Heterologous prime-boost immunization with CoronaVac and Convidecia

Objectives, Participants, and Oversight

We conducted a randomized, controlled, observer-blinded trial to access the safety and immunogenicity of heterologous prime-boost immunization with CoronaVac and Convidecia. Healthy participants, male or female, aged between 18 and 59 years, who have received one dose of CoronaVac in the past 1∼3 months or two doses of CoronaVac in the past 3∼6 months were recruited for screening of eligibility. Participants with a previous clinical or virologic COVID-19 diagnosis or SARS-CoV-2 infection, and women with positive urine pregnancy test results were excluded from this study. The occurrence of adverse reactions and immune responses in eligible participants who were administrated with heterologous Convidecia were compared with those received a homogeneous third dose of CoronaVac.

This was a proof of concept trial, initiated by investigators from Jiangsu Provincial Center of Disease Control and Prevention. The trial protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of the Jiangsu Provincial Center of Disease Control and Prevention, and no protocol change was made after the initial of the study. This trial was conducted following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and local guidelines.

Procedures

We recruited participants form one clinic site in Lianshui County, Jiangsu Province. Eligible participants who competed the prime vaccination of two doses of CoronaVac in the past 3∼6 months were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive a booster dose of Convidecia (group A, heterologous boost dose) or CoronaVac (group B, homogeneous boost dose). While, participants who were primed with one dose of CoronaVac in the past 1∼2 months were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a second dose of Convidecia (group C, heterologous dose) or CoronaVac (group D, homogeneous dose). The vaccination records were verified by investigators through the electronic registration system for COVID-19 vaccine immunization. An interactive Web-based response system was used for randomization, and the randomization lists were generated by an independent statistician using SAS (version 9.4).

We masked participants, investigators, laboratory staff, and outcome assessors to the allocation of treatment groups, but not to the three-dose or two-dose regimen. Designated unblinded personnel were responsible for the preparation and administration of the vaccination, and were forbidden to reveal the identity of the study vaccines to the participants or other investigators. All the vaccinations were administered intramuscularly.

Safety

The primary endpoint for safety objective was the occurrence of adverse reactions within 28 days after the vaccination. Participants were observed at the clinic for 30 minutes after the vaccination for any immediate vaccine-associated reactions, and then were instructed to keep a daily record of any solicited or unsolicited adverse events for the next 14 days. Solicited injection-site events included pain, redness, swelling, induration, itch and cellulitis, while systemic events included fever, malaise, muscle ache, joint pain, fatigue, nausea, headache and so on. Unsolicited adverse events within 28 days reported by the participants were also collected. Severity of adverse events are graded according to the standard guidelines issued by the China State Food and Drug Administration, and the causality with immunization before unmasking. Serious adverse events self-reported by participants were documented throughout the study.

Immunogenicity

Participants donated blood samples at baseline before receiving the booster dose, and at 14 and 28 days after receiving the booster dose. The primary endpoint for immunogenicity was the geometric mean titres (GMTs) of neutralizing antibodies against live SARS-CoV-2 virus at 14 days after the booster vaccination. Live viral neutralizing antibody titer in serum was determined by using a cytopathic effect (CPE)-based microneutralization assay with a wild-type SARS-CoV-2 virus strain BetaCoV/Jiangsu/JS02/2020 (EPI_ISL_411952) in Vero-E6 cells. Serum dilutions were then mixed with the same volume of virus solution to achieve a 100 TCID₅₀ (50% tissue culture infectious dose) per well. The reported titer was the reciprocal of the highest sample dilution that protected at least 50% of cells from CPE. The serum dilution for microneutralization assay started from 1:4, and the seropositivity was defined as the titer ≥1:4.

Receptor binding domain (RBD)- and N-specific ELISA antibody responses were measured at the same time points, using an indirect ELISA assay. RBD-binding IgG isotype in serum was also determined by ELISA, and the type 1 helper T cells (Th1)-dependent IgG1 vs. type 2 helper T cells (Th2)-dependent IgG4 antibody subclasses were calculated to evaluate the Th1/Th2 profiling. The WHO international standard for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (NIBSC code 20/136) was used side by side as reference with the serum samples measured in this study for calibration and harmonization of the serological assays.¹⁴ The conversion factors to international standard units were showed in the appendix 1. Fold increase of antibody responses and types of binding antibodies IgG against SARS-CoV-2 S protein in serum post-vaccination in each treatment group were also analyzed. To evaluate cellular immunity, we isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from blood samples of the first 50 and 30 participants in the three-dose regimen and two-dose regimen cohort at days 14 post the boost, respectively. PBMCs were stimulated with a SARS-CoV-2 spike peptide-pool and cytokine secretions of Th1 (interferon-gamma [IFN-γ], and tumor necrosis factor-α [TNFα]), and Th2 (IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13) were determined by ELISpot.

Statistical Analysis

The sample size calculation was based on the hypothesis on a boost vaccination following the two-dose of inactivated vaccine regimen, and performed by using Power Analysis and Sample Size (PASS) software. We assumed that the GMT of neutralizing antibodies was about 1:40 at baseline before receiving the booster immunization (i.e. three to six months after receiving two doses of inactivated vaccines). After the boost vaccination, the GMTs were expected to reach 1:80 for those receiving a homogeneous dose of CoronaVac, and 1:160 for those receiving a or a heterogeneous of Convidecia at days 14. Equal standard deviation of GMTs of 4 was estimated for both groups. A sample size of 100 per treatment group would provide at least 90% power to detect a difference in log-transformed postvaccination GMTs at the one-sided 2.5% significance level. In this study, a heterogeneous vaccination following one dose of inactivated vaccine were also explored with 50 persons per group, for which the power was not calculated.

We assessed the number and proportion of participants with adverse reactions post vaccination. The antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were presented as GMTs, geometric mean fold increases (GMFIs) and the proportion of participants with at least four-fold increase with 95% CIs. The cellular responses were shown as the average number of positive cells per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). We used the χ² test or Fisher’s exact test to analyze categorical data, T test to analyze the log transformed antibody titers, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test for non-normal distributed data. The correlation between concentrations of log-transformed neutralizing antibodies and binding antibody was analyzed using Pearson’s correlation.

The primary analysis was performed based on the intervention modified intention-to-treat cohort. Statistical analyses were done by using SAS (version 9.4) or GraphPad Prism 8.0.1. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04892459.

Participants

Between May 25 and 26, 2021, we recruited 302 participants for screening. A total of 300 participants were enrolled, of whom 200 primed with two doses of inactivated vaccine CoronaVac, and 100 primed with one dose of CoronaVac were randomized (figure 1). One participant only received one prime dose, but was wrongly classified into the cohort having two doses primed, and then randomized to receive a heterologous boost dose of Convidecia. We reclassified this participant into group C. Two participants who were randomized to group A but were wrongly administrated with a homogeneous boost dose of CoronaVac, were classified into group B. 299 of these participants received a booster dose on day 0, and completed seven days follow-up to assess safety. We obtained serum samples from 298 participants at day 14, and 293 participants at day 28. The demographic characteristics of participants are shown in table 1. Approximately 11.8∼27.1% of the participants who completed two doses in the last 3 to 6 months and 4.0∼5.9% of those who received one dose in the last 1 to 2 months, showed positive neutralizing antibody against SARS-CoV-2 in serum at the enrollment before receiving a boost vaccination.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1. Trial profile.

*2 participants were randomized to group A, but were wrongly administrated with an inactivated vaccine and then classified to group B. 1 participant was only primed one dose, but was wrongly classified into the population with two doses prime vaccination, and randomized to group A to receive one dose of ad5-based vaccine. We reclassified this participant to Group C.

Safety

In both two-dose and three-dose regimen cohorts, Convidecia recipients reported more adverse reactions than CoronaVac recipients with p values of <0.001 and 0.019, respectively (Table 2). Participants in the two-dose regimen cohort, who received the second dose with a heterologous dose of Convidecia reported significant higher occurrence of solicited injection-site reactions than did those received a homogeneous dose of CoronaVac. While, the systemic reactions were reported at similar frequencies between the two groups. In the three-dose regimen cohort, participants received the third dose with a Convidecia following a heterologous prime-boost immunization had significant more solicited injection-site and systemic reactions than those received a homogeneous dose of CoronaVac (29.2% vs. 2.9%, p<0.001, and 13.5% vs. 2.9%, p=0.006). The injection-site and systemic reactions were generally mild to moderate in severity, and typically resolved within 1 or 2 days. In both regimen cohorts, injection-site pain was the most common injection-site reaction. Severe injection-site pain after Convidecia was reported in 2.1% of the participants, while no severe pain was reported after the administration of CoronaVac. Fever and fatigue were the most frequently reported systemic reactions. Unsolicited adverse reactions within 28 days after the vaccination had a low incidence in both treatment groups in two-dose or three-dose regimen cohort. No severe fever was noted, but the use of antipyretic agents was slightly more frequent among Convidecia recipients than among those who received CoronaVac (4.8% vs. 0.7%). No thromboses or vaccine-related anaphylaxis, or serious adverse event was seen in any cohort of the participants.

Immunogenicity

Significant responses were observed after the booster dose vaccination in both three-dose and two-dose cohort (table 3). GMTs (PRNT₅₀) of neutralizing antibodies at day 0 before the vaccination were about 2.5 (95%CI 2.3, 2.7) and 2.2 (2.1, 2.3) in the three-dose regimen cohort, increasing to 197.4 (167.7, 232.4) and 33.6 (28.3, 39.8) at day 14 after receiving Convidecia and CoronaVac, respectively (<0.0001). While, PRNT₅₀ neutralizing antibodies GMTs of 2.1 (95%CI 2.0, 2.3) and 2.1 (2.0, 2.1) at day 0 before the vaccination were noted in the two-dose regimen cohort, which increased to 54.4 (37. 9, 78) and 12.8 (9.3, 17.5) at day 14 after receiving Convidecia and CoronaVac as the second dose, respectively (<0.0001). The heterologous boost with Convidecia demonstrated an at least 78-fold increase in the average neutralizing antibody levels, and the homogeneous boost with CoronaVac did 15.2-fold increase, for the three-dose regimen group post the boost. In the two-dose regimen, neutralizing antibody GMTs in participants receiving heterologous boost with Convidecia increased at least 25.7-fold, while those receiving homogeneous boost with CoronaVac did 6.2-fold increase. At day 28 post the boost, the average neutralizing antibody levels decreased, but still heterologous boost group showed significant higher neutralizing antibody GMTs than did the homogeneous boost group (150.3 [128.6, 175.7] vs. 35.3 [29.4, 42.4] in the three-dose regimen cohort, and 49.6 [35.1, 70.2] vs. 10.6 [8.3, 13.5] in the two-dose regimen cohort).

In line with the neutralizing antibody titers, both heterologous and homogeneous boost could induce significant immunological memory responses with a large enhancement of RBD-binding IgG (figure 2A). But the heterologous boost with Convidecia elicited higher levels of RBD-binding IgG GMTs than did homogeneous boost with CoronaVac (3090.1 [95%CI 2636.1, 3622.3] vs. 369.0 [95%CI 304.2, 447.5] in the three-dose regimen cohort, and 941.8 (663.9, 1336.1) vs. 154.1 (116.3, 204.3) in the two-dose regimen cohort) at day 14 (appendix 2). The anti-RBD IgG isotype showed that the predominant binding antibody responses were associated with IgG1 after the boost in both heterologous or homogeneous vaccine groups (appendix 3). Very mild responses from IgG3 were found in participants receiving heterologous Convidecia, but not in those receiving homogeneous CoronaVac. Nearly no responses of IgG2 and IgG4 were observed across the treatment groups. At day 14, the mean ratios of IgG1/IgG4 were 42.4 (95%CI 35.6, 50.6) vs. 6.1 (5.2, 7.1), and 24.4 (17.7, 33.6) vs. 3.8 (3.1, 4.6) for the Convidecia vs. CoronaVac groups in the three-dose and two-dose regimen cohorts, respectively. Participants in both the cohorts had similar N-specified binding antibodies at day 0 before the vaccination, but only participants who received CoronaVac showed increases of IgG titers to both RBD and N protein after the boost dose (figure 2B). Convidecia recipients showed no increase of N-specified binding antibodies post the boost. The association between the RBD-binding antibodies and neutralising antibody titres against live virus showed a positive correlation coefficient of 0.56∼0.77 post vaccination in the heterologous and homogeneous prime-boost groups, respectively (appendix 4).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2. Receptor binding domain (RBD)-, N-specific ELISA antibody responses before and after a heterogeneous or homologous boost vaccination.

Group A: primed with two doses of CoronaVac + Convidecia; Group B: primed with two doses of CoronaVac + CoronaVac; Group C: primed with one dose of CoronaVac + Convidecia; Group D: primed with one dose of CoronaVac + CoronaVac. ****p value <0.0001.

We observed a profound increase in the levels of Th1-biased cytokine IFN-γ compared with the pre-boost across the treatment groups in both cohorts, at 14 days after the boost dose (figure 3A). Participants who were in the three-dose regimen cohort, had medians of IFN-γ+ spot counts of 100 per 10⁶ PBMCs (IQR 60, 165) and 90 per 10⁶ PBMCs (40, 230) after receiving heterologous Convidecia, and homogeneous CoronaVac, respectively. In the participants in the two-dose regimen cohort, somewhat lower geometric mean IFN-γ+ spot counts of 65 per 10⁶ PBMCs (IQR 45, 95) in the heterologous Convidecia group and 40 per 10⁶ PBMCs (30, 60) in the homogeneous CoronaVac group were noted. However, the pre-boost cytokines TNF-α were relatively high across the groups and no increases of TNF-α were found after the boost (figure 3B). Th2 responses were detected at minimal levels in the heterologous Convidecia groups, as observed by IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 responses (figure 3C, D, E). Overall, we observed a robust Th1 biased cellular immune response, but low levels of Th2-biased cytokines IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 in the heterologous vaccination groups, resulting in higher Th1/Th2 cytokine ratios than those in the homogeneous groups (figure 3F).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3. SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific cytokine T cells responses before and after receiving a heterogeneous or homologous boost vaccine.

Group A: primed with two doses of CoronaVac + one dose of Convidecia; Group B: primed with two doses of CoronaVac + one dose of CoronaVac; Group C: primed with one dose of CoronaVac + one dose of Convidecia; Group D: primed with one dose of CoronaVac + one dose of CoronaVac. Cytokine T cells were background corrected for unstimulated cells and values lower than 0 were considered negative. Th1/Th2 ratio was calculated by the sum of IFN-γ plus TNF-α cytokine levels divided by the sum of IL-4, and IL-5 plus IL-13 cytokine level. Horizontal bars show the median and error bars show the interquartile range.