduce the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Association Between Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity: A Post Hoc Analysis of 2 Phase 3 Studies With the Adjuvanted Recombinant Zoster Vaccine.

A recurrent question is whether transient reactions to vaccines translate into better immune responses. Using clinical data from 2 large phase 3 studies of the recombinant zoster vaccine, we observed a small but statistically significant association between the intensity of a frequent side effect (pain) after vaccination and immune responses to vaccination. However, despite the statistical correlation, the impact on the immune response is so small, and the immune response in individuals without pain already sufficient, that pain cannot be a surrogate marker for an appropriate immune response. Reactogenicity cannot be used to predict immunity after vaccination.

Safety of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in patients with well-controlled myasthenia gravis.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Data on safety and tolerability of the vaccines against severe acute respiratory virus coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2, or coronavirus disease-2019 [COVID-19]) in patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) are currently limited. In this study we investigated the safety of mRNA-based two-dose vaccination in a cohort of patients with MG. METHODS: This investigation was a prospective observational study of messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines administered to patients with MG with stable disease. Local and systemic reactogenicity after injection was monitored for each dose administered. The patients were categorized and clinically assessed following the recommendations of the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America. RESULTS: Thirty-six males and 55 females (mean age at first vaccine dose, 58.8 years; standard deviation, = 17.1 years) received vaccines. Seventy-two patients (79.1%) were taking one or more immunosuppressant(s). The most frequent adverse effects were injection-site pain, fatigue, myalgia, chills, fever, and headache. Local and systemic reactions were transient; 58.2% of the patients developed one or more reaction(s). There were no anaphylactic reactions. None of the patients had a myasthenic crisis, and two developed a mild deterioration compared with their Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis baseline score. The clinical outcome scores showed no exacerbation of MG symptoms. Patients over 65 years of age developed fewer adverse effects. COVID-19 vaccination did not induce clinical exacerbation in stable patients with MG, regardless of their age, sex, history of myasthenic crisis, or whether they were taking immunosuppressants. DISCUSSION: Our data are consistent with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine being well tolerated in patients with well-controlled MG. The findings may contribute to decisions in vaccination campaigns in the future.