Editorial

2 pages, 151 KiB

Open AccessEditorial

Current Understanding of the Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination

by Shunbin Ning and Davide Firinu

Vaccines 2024, 12(3), 250; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12030250 - 28 Feb 2024

Viewed by 719

The global vaccination campaign against SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, has been a monumental endeavor, marked by unprecedented collaboration between scientific researchers and pharmaceutical companies [...] Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

Research

Jump to: Editorial, Review, Other

12 pages, 522 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Safety and Tolerability of COVID-19 Vaccine in Mast Cell Disorders Real-Life Data from a Single Centre in Italy

by Stefania Nicola, Marina Mazzola, Luca Lo Sardo, Erika Montabone, Iuliana Badiu, Federica Corradi, Maria Carmen Rita Azzolina, Maurizio Gaspare Dall’Acqua, Giovanni Rolla, Irene Ridolfi, Anna Quinternetto and Luisa Brussino

Vaccines 2024, 12(2), 202; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12020202 - 16 Feb 2024

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 942

Abstract

Background In the past three years, COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the healthcare systems and people’s safety worldwide. Mass vaccinations dramatically improved the health and economic damage caused by SARS-CoV-2. However, the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients at high risk [...] Read more.

Background In the past three years, COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the healthcare systems and people’s safety worldwide. Mass vaccinations dramatically improved the health and economic damage caused by SARS-CoV-2. However, the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients at high risk of allergic reactions still has many unmet needs that should be clarified. Material and methods A retrospective, single-centre study was performed by collecting demographic and clinical data of patients with Mast Cell Disorders (MCDs) to evaluate the safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccinations. Moreover, any changes in the natural history of the underlying disease following the vaccine have been evaluated. Results This study included 66 patients affected with MCDs. Out of them, 52 (78.8%) received a COVID-19 vaccination and 41 (78.8%) completed the vaccination course. Premedication came first in 86.6% of our patients. A total of seven (4.5%) patients complained about an immediate reaction and two (1.3%) had a late reaction. Worsening of MCD history was observed in a single patient. Conclusions Despite the overall high risk of allergic reactions, our study did not reveal any increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 allergic reactions in MCD patients, thus supporting the recommendation in favour of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. However, due to the potentially increased rate of anaphylactic reactions, MCD patients should receive vaccine premedication and should be treated in a hospital setting after an allergological specialistic evaluation. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1310 KiB

Open AccessArticle

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine Response in People Living with HIV According to CD4 Count and CD4/CD8 Ratio

by Alessandra Vergori, Alessandro Tavelli, Giulia Matusali, Anna Maria Azzini, Matteo Augello, Valentina Mazzotta, Giovanni Francesco Pellicanò, Andrea Costantini, Antonio Cascio, Andrea De Vito, Lorenzo Marconi, Elda Righi, Assunta Sartor, Carmela Pinnetti, Fabrizio Maggi, Francesca Bai, Simone Lanini, Stefania Piconi, Gabriel Levy Hara, Giulia Marchetti, Maddalena Giannella, Evelina Tacconelli, Antonella d’Arminio Monforte, Andrea Antinori, Alessandro Cozzi-Lepri and on behalf of the Vax-ICONA-ORCHESTRA Study Show full author list Hide full author list

Vaccines 2023, 11(11), 1664; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11111664 - 30 Oct 2023

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1932

Abstract

Background: Our aim was to estimate the rates of not achieving a robust/above-average humoral response to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in people living with HIV (PLWH) who received ≥2 doses and to investigate the role of the CD4 and CD4/CD8 ratio in predicting [...] Read more.

Background: Our aim was to estimate the rates of not achieving a robust/above-average humoral response to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in people living with HIV (PLWH) who received ≥2 doses and to investigate the role of the CD4 and CD4/CD8 ratio in predicting the humoral response. Methods: We evaluated the humoral anti-SARS-CoV-2 response 1-month after the second and third doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine as a proportion of not achieving a robust/above-average response using two criteria: (i) a humoral threshold identified as a correlate of protection against SARS-CoV-2 (<90% vaccine efficacy): anti-RBD < 775 BAU/mL or anti-S < 298 BAU/mL, (ii) threshold of binding antibodies equivalent to average neutralization activity from the levels of binding (nAb titer < 1:40): anti-RBD < 870 BAU/mL or anti-S < 1591 BAU/mL. PLWH were stratified according to the CD4 count and CD4/CD8 ratio at first dose. Logistic regression was used to compare the probability of not achieving robust/above-average responses. A mixed linear model was used to estimate the mean anti-RBD titer at various time points across the exposure groups. Results: a total of 1176 PLWH were included. The proportions of participants failing to achieve a robust/above-average response were significantly higher in participants with a lower CD4 and CD4/CD8 ratio, specifically, a clearer gradient was observed for the CD4 count. The CD4 count was a better predictor of the humoral response of the primary cycle than ratio. The third dose was pivotal in achieving a robust/above-average humoral response, at least for PLWH with CD4 > 200 cells/mm³ and a ratio > 0.6. Conclusions: A robust humoral response after a booster dose has not been reached by 50% of PLWH with CD4 < 200 cells mm³. In the absence of a validated correlate of protections in the Omicron era, the CD4 count remains the most solid marker to guide vaccination campaigns in PLWH. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 990 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Multicentric Observational Study on Safety and Tolerability of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients with Angioedema with C1 Inhibitor Deficiency: Data from Italian Network on Hereditary and Acquired Angioedema (ITACA)

by Roberta Parente, Silvio Sartorio, Luisa Brussino, Tiziana De Pasquale, Alessandra Zoli, Stefano Agolini, Ester Di Agosta, Paolina Quattrocchi, Paolo Borrelli, Donatella Bignardi, Angelica Petraroli, Riccardo Senter, Valentina Popescu Janu, Chiara Cogliati, Maria Domenica Guarino, Oliviero Rossi, Davide Firinu, Stefano Pucci, Giuseppe Spadaro, Massimo Triggiani, Mauro Cancian and Andrea Zanichelli Show full author list Hide full author list

Vaccines 2023, 11(4), 852; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11040852 - 16 Apr 2023

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1561

Abstract

Angioedema due to C1 inhibitor deficiency (AE-C1-INH) is a rare disease characterized by recurrent and unpredictable attacks of angioedema. Multiple trigger factors, including trauma, emotional stress, infectious diseases, and drugs, could elicit angioedema attacks. The aim of this study was to collect data [...] Read more.

Angioedema due to C1 inhibitor deficiency (AE-C1-INH) is a rare disease characterized by recurrent and unpredictable attacks of angioedema. Multiple trigger factors, including trauma, emotional stress, infectious diseases, and drugs, could elicit angioedema attacks. The aim of this study was to collect data on the safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccines in a population of patients affected by AE-C1-INH. Adult patients with AE-C1-INH, followed by Reference Centers belonging to the Italian Network for Hereditary and Acquired Angioedema (ITACA), were enrolled in this study. Patients received nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccines and vaccines with adenovirus vectors. Data on acute attacks developed in the 72 h following COVID-19 vaccinations were collected. The frequency of attacks in the 6 months after the COVID-19 vaccination was compared with the rate of attacks registered in the 6 months before the first vaccination. Between December 2020 and June 2022, 208 patients (118 females) with AE-C1-INH received COVID-19 vaccines. A total of 529 doses of the COVID-19 vaccine were administered, and the majority of patients received mRNA vaccines. Forty-eight attacks of angioedema (9%) occurred within 72 h following COVID-19 vaccinations. About half of the attacks were abdominal. Attacks were successfully treated with on-demand therapy. No hospitalizations were registered. There was no increase in the monthly attack rate following the vaccination. The most common adverse reactions were pain at the site of injection and fever. Our results show that adult patients with angioedema due to C1 inhibitor deficiency can be safely vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 in a controlled medical setting and should always have available on-demand therapies. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 653 KiB

Open AccessArticle

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Italian Healthcare Workers: Latent Profiles and Their Relationships to Predictors and Outcome

by Igor Portoghese, Melinda Siddi, Luchino Chessa, Giulia Costanzo, Vanessa Garcia-Larsen, Andrea Perra, Roberto Littera, Giada Sambugaro, Stefano Del Giacco, Marcello Campagna and Davide Firinu

Vaccines 2023, 11(2), 273; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11020273 - 27 Jan 2023

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1401

Abstract

Vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy beliefs among healthcare workers (HCWs) represent operational priorities that require urgent attention. Identifying and classifying specific subpopulation of hesitancy is crucial to customize educational and intervention strategies to enhance the acceptance and uptake rate of vaccination. Thus, the main [...] Read more.

Vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy beliefs among healthcare workers (HCWs) represent operational priorities that require urgent attention. Identifying and classifying specific subpopulation of hesitancy is crucial to customize educational and intervention strategies to enhance the acceptance and uptake rate of vaccination. Thus, the main purpose of our study was to empirically identify latent profiles of vaccine hesitancy among Italian HCWs adopting a person-centered approach and investigating their relationships with antecedents and intention to get a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine. We conducted latent profile analyses (LPA) to identify different configurations of vaccine hesitancy based on five antecedents of vaccination: confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility among a sample of Italian HCWs (n = 573). LPA revealed four distinct profiles: believer (61.5%), middler (24.7%), hesitant (9.00%), and rejecter (4.7%). Having conspiracy beliefs was associated with a greater likelihood of membership in all but believer. Finally, the likelihood of intention to get a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine was lowest in the rejector and hesitant profiles. Theoretical contributions and implications for practice are discussed. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 1054 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Higher Immunological Response after BNT162b2 Vaccination among COVID-19 Convalescents—The Data from the Study among Healthcare Workers in an Infectious Diseases Center

by Agata Skrzat-Klapaczyńska, Justyna Dominika Kowalska, Marcin Paciorek, Joanna Puła, Carlo Bieńkowski, Dominika Krogulec, Jarosław Stengiel, Agnieszka Pawełczyk, Karol Perlejewski, Sylwia Osuch, Marek Radkowski and Andrzej Horban

Vaccines 2022, 10(12), 2158; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10122158 - 15 Dec 2022

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1408

Abstract

Introduction: The BNT162b2 vaccination studies did not specifically focus on groups that were heavily exposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs). Methods: Study participants were recruited from hospital employees [...] Read more.

Introduction: The BNT162b2 vaccination studies did not specifically focus on groups that were heavily exposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs). Methods: Study participants were recruited from hospital employees who received BNT162b2 vaccination at the Hospital for Infectious Diseases in Warsaw. Blood samples were collected before and after each vaccination dose. At each timepoint, the levels of anti-SARS CoV-2 IgM, anti-n SARS-CoV-2 IgG, and S-RBD antibodies were measured. Data on concomitant diseases and the vaccine’s adverse events (VAE) were collected after each vaccination dose. In the statistical analyses, non-parametric tests were used. Results: In total, 170 healthcare workers were included in the analysis. Their median age was 51 years (interquartile range (IQR): 41–60 years); most of them were women (n = 137, 80.6%) working in direct contact with patients (n = 137, 73.2%); and 46 (27.0%) had concomitant diseases. More than one fifth of subjects had COVID-19 before their first dose of vaccination (n = 38, 22.6%). In terms of immunological responses, our investigations showed a high level of efficacy for the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination as measured by S-RBD antibody concentrations: these were positive in 100% of participants 14 days after the second dose of the vaccine. It was also observed that employees with high S-RBD antibodies (>=433 BAU/mL) were more likely to be COVID-19 convalescents before receiving the first vaccine dose (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The BNT162b2 vaccine is safe and effective among HCWs. Vaccine adverse events occurred, but serious events were not observed. Moreover, the BNT162b2 vaccine is effective against symptomatic and severe COVID-19—none of the workers that acquired a SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination required hospitalization or medical care. We also observed higher immunological responses among COVID-19 convalescents. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 1567 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Immunogenicity and Safety of mRNA Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

by Ilaria Mormile, Francesca Della Casa, Angelica Petraroli, Alessandro Furno, Francescopaolo Granata, Giuseppe Portella, Francesca Wanda Rossi and Amato de Paulis

Vaccines 2022, 10(8), 1221; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10081221 - 30 Jul 2022

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 1623

Abstract

Vaccination is the most effective preventive measure to control the spread of COVID-19 and reduce associated complications. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). A total of 41 adult SLE [...] Read more.

Vaccination is the most effective preventive measure to control the spread of COVID-19 and reduce associated complications. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). A total of 41 adult SLE patients receiving two doses of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Comirnaty-BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine were enrolled. The quantitative determination of anti-trimeric spike protein-specific IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was assessed before (T0), 21 days after the administration of the first dose of the vaccine (T1), and between 21 and 28 days after the second dose (T2). They were compared with the same determinations from a cohort of 29 patients with C1-esterase inhibitor deficiency hereditary angioedema (C1-INH-HAE) as controls. All the SLE patients and controls demonstrated a positive serological response after a single dose of the vaccine (T1), which significantly increased after the second dose (T2). No significant difference was found between SLE patients and controls at T1 [t(52.81) = −0.68; p = 0.49] and at T2 [t(67.74) = −0.22; p = 0.825]. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) analysis showed that the vaccine did not influence SLE activity or caused disease flare in our cohort. In conclusion, COVID-19 vaccines produced a satisfactory response in SLE patients without variation in the disease activity. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

8 pages, 1586 KiB

Open AccessCommunication

Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Have a Very High Risk of Ineffective Response to the BNT162b2 Vaccine

by Andrea Galitzia, Luca Barabino, Roberta Murru, Giovanni Caocci, Marianna Greco, Giancarlo Angioni, Olga Mulas, Sara Oppi, Stefania Massidda, Alessandro Costa and Giorgio La Nasa

Vaccines 2022, 10(7), 1162; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10071162 - 21 Jul 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1710

Abstract

Patients with CLL have high rates of either severe disease or death from COVID-19 and a low response rate after COVID-19 vaccination has been reported. We conducted a single-center study with the main objective to evaluate the immunogenicity of the BNT1162b2 mRNA vaccines [...] Read more.

Patients with CLL have high rates of either severe disease or death from COVID-19 and a low response rate after COVID-19 vaccination has been reported. We conducted a single-center study with the main objective to evaluate the immunogenicity of the BNT1162b2 mRNA vaccines in 42 patients affected by CLL with the assessment of antibody response after the second and the third dose. After the second dose of vaccine, 13 patients (30%) showed an antibody response. The presence of hypogammaglobulinemia and the use of steroids or IVIG were the main factors associated with poor response. After the third dose, 5/27 (18%) patients showed an antibody response while in non-responders to the second dose, only 1 patient (4%) showed an elicitation of the immune response by the third dose, with no statistically significant difference. Our data, despite the small size of our cohort, demonstrate that patients with CLL have a low rate of effective response to the BNT162b2 vaccine. However, the effective role of a subsequent dose is still unclear, highlighting the need for alternative methods of immunization in this particularly fragile group of patients. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 1677 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Dose-Dependent Impairment of the Immune Response to the Moderna-1273 mRNA Vaccine by Mycophenolate Mofetil in Patients with Rheumatic and Autoimmune Liver Diseases

by Maria De Santis, Francesca Motta, Natasa Isailovic, Massimo Clementi, Elena Criscuolo, Nicola Clementi, Antonio Tonutti, Stefano Rodolfi, Elisa Barone, Francesca Colapietro, Angela Ceribelli, Matteo Vecellio, Nicoletta Luciano, Giacomo Guidelli, Marta Caprioli, Clara Rezk, Lorenzo Canziani, Elena Azzolini, Luca Germagnoli, Nicasio Mancini, Ana Lleo and Carlo Selmi Show full author list Hide full author list

Vaccines 2022, 10(5), 801; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10050801 - 18 May 2022

Cited by 12 | Viewed by 3388

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Moderna-1273 mRNA vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 in patients with immune-mediated diseases under different treatments. Anti-trimeric spike protein antibodies were tested in 287 patients with rheumatic or autoimmune diseases (10% receiving [...] Read more.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Moderna-1273 mRNA vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 in patients with immune-mediated diseases under different treatments. Anti-trimeric spike protein antibodies were tested in 287 patients with rheumatic or autoimmune diseases (10% receiving mycophenolate mofetil, 15% low-dose glucocorticoids, 21% methotrexate, and 58% biologic/targeted synthetic drugs) at baseline and in 219 (76%) 4 weeks after the second Moderna-1273 mRNA vaccine dose. Family members or caretakers were enrolled as the controls. The neutralizing serum activity against SARS-CoV-2-G614, alpha, and beta variants in vitro and the cytotoxic T cell response to SARS-CoV-2 peptides were determined in a subgroup of patients and controls. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody development, i.e., seroconversion, was observed in 69% of the mycophenolate-treated patients compared to 100% of both the patients taking other treatments and the controls (p < 0.0001). A dose-dependent impairment of the humoral response was observed in the mycophenolate-treated patients. A daily dose of >1 g at vaccination was a significant risk factor for non-seroconversion (ROC AUC 0.89, 95% CI 0.80–98, p < 0.0001). Moreover, in the seroconverted patients, a daily dose of >1 g of mycophenolate was associated with significantly lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers, showing slightly reduced neutralizing serum activity but a comparable cytotoxic response compared to other immunosuppressants. In non-seroconverted patients treated with mycophenolate at a daily dose of >1 g, the cytotoxic activity elicited by viral peptides was also impaired. Mycophenolate treatment affects the Moderna-1273 mRNA vaccine immunogenicity in a dose-dependent manner, independent of rheumatological disease. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 1345 KiB

Open AccessCommunication

Neutralizing Antibodies Responses against SARS-CoV-2 in a Sardinian Cohort Group Up to 9 Months after BNT162b2 Vaccination

by Giuseppina Sanna, Alessandra Marongiu, Davide Firinu, Cristina Piras, Gianluigi Franci, Massimiliano Galdiero, Giuseppe Pala, Vanessa Palmas, Fabrizio Angius, Roberto Littera, Andrea Perra, Germano Orrù, Marcello Campagna, Giulia Costanzo, Federico Meloni, Ferdinando Coghe, Luchino Chessa and Aldo Manzin

Vaccines 2022, 10(4), 531; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10040531 - 29 Mar 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2228

Abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiological agent of COVID-19, has caused over 460 million cases of infection and over 6 million deaths worldwide. The pandemic has called for science, technology, and innovation to provide solutions and, due to an incredible [...] Read more.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiological agent of COVID-19, has caused over 460 million cases of infection and over 6 million deaths worldwide. The pandemic has called for science, technology, and innovation to provide solutions and, due to an incredible scientific and financial global effort, several prophylactic and therapeutic apparatuses such as monoclonal antibodies and vaccines were developed in less than one year to address this emergency. After SARS-CoV-2 infection, serum neutralizing antibodies are produced by B cells and studies on virus-neutralizing antibodies’ kinetics are pivotal. The process of protective immunity and the duration of this kind of protection against COVID-19 remain to be clarified. We tested 136 sera from 3 groups of individuals, some of them providing multiple sequential sera (1—healthy, no previous CoV2-infected, vaccinated; 2—healthy, previous CoV2 infected, vaccinated; 3—healed, previous CoV2-infected, not vaccinated) to assess the kinetics of antibodies (Abs) neutralizing activity. We found that SARS-CoV-2 infection elicits moderate neutralizing antibody activity in most individuals; neither age nor gender appear to have any influence on Abs responses. The BNT162b2 vaccine, when administered in two doses, induces high antibodies titre endowed with potent neutralizing activity against bare SARS-CoV-2 in in vitro neutralizing assay. The residual neutralization capability and the kinetic of waning immunity were also evaluated over 9 months after the second dose in a reference group of subjects. Neutralization titre showed a decline in all subjects and the median level of S-protein IgG, over 270 days after the second vaccination dose, was below 10 AU/mL in 53% of serum tested. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

8 pages, 681 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Evaluation of the Humoral Immune Response of a Heterologous Vaccination between BBIBP-CorV and BNT162b2 with a Temporal Separation of 7 Months, in Peruvian Healthcare Workers with and without a History of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

by Miguel Hueda-Zavaleta, Juan C. Gómez de la Torre, José Alonso Cáceres-Del Aguila, Cecilia Muro-Rojo, Nathalia De La Cruz-Escurra, Daniella Arenas Siles, Diana Minchón-Vizconde, Cesar Copaja-Corzo, Fabrizzio Bardales-Silva, Vicente A. Benites-Zapata and Alfonso J. Rodriguez-Morales

Vaccines 2022, 10(4), 502; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10040502 - 24 Mar 2022

Cited by 11 | Viewed by 3467

Abstract

Information on the effects of a heterologous booster in adult patients first vaccinated with the BBIBP-CorV vaccine is limited. This prospective cohort study evaluated the humoral response of 152 healthcare workers (HCWs) from a private laboratory in Lima (Peru) before and after receiving [...] Read more.

Information on the effects of a heterologous booster in adult patients first vaccinated with the BBIBP-CorV vaccine is limited. This prospective cohort study evaluated the humoral response of 152 healthcare workers (HCWs) from a private laboratory in Lima (Peru) before and after receiving the BNT162b2 vaccine, with a seven-month interval since the BBIBP-CorV doses. We employed the Elecsys^® anti-SARS-CoV-2 S and the cPass™ SARS-CoV-2 Neutralization Antibody (NAbs) assays to evaluate anti-S-RBD IgG and NAbs, respectively. Of the 152 HCWs, 79 (51.98%) were previously infected (PI) with SARS-CoV-2 and 73 (48.02%) were not previously infected (NPI). The proportion of HCWs with positive NAbs, seven months after the BBIBP-CorV immunization, was 49.31% in NPI and 92.40% in PI. After the booster, this ratio increased to 100% in both groups. The anti-S-RBD IgG and NAbs in the HCWs’ NPI increased by 32.7 and 3.95 times more, respectively. In HCWs’ PI, this increment was 5 and 1.42 times more, respectively. There was no statistical association between the history of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and the titer of anti-S-RBD IgG and NAbs after the booster. The humoral immunity presented a robust increase after receiving the BNT162b2 booster and was more pronounced in NPI. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 2420 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Intensity and Dynamics of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immune Responses after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination: Implications for Public Health Vaccination Strategies

by Matthaios Speletas, Ioanna Voulgaridi, Styliani Sarrou, Aikaterini Dadouli, Varvara A. Mouchtouri, Dimitrios J. Nikoulis, Maria Tsakona, Maria A. Kyritsi, Athanasia-Marina Peristeri, Ioanna Avakian, Asimina Nasika, Paraskevi C. Fragkou, Charalampos D. Moschopoulos, Stamatia Zoubouneli, Ilias Onoufriadis, Lemonia Anagnostopoulos, Alexia Matziri, Georgia Papadamou, Aikaterini Theodoridou, Sotirios Tsiodras and Christos Hadjichristodoulou Show full author list Hide full author list

Vaccines 2022, 10(2), 316; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10020316 - 17 Feb 2022

Cited by 10 | Viewed by 2187

Abstract

The aim of our study was to investigate the immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 vaccination according to the age and medical status of vaccinated individuals. A total of 511 individuals were enrolled (median age: 54.0 years, range: 19–105); 509 of these individuals (99.6%) received [...] Read more.

The aim of our study was to investigate the immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 vaccination according to the age and medical status of vaccinated individuals. A total of 511 individuals were enrolled (median age: 54.0 years, range: 19–105); 509 of these individuals (99.6%) received two doses of BNT162b2 at an interval of 21 days. IgG and IgA responses were evaluated on days 21, 42, 90, and 180 after the first dose with chemiluminescent microparticle and ELISA assays. The cell-mediated immune responses were assessed by an automated interferon-gamma release assay. We demonstrated positive antibody responses after vaccination for the majority of enrolled participants, although waning of IgG and IgA titers was also observed over time. We further observed that the intensity of humoral responses was positively correlated with increased age and prior COVID-19 infection (either before or after the first vaccination). Moreover, we found that only a medical history of autoimmune disease could affect the intensity of IgA and IgG responses (3 weeks after the primary and secondary immunization, respectively), while development of systemic adverse reactions after the second vaccination dose was significantly associated with the height of IgG responses. Finally, we identified a clear correlation between humoral and cellular responses, suggesting that the study of cellular responses is not required as a routine laboratory test after vaccination. Our results provide useful information about the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccination with significant implications for public health vaccination strategies. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Editorial, Research, Other

60 pages, 6397 KiB

Open AccessReview

Innate and Adaptive Immunity during SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Biomolecular Cellular Markers and Mechanisms

by Brent Brown, Vanshika Ojha, Ingo Fricke, Suhaila A Al-Sheboul, Chinua Imarogbe, Tanya Gravier, Michael Green, Lori Peterson, Ivoyl P. Koutsaroff, Ayça Demir, Jonatane Andrieu, Chiuan Yee Leow and Chiuan Herng Leow

Vaccines 2023, 11(2), 408; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11020408 - 10 Feb 2023

Cited by 9 | Viewed by 8968

Abstract

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was caused by a positive sense single-stranded RNA (ssRNA) severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, other human coronaviruses (hCoVs) exist. Historical pandemics include smallpox and influenza, with efficacious therapeutics utilized to reduce overall disease burden through [...] Read more.

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was caused by a positive sense single-stranded RNA (ssRNA) severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, other human coronaviruses (hCoVs) exist. Historical pandemics include smallpox and influenza, with efficacious therapeutics utilized to reduce overall disease burden through effectively targeting a competent host immune system response. The immune system is composed of primary/secondary lymphoid structures with initially eight types of immune cell types, and many other subtypes, traversing cell membranes utilizing cell signaling cascades that contribute towards clearance of pathogenic proteins. Other proteins discussed include cluster of differentiation (CD) markers, major histocompatibility complexes (MHC), pleiotropic interleukins (IL), and chemokines (CXC). The historical concepts of host immunity are the innate and adaptive immune systems. The adaptive immune system is represented by T cells, B cells, and antibodies. The innate immune system is represented by macrophages, neutrophils, dendritic cells, and the complement system. Other viruses can affect and regulate cell cycle progression for example, in cancers that include human papillomavirus (HPV: cervical carcinoma), Epstein–Barr virus (EBV: lymphoma), Hepatitis B and C (HB/HC: hepatocellular carcinoma) and human T cell Leukemia Virus-1 (T cell leukemia). Bacterial infections also increase the risk of developing cancer (e.g., Helicobacter pylori). Viral and bacterial factors can cause both morbidity and mortality alongside being transmitted within clinical and community settings through affecting a host immune response. Therefore, it is appropriate to contextualize advances in single cell sequencing in conjunction with other laboratory techniques allowing insights into immune cell characterization. These developments offer improved clarity and understanding that overlap with autoimmune conditions that could be affected by innate B cells (B1⁺ or marginal zone cells) or adaptive T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection and other pathologies. Thus, this review starts with an introduction into host respiratory infection before examining invaluable cellular messenger proteins and then individual immune cell markers. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Other

Jump to: Editorial, Research, Review

7 pages, 589 KiB

Open AccessBrief Report

Assessment of the Neutralizing Antibody Response of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Naïve and Previously Infected Individuals: A Comparative Study

by Farah M. Shurrab, Duaa W. Al-Sadeq, Haissam Abou-Saleh, Nader Al-Dewik, Amira E. Elsharafi, Fatima M. Hamaydeh, Bushra Y. Abo Halawa, Tala M. Jamaleddin, Huda M. Abdul Hameed, Parveen B. Nizamuddin, Fathima Humaira Amanullah, Hanin I. Daas, Laith J. Abu-Raddad and Gheyath K. Nasrallah

Vaccines 2022, 10(2), 191; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10020191 - 25 Jan 2022

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 3918

Abstract

The currently authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, Pfizer-BNT162b2 and Moderna-mRNA-1273, offer great promise for reducing the spread of the COVID-19 by generating protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Recently, it was shown that the magnitude of the neutralizing antibody (NAbs) response correlates with the degree of [...] Read more.

The currently authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, Pfizer-BNT162b2 and Moderna-mRNA-1273, offer great promise for reducing the spread of the COVID-19 by generating protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Recently, it was shown that the magnitude of the neutralizing antibody (NAbs) response correlates with the degree of protection. However, the difference between the immune response in naïve mRNA-vaccinated and previously infected (PI) individuals is not well studied. We investigated the level of NAbs in naïve and PI individuals after 1 to 26 (median = 6) weeks of the second dose of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination. The naïve mRNA-1273 vaccinated group (n = 68) generated significantly higher (~2-fold, p ≤ 0.001) NAbs than the naïve BNT162b2 (n = 358) group. The P -vaccinated group (n = 42) generated significantly higher (~3-fold; p ≤ 0.001) NAbs levels than the naïve-BNT162b2 (n = 426). Additionally, the older age groups produced a significantly higher levels of antibodies than the young age group (<30) (p = 0.0007). Our results showed that mRNA-1273 generated a higher NAbs response than the BNT162b2 vaccine, and the PI group generated the highest level of NAbs response regardless of the type of vaccine. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Current Understanding of Immune Response after COVID-19 Vaccination

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Published Papers (14 papers)

Editorial

Research

Review

Other

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI