43
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Immunogenicity of BA.5 Bivalent mRNA Vaccine Boosters

      letter
      , M.D., , B.S., , B.S., , M.S., , Ph.D., , M.S.N., , R.N., , B.S., , B.A., , B.S., , B.S., , Ph.D., , B.S., , B.S., , M.S., , B.A., , B.S., , B.S., , M.S., , B.S., , B.S., , M.D., Ph.D.
      The New England Journal of Medicine
      Massachusetts Medical Society
      Keyword part (code): 18Keyword part (keyword): Infectious DiseaseKeyword part (code): 18_2Keyword part (keyword): VaccinesKeyword part (code): 18_6Keyword part (keyword): Viral InfectionsKeyword part (code): 18_12Keyword part (keyword): Coronavirus , 18, Infectious Disease, Keyword part (code): 18_2Keyword part (keyword): VaccinesKeyword part (code): 18_6Keyword part (keyword): Viral InfectionsKeyword part (code): 18_12Keyword part (keyword): Coronavirus , 18_2, Vaccines, 18_6, Viral Infections, 18_12, Coronavirus

      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.

          Abstract

          To the Editor: Waning immunity after messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination and the emergence of variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have led to reduced mRNA vaccine efficacy against symptomatic infection and severe disease. 1,2 Bivalent mRNA boosters (manufactured by Pfizer–BioNTech and Moderna) expressing the spike protein of the B.1.1.529 (omicron) BA.5 sublineage and the ancestral WA1/2020 strain have been developed because BA.5 substantially evades neutralizing antibodies. 3 However, the immunogenicity of the BA.5-containing bivalent mRNA boosters remains unknown. We evaluated immune responses in 15 participants who had received the original monovalent mRNA boosters and in 18 participants who had received the bivalent mRNA boosters of the two vaccines (Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). The participants received a median of three doses of vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, and 33% had documentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the omicron surge, although it is likely that the majority of the participants had hybrid immunity before boosting, given the high incidence of BA.5 infection during the summer and fall of 2022. Both the monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosters led to preferential expansion of WA1/2020 neutralizing antibody titers and lower BA.5 neutralizing antibody titers (Figure 1A and 1B and Fig. S1). The median BA.5 neutralizing antibody titer increased from 184 to 2829 after monovalent mRNA boosting and from 211 to 3693 after bivalent mRNA boosting. Binding antibody responses were similar after monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosting by enzyme-linked immunosorbent and electrochemiluminescence assays (Fig. S2 and S3). Spike-specific CD8+ and CD4+ T-cell responses increased modestly after monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosting. The median BA.5 CD8+ T-cell response increased from 0.027% to 0.048% after monovalent mRNA boosting and from 0.024% to 0.046% after bivalent mRNA boosting (Figure 1C and 1D). The median BA.5 CD4+ T-cell response increased from 0.060% to 0.130% after monovalent mRNA boosting and from 0.051% to 0.072% after bivalent mRNA boosting (Figure 1E and 1F). The median BA.5 memory B-cell response was 0.079% after monovalent mRNA boosting and 0.091% after bivalent mRNA boosting (Fig. S4). Our data indicate that both monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosters markedly increased antibody responses but did not substantially augment T-cell responses. Neutralizing antibody titers against the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2 were higher than titers against BA.5 after both monovalent and bivalent boosting. The median BA.5 neutralizing antibody titer was similar after monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosting, with a modest trend favoring the bivalent booster by a factor of 1.3. It is possible that larger studies may show a greater between-group difference, but any such comparative studies between monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosters would need to enroll the two cohorts within the same time frame and after the BA.5 surge, because negative results on nucleocapsid serologic analysis would not exclude all infected participants. These data are consistent with the modest benefits observed with a BA.1-containing bivalent mRNA booster. 4 Our findings suggest that immune imprinting by previous antigenic exposure 5 may pose a greater challenge than is currently appreciated for inducing robust immunity against SARS-CoV-2 variants.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

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

          Neutralization Escape by SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Subvariants BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5

          To the Editor: In recent months, multiple lineages of the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have emerged, 1 with subvariants BA.1 and BA.2 showing substantial escape from neutralizing antibodies. 2-5 Subvariant BA.2.12.1 is now the dominant strain in the United States, and BA.4 and BA.5 are dominant in South Africa (Figure 1A). Subvariants BA.4 and BA.5 have identical sequences of the spike protein. We evaluated neutralizing antibody titers against the reference WA1/2020 isolate of SARS-CoV-2 along with omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, and BA.4 or BA.5 in 27 participants who had been vaccinated and boosted with messenger RNA vaccine BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) and in 27 participants who had been infected with the BA.1 or BA.2 subvariant a median of 29 days earlier (range, 2 to 113) (Tables S1 and S2 in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). In the vaccine cohort, participants were excluded if they had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection or a positive result on nucleocapsid serologic analysis or if they had received another vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) or an immunosuppressive medication. Six months after the initial two BNT162b2 immunizations, the median neutralizing antibody pseudovirus titer was 124 against WA1/2020 but less than 20 against all the tested omicron subvariants (Figure 1B). Two weeks after administration of the booster dose, the median neutralizing antibody titer increased substantially, to 5783 against the WA1/2020 isolate, 900 against the BA.1 subvariant, 829 against the BA.2 subvariant, 410 against the BA.2.12.1 subvariant, and 275 against the BA.4 or BA.5 subvariant. These data show that as compared with the response against the WA1/2020 isolate, the neutralizing antibody titer was lower by a factor of 6.4 against BA.1, by a factor of 7.0 against BA.2, by a factor of 14.1 against BA.2.12.1, and by a factor of 21.0 against BA.4 or BA.5. In addition, as compared with the median neutralizing antibody titer against the BA.1 subvariant, the median titer was lower by a factor of 2.2 against the BA.2.12.1 subvariant and by a factor of 3.3 against the BA.4 or BA.5 subvariant. Among the participants who had been infected with the BA.1 or BA.2 subvariant of omicron, all but one had been vaccinated against Covid-19. Because of the variation in sampling after the onset of infection, some samples may not reflect peak neutralizing antibody titers (Table S2). Among the participants with a history of Covid-19, the median neutralizing antibody titer was 11,050 against the WA1/2020 isolate, 1740 against the BA.1 subvariant, 1910 against the BA.2 subvariant, 1150 against the BA.2.12.1 subvariant, and 590 against the BA.4 or BA.5 subvariant (Figure 1C). These data show that as compared with the WA1/2020 isolate, the median neutralizing antibody titer was lower by a factor of 6.4 against BA.1, by a factor of 5.8 against BA.2, by a factor of 9.6 against BA.2.12.1, and by a factor of 18.7 against BA.4 or BA.5. In addition, as compared with the median titers against the BA.1 subvariant, the median titer was lower by a factor of 1.5 against the BA.2.12.1 subvariant and by a factor of 2.9 against the BA.4 or BA.5 subvariant. These data show that the BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5 subvariants substantially escape neutralizing antibodies induced by both vaccination and infection. Moreover, neutralizing antibody titers against the BA.4 or BA.5 subvariant and (to a lesser extent) against the BA.2.12.1 subvariant were lower than titers against the BA.1 and BA.2 subvariants, which suggests that the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant has continued to evolve with increasing neutralization escape. These findings provide immunologic context for the current surges caused by the BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5 subvariants in populations with high frequencies of vaccination and BA.1 or BA.2 infection.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A Bivalent Omicron-Containing Booster Vaccine against Covid-19

            Abstract Background The safety and immunogenicity of the bivalent omicron-containing mRNA-1273.214 booster vaccine are not known. Methods In this ongoing, phase 2–3 study, we compared the 50-μg bivalent vaccine mRNA-1273.214 (25 μg each of ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 and omicron B.1.1.529 [BA.1] spike messenger RNAs) with the previously authorized 50-μg mRNA-1273 booster. We administered mRNA-1273.214 or mRNA-1273 as a second booster in adults who had previously received a two-dose (100-μg) primary series and first booster (50-μg) dose of mRNA-1273 (≥3 months earlier). The primary objectives were to assess the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of mRNA-1273.214 at 28 days after the booster dose. Results Interim results are presented. Sequential groups of participants received 50 μg of mRNA-1273.214 (437 participants) or mRNA-1273 (377 participants) as a second booster dose. The median time between the first and second boosters was similar for mRNA-1273.214 (136 days) and mRNA-1273 (134 days). In participants with no previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, the geometric mean titers of neutralizing antibodies against the omicron BA.1 variant were 2372.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2070.6 to 2718.2) after receipt of the mRNA-1273.214 booster and 1473.5 (95% CI, 1270.8 to 1708.4) after receipt of the mRNA-1273 booster. In addition, 50-μg mRNA-1273.214 and 50-μg mRNA-1273 elicited geometric mean titers of 727.4 (95% CI, 632.8 to 836.1) and 492.1 (95% CI, 431.1 to 561.9), respectively, against omicron BA.4 and BA.5 (BA.4/5), and the mRNA-1273.214 booster also elicited higher binding antibody responses against multiple other variants (alpha, beta, gamma, and delta) than the mRNA-1273 booster. Safety and reactogenicity were similar with the two booster vaccines. Vaccine effectiveness was not assessed in this study; in an exploratory analysis, SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred in 11 participants after the mRNA-1273.214 booster and in 9 participants after the mRNA-1273 booster. Conclusions The bivalent omicron-containing vaccine mRNA-1273.214 elicited neutralizing antibody responses against omicron that were superior to those with mRNA-1273, without evident safety concerns. (Funded by Moderna; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04927065.)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Immune boosting by B.1.1.529 (Omicron) depends on previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure

              The Omicron, or Pango lineage B.1.1.529, variant of SARS-CoV-2 carries multiple spike mutations with high transmissibility and partial neutralizing antibody (nAb) escape. Vaccinated individuals show protection from severe disease, often attributed to primed cellular immunity. We investigated T and B cell immunity against B.1.1.529 in triple mRNA vaccinated healthcare workers (HCW) with different SARS-CoV-2 infection histories. B and T cell immunity against previous variants of concern was enhanced in triple vaccinated individuals, but magnitude of T and B cell responses against B.1.1.529 spike protein was reduced. Immune imprinting by infection with the earlier B.1.1.7 (Alpha) variant resulted in less durable binding antibody against B.1.1.529. Previously infection-naïve HCW who became infected during the B.1.1.529 wave showed enhanced immunity against earlier variants, but reduced nAb potency and T cell responses against B.1.1.529 itself. Previous Wuhan Hu-1 infection abrogated T cell recognition and any enhanced cross-reactive neutralizing immunity on infection with B.1.1.529.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                N Engl J Med
                N Engl J Med
                nejm
                The New England Journal of Medicine
                Massachusetts Medical Society
                0028-4793
                1533-4406
                11 January 2023
                11 January 2023
                : NEJMc2213948
                Affiliations
                Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA dbarouch@ 123456bidmc.harvard.edu
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8539-3960
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2100-8461
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0899-2548
                Article
                NJ202301110000001
                10.1056/NEJMc2213948
                9847505
                36630611
                bc73b55f-9cf1-4635-a851-02ba8f799fb8
                Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted re-use, except commercial resale, and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgment of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the Covid-19 pandemic or until revoked in writing. Upon expiration of these permissions, PMC is granted a license to make this article available via PMC and Europe PMC, subject to existing copyright protections.

                History
                Funding
                Funded by: National Cancer Institute, FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000054;
                Award ID: CA260476
                Funded by: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000060;
                Award ID: AI69309
                Funded by: Ragon Institute of MGH, MIT and Harvard, FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012802;
                Funded by: Massachusetts Consortium for Pathogen Readiness, FundRef ;
                Funded by: Musk Foundation, FundRef ;
                Categories
                Correspondence
                Custom metadata
                2023-01-11T17:00:00-05:00
                2023
                01
                11
                17
                00
                00
                -05:00

                Comments

                Comment on this article