Abstract
Three COVID-19 vaccines are licensed for emergency use in the USA: the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna/NIH mRNA-based vaccines, and the Johnson & Johnson (J&J)/Janssen human adenovirus (Ad26) vaccine. These vaccines have immunized ∼160 million people nationwide, comprising ∼53% Pfizer, 39% Moderna, and 8% J&J recipients [1]. Although at varying stages of clinical investigation for use in children, no COVID-19 vaccines are yet available for this population, posing a significant public health concern. One method to protect infants and young children may be passive immunization via antibodies (Abs) provided in the milk of a lactating vaccinated person. Our early work [2] and other recent reports [3-5] examining the milk Ab response to mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination have demonstrated that unlike the post-SARS-CoV-2 infection milk Ab profile, which is rich in specific secretory (s)IgA, the vaccine response is highly IgG-dominant. In this report, we present a comparative assessment of the milk Ab response elicited by not only the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, but importantly, the J&J vaccine as well. This analysis revealed that compared to mRNA vaccine recipients, 49% - 63% fewer J&J vaccine recipient milk samples were positive for Spike-specific IgG, with positive samples exhibiting significantly lower mean IgG titers. J&J recipient milk samples contained significantly less specific IgA than Moderna recipient milk samples, which exhibited significantly greater relative IgA increases compared to both Pfizer and J&J recipients. Absolute and relative vaccine-induced secretory Ab titers were similarly low for all groups, though ∼25% more Moderna recipients exhibited a relative increase compared to Pfizer and J&J recipients. These data indicate that J&J vaccine poorly elicits Spike-specific Ab in milk compared to mRNA-based vaccines and that this vaccine should be considered a last choice for immunizing those intending to elicit a strong Ab response in their milk. These data also suggest that Moderna vaccine elicits a superior, albeit moderate, milk (s)IgA response, and highlight the need to design vaccines with optimal protection of the breastfeeding infant in mind.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.
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:
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Mount Sinai Hospital (IRB 19-01243).
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
All data is provided in the manuscript, and raw data is available upon request.
