Abstract
Background The humoral immune response after primary immunisation with a SARS-CoV-2 vector vaccine (AstraZeneca AZD1222, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, Vaxzevria) followed by an mRNA vaccine boost (BioNTech, BNT162b2; Moderna, m-1273) was examined and compared with the antibody response after homologous vaccination schemes (AZD1222/AZD1222 or BNT162b2/BNT162b2).
Methods Sera from 59 vaccinees were tested for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) and virus-neutralising antibodies (VNA) with four IgG assays, a surrogate neutralisation test (sVNT) and a Vero cell-based neutralisation test (cVNT) before and after heterologous (n=31 and 42) or homologous booster vaccination (AZD1222/AZD1222, n=8/9; BNT162b2/BNT162b2, n=8/8). The strength of IgG binding to separate SARS-CoV-2 antigens was measured as avidity.
Results After the first vaccination, prevalence of IgGs antibodies directed against (trimeric) SARS-CoV-2 spike (S)- protein and its receptor-binding domain (RBD) varied from 55-95 % (AZD1222) to 100% (BNT162b2), depending on the vaccine used and the SARS-CoV-2 antigen used. The booster vaccination resulted in 100 percent seroconversion and appearance of highly avid IgG as well as VNA against a SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern (alpha; B.1.1.7) used as antigen in the cVNT. The results of the sVNT basically agree with those of our in-house cVNT, but the sVNT seems to overestimate non- and weakly virus-neutralizing titres. The mean IgG and VNA titres were higher after heterologous vaccination compared to the homologous AZD1222 scheme.
Conclusions The heterologous SARS-CoV-2 vaccination leads to a strong antibody response with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and VNA titres at a level comparable to that of a homologous BNT162b2 vaccination scheme. Irrespectively of the chosen immunisation regime, highly avid IgG antibodies can be detected just two weeks after the second vaccine dose indicating the development of a robust humoral immunity.
Competing Interest Statement
The companies Diasorin GmbH, Mikrogen GmbH and Tecomedical GmbH supported this study by providing free or discounted kits. None of the three companies had any influence on the testing and the interpretation of the results. The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Funding Statement
This research received no external funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethik-Kommission der CAU Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Strasse 3, Haus U 27, 24105 Kiel, Germany, ethikkomm{at}email.uni-kiel.de
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.
