For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
15
views
49
references
 Top references
cited by
65
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      166
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Waning immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern among vaccinees in Hong Kong

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Background

          Nearly 4 billion doses of the BNT162b2-mRNA and CoronaVac-inactivated vaccines have been administrated globally, yet different vaccine-induced immunity against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) remain incompletely investigated.

          Methods

          We compare the immunogenicity and durability of these two vaccines among fully vaccinated Hong Kong people.

          Findings

          Standard BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations were tolerated and induced neutralizing antibody (NAb) (100% and 85.7%) and spike-specific CD4 T cell responses (96.7% and 82.1%), respectively. The geometric mean NAb IC 50 and median frequencies of reactive CD4 subsets were consistently lower among CoronaVac-vaccinees than BNT162b2-vaccinees. CoronaVac did not induce measurable levels of nucleocapsid protein-specific IFN-γ + CD4 + T or IFN-γ + CD8 + T cells compared with unvaccinated. Against VOCs, NAb response rates and geometric mean IC 50 titers against B.1.617.2 (Delta) and B.1.1.529 (Omicron) were significantly lower for CoronaVac (50%, 23.2 and 7.1%, <20) than BNT162b2 (94.1%, 131 and 58.8%, 35.0), respectively. Three months after vaccinations, NAbs to VOCs dropped near to detection limit, along with waning memory T cell responses, mainly among CoronaVac-vaccinees.

          Interpretation

          Our results indicate that vaccinees especially CoronaVac-vaccinees with significantly reduced NAbs may probably face higher risk to pandemic VOCs breakthrough infection.

          Funding

          This study was supported by the Hong Kong Research Grants Council Collaborative Research Fund (C7156-20GF and C1134-20GF); the Wellcome Trust (P86433); the National Program on Key Research Project of China (Grant 2020YFC0860600, 2020YFA0707500 and 2020YFA0707504); Shenzhen Science and Technology Program (JSGG20200225151410198 and JCYJ20210324131610027); HKU Development Fund and LKS Faculty of Medicine Matching Fund to AIDS Institute; Hong Kong Innovation and Technology Fund, Innovation and Technology Commission and generous donation from the Friends of Hope Education Fund. Z.C.’s team was also partly supported by the Theme-Based Research Scheme (T11-706/18-N).

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine

          Fernando P Polack, Stephen J. Thomas, Nicholas R.E. Kitchin … (2023)
          Abstract Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have afflicted tens of millions of people in a worldwide pandemic. Safe and effective vaccines are needed urgently. Methods In an ongoing multinational, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, pivotal efficacy trial, we randomly assigned persons 16 years of age or older in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses, 21 days apart, of either placebo or the BNT162b2 vaccine candidate (30 μg per dose). BNT162b2 is a lipid nanoparticle–formulated, nucleoside-modified RNA vaccine that encodes a prefusion stabilized, membrane-anchored SARS-CoV-2 full-length spike protein. The primary end points were efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 and safety. Results A total of 43,548 participants underwent randomization, of whom 43,448 received injections: 21,720 with BNT162b2 and 21,728 with placebo. There were 8 cases of Covid-19 with onset at least 7 days after the second dose among participants assigned to receive BNT162b2 and 162 cases among those assigned to placebo; BNT162b2 was 95% effective in preventing Covid-19 (95% credible interval, 90.3 to 97.6). Similar vaccine efficacy (generally 90 to 100%) was observed across subgroups defined by age, sex, race, ethnicity, baseline body-mass index, and the presence of coexisting conditions. Among 10 cases of severe Covid-19 with onset after the first dose, 9 occurred in placebo recipients and 1 in a BNT162b2 recipient. The safety profile of BNT162b2 was characterized by short-term, mild-to-moderate pain at the injection site, fatigue, and headache. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and was similar in the vaccine and placebo groups. Conclusions A two-dose regimen of BNT162b2 conferred 95% protection against Covid-19 in persons 16 years of age or older. Safety over a median of 2 months was similar to that of other viral vaccines. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728.)
          Article 0 comments Cited 6973 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine

            Lindsey Baden, Hana El Sahly, Brandon Essink … (2020)
            Abstract Background Vaccines are needed to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and to protect persons who are at high risk for complications. The mRNA-1273 vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle–encapsulated mRNA-based vaccine that encodes the prefusion stabilized full-length spike protein of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes Covid-19. Methods This phase 3 randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at 99 centers across the United States. Persons at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection or its complications were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two intramuscular injections of mRNA-1273 (100 μg) or placebo 28 days apart. The primary end point was prevention of Covid-19 illness with onset at least 14 days after the second injection in participants who had not previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Results The trial enrolled 30,420 volunteers who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either vaccine or placebo (15,210 participants in each group). More than 96% of participants received both injections, and 2.2% had evidence (serologic, virologic, or both) of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline. Symptomatic Covid-19 illness was confirmed in 185 participants in the placebo group (56.5 per 1000 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 48.7 to 65.3) and in 11 participants in the mRNA-1273 group (3.3 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 1.7 to 6.0); vaccine efficacy was 94.1% (95% CI, 89.3 to 96.8%; P<0.001). Efficacy was similar across key secondary analyses, including assessment 14 days after the first dose, analyses that included participants who had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline, and analyses in participants 65 years of age or older. Severe Covid-19 occurred in 30 participants, with one fatality; all 30 were in the placebo group. Moderate, transient reactogenicity after vaccination occurred more frequently in the mRNA-1273 group. Serious adverse events were rare, and the incidence was similar in the two groups. Conclusions The mRNA-1273 vaccine showed 94.1% efficacy at preventing Covid-19 illness, including severe disease. Aside from transient local and systemic reactions, no safety concerns were identified. (Funded by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; COVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04470427.)
            Article 0 comments Cited 4785 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

              Merryn Voysey, Sue Ann Costa Clemens, Shabir Madhi … (2022)
              Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; p interaction =0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. Funding UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.
              Article 0 comments Cited 2429 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Zhiwei Chen
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): EBioMedicine
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): EBioMedicine
                Title: EBioMedicine
                Publisher: Elsevier
                ISSN (Electronic): 2352-3964
                Publication date PMC-release: 03 March 2022
                Publication date Collection: March 2022
                Publication date (Electronic): 03 March 2022
                Volume: 77
                Electronic Location Identifier: 103904
                Affiliations
                [a ]AIDS Institute, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China
                [b ]Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China
                [c ]National Clinical Research Center for Infectious Diseases, HKU AIDS Institute Shenzhen Research laboratory, The Third People's Hospital of Shenzhen and The Second Affiliated Hospital of Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong, People's Republic of China
                [d ]Department of Surgery, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, People's Republic of China
                [e ]State Key Laboratory for Emerging Infectious Diseases, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China
                [f ]Centre for Virology, Vaccinology and Therapeutics Limited, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: AIDS Institute and Department of Microbiology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China. zchenai@ 123456hku.hk
                [1]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Article
                Publisher Item ID: S2352-3964(22)00088-3 Publisher ID: 103904
                DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.103904
                PMC ID: 8893246
                PubMed ID: 35248996
                SO-VID: f2b5fba4-63bb-4c95-9cba-0d83a6fbac05
                Copyright © © 2022 The Authors
                License:

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                Date received : 1 November 2021
                Date revision received : 7 February 2022
                Date accepted : 11 February 2022
                Categories
                Subject: Articles

                Keywords: sars-cov-2,mrna vaccine,inactivated vaccine,cellular immune response,humoral immune response
                Data availability:
                Keywords: sars-cov-2, mrna vaccine, inactivated vaccine, cellular immune response, humoral immune response

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content166

                See all similar

                Cited by65

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors4,732

                See all reference authors