ABSTRACT
Vaccination is a strategy that confers protection against symptomatic infections and/or development of severe COVID-19. In Brazil, COVID-19 vaccination began in January 2021 and has been performed using vaccines from different manufactures including CoronaVac (Sinovac), ChAdOx1 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech). One of the main protective mechanisms triggered by vaccination involves the production of IgG antibodies reactive to the Spike antigen of SARS-CoV-2, the levels of which correlates with vaccine efficacy. Although phase III clinical studies confirmed the efficacy of the vaccines used in Brazil, there are just few studies comparing vaccine immunogenicity in a real-world scenario. This study aimed to depict the IgG response to natural infections and to vaccination using different types of vaccines at population scale in Matinhos, a city located in south of Brazil. Nucleocapsid seroconversion rates indicated that more than a quarter of the cohort has been subjected to natural infections by SARS-CoV-2 by the first trimester of 2022. Spike seroconversion rates achieved >95% by February 2022 and maintained stable as far as June 2022 confirming the effectiveness of the vaccination program. Immunogenicity concerning IgG reactive to Spike was higher using the BNT162b2 vaccine, followed by ChAdOx1 and CoronaVac. Natural infections boosted IgG levels reactive to Spike in those individuals that completed primary vaccination with ChAdOx1 and CoronaVac but not with BNT162b2. The levels of IgG reactive to Spike increased with the number of vaccine doses administered. The application of BNT162b2 as booster dose resulted in high levels of IgG reactive to Spike which were similar despite the type of the vaccine used during primary vaccination.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by Federal University of Parana
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:
Ethics approval was obtained from the CEP/UFPR (n# 35872520.8.0000.0102) and CEP/HEG (n# 54095221.0.0000.0098). Federal University of Parana
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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 produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
