Cytokine release syndrome-like serum responses after COVID-19 vaccination are frequent but clinically inapparent in cancer patients under immune checkpoint therapy

Cancer patients frequently receive immune checkpoint therapies (ICT) which may modulate immune responses to COVID-19 vaccines. Recently, a cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was observed in a cancer patient who received the BTN162b2 vaccine under ICT. Here, we analyzed adverse events (AEs) in patients of various solid tumor types undergoing (n=64) or not undergoing (n=26) COVID-19 vaccination under ICT as an exploratory endpoint of a prospectively planned cohort study. We did not observe clinically relevant CRS after vaccination (95% CI [0,0.056]). Short term (<4 weeks) serious AEs were rare (12.5%) and overall AEs under ICT were comparable to unvaccinated patients. Despite the absence of CRS symptoms, we observed a pairwise-correlated set of CRS-associated cytokines upregulated in 42% of patients after vaccination and ICT (>1.5fold). Hence, clinically meaningful CRS appears to be rare in cancer patients under ICT and elevated serum cytokine levels are common but not sufficient to establish CRS diagnosis.


Introduction 61
Patients with solid tumors have an increased fatality risk after infection with the SARS-CoV-2 62 coronavirus (Russell et al., 2021). Cancer patients have therefore been prioritized for 63 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19 vaccination) in many countries (Ribas et al., 64 2021;Trapani & Curigliano, 2021). Approved vaccines in Europe and the United States use 65 mRNA lipid nanoparticles or viral vectors to transiently transfect/transduce a SARS-CoV-2 66 spike mRNA/transgene which is translated in the patient's healthy cells at the site of 67 vaccination, thus strongly inducing cellular and humoral adaptive immunity (Baden et al., 2020;68 Fendler et al., 2021;Folegatti et al., 2020;Frenck et al., 2021;Sahin et al., 2014). However, 69 cancer patients were underrepresented in clinical phase III trials leading to FDA and EMA 70 approval of these vaccines (Baden et al., 2020;Folegatti et al., 2020;Polack et al., 2020). 71 Moreover, an increasing number of cancer patients receive immunomodulatory cancer 72 therapies, mostly immune checkpoint therapies (ICT) blocking the PD-1/PD-L1 coinhibitory 73 axis for T cell activation (Haslam & Prasad, 2019). Since ICT leads to reactivation of tumor 74 antigen-reactive T cells, it is possible that ICT may also influence activation of SARS-CoV-2 75 spike protein (S1)-specific T cells. This increased T cell activation may lead to massive 76 cytokine release and subsequent clinical reactions. The body's systemic reaction to the 77 resulting release of multiple inflammatory cytokines from T and myeloid cells is called cytokine 78 release syndrome (CRS). CRS manifests itself in fever, hypotension, hypoxia and multiorgan 79 dysfunction at later stages (Lee et al., 2019). Most frequently such responses are observed 80 after adoptive T cell therapies, bispecific antibodies to the CD3 co-receptor or severe infection 81 (Fajgenbaum & June, 2020). CRS is commonly graded according to the Common Terminology 82 of Adverse Events (CTCAE) or the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy 83 (ASTCT) consensus grading (Fajgenbaum & June, 2020;Lee et al., 2019). However, fever 84 ≥38°C alone is sufficient to establish CTCAE grade 1 CRS, which does not account for mild 85 fever as part of many appropriate immune reactions. Hence, an exhaustive differential 86 diagnosis is essential in establishing CRS (Fajgenbaum & June, 2020). 87 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a perpetuity.
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ;https://doi.org/10.1101https://doi.org/10. /2021 melanoma (n=21), hepatocellular carcinoma (n=11) and renal cell carcinoma (n=9) ( Table 1, 114 Figure 1C). Therapies included a variety of combinatorial immunomodulatory therapies, most 115 frequently anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy (n=35), combined anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 116 therapy (n=15), and a combination of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 with anti-VEGF (n=11) (Table 1, Figure  117 1D). Despite the limited patient sizes of our cohorts, vaccinated and unvaccinated patients 118 showed similar clinical characteristics such as sex, age, tumor type, stage, comorbidities, 119 therapy regimen and line of therapy (Table 1)  is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ;https://doi.org/10.1101https://doi.org/10. /2021  is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint  Figure  139 2A). While fewer early local adverse events such as pain at the injection site (n=2, 3.1%) were 140 reported in our cohort, early systemic AEs were comparable to reported AEs in cancer patients 141 including patients under ICT (Monin et al., 2021;Waissengrin et al., 2021). The most common 142 systemic AEs included fatigue (n=10, 15.6%), muscle weakness (n=8, 12.5%) and fever (n=4, 143 6.3%) ( Figure 2B, Table 2). Seven patients (10.9%) were hospitalized due to grade ≥3 AEs 144 and three of these patients died (4.7%) ( Figure 2B). One patient who received the BNT162b2 145 vaccine was admitted after grade 4 anemia due to esophageal varices bleeding and recovered 146 quickly under high-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy. A second patient experienced grade 3 147 increase of transaminases under pembrolizumab + axitinib and the mRNA-1273 vaccine which 148 normalized within three weeks after initial IV methylprednisolone and subsequent oral 149 glucocorticoid tapering. Another patient already exhibited grade 2 diarrhea before BNT162b2 150 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a perpetuity.
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint

172
We observed no clinically relevant CRS in our patient cohort, defined as all CRS without 173 evidence for infection identified by either the CTCAE v5.0 or ASTCT 2019 criteria (95% CI 174 [0,0.056]). We excluded patients with fever alone without constitutional symptoms, which may 175 reflect appropriate inflammatory reactions (Fajgenbaum & June, 2020). In the above-176 mentioned case report (Au et al., 2021) CRS was associated with thrombocytopenia and c-177 reactive protein (CRP) increase. In our cohort, only one patient experienced grade ≥3 178 thrombocytopenia with a platelet count of 5/nl four days after the 2 nd BNT162b2 dose. This 179 patient had received gemcitabine and carboplatin three days prior to the event while still under 180 prednisolone (50mg/d) due to a grade 3 autoimmune hemolytic anemia, which started after a 181 blood transfusion two months earlier. The patient was asymptomatic, afebrile and was not 182 hospitalized. Moreover, platelet counts spontaneously normalized within 2 weeks thus making 183 CRS unlikely. We frequently observed mild (>30mg/l and >1.5-fold) CRP increase after 184 vaccination (n= 22, 40% after 1 st dose; n=17, 35% after 2 nd dose) ( Figure 2C). One patient 185 showed a severe CRP increase (80 to 289mg/l) peaking 7 days after the 2 nd BNT162b2 dose 186 ( Figure 2C). This patient was also asymptomatic including absence of fever/hypotension or 187 hypoxia, thus making CRS unlikely. Blood and urine cultures remained negative, and CRP 188 spontaneously dropped below 100mg/l within 2 weeks. Hence, we did not observe any 189 clinically apparent CRS after COVID-19 vaccination in our cohort suggesting that CRS may 190 be rare in patients under ICT and concurrent COVID-19 vaccination. is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021.

Asymptomatic CRS-like serum response patterns after COVID-19 vaccination under ICT 193
To evaluate cytokine responses indicative of CRS, we analyzed serum levels of  associated cytokines in 37 patients undergoing concurrent ICT and COVID-19 vaccination 195 with a baseline sample ≤6 months before vaccination and a sample ≤6 weeks after vaccination 196 ( Figure 3A-B). We excluded one patient who had an immune related adverse event (arthritis 197 grade 3) at baseline before vaccination.  is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint  To assess whether vaccination increased the frequency of ICT-related adverse events at later 243 timepoints we compared AE frequencies in vaccinated (n=64) and unvaccinated patients 244 (n=26) over the entire course of ICT. We did not detect any significant differences in all grade 245 or grade ≥3 AEs between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients under ICT ( Figure 4A-B). One 246 patient experienced CRS grade 2 before COVID-19 vaccination but no patient showed CRS 247 after vaccination. Immune related AE were numerically more frequent in unvaccinated patients 248 while vaccinated patients had a higher frequency of fatigue, nausea and lower grade infections 249 although these differences were not statistically significant ( Figure 4A-B, Table 3). To confirm 250 the accuracy of this comparison, we calculated propensity scores based on age and sex and 251 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a perpetuity.
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint matched vaccinated and unvaccinated patients according to this score ( Figure S2A-B). For 252 this purpose, we assigned unvaccinated patients a "virtual" vaccination date at the same time 253 interval from the start of ICT as their vaccinated matched counterparts ( Figure S2A). Again, 254 overall and grade ≥3 adverse events were comparable between the matched cohorts ( Figure  255 S2C) suggesting that it is unlikely that COVID-19 vaccination profoundly increases the 256 incidence of severe adverse events in ICT-treated cancer patients. 257 Starting from 15 th October 2020, all patients were screened for COVID-19 at every therapy 258 session generally every 1-4 weeks using a rapid antigen test fulfilling the quality criteria of the 259 German Federal Institute for Vaccines and Biomedicines. We detected two COVID-19 cases 260 in the unvaccinated cohort (7.7%, 95% CI [1.6%,22.5%]) which had to be hospitalized for 261 severe pneumonia. One patient recovered and was able to resume therapy 6 weeks later but 262 died two months after due to disease progression. The other patient died from COVID-19 263 pneumonia on the intensive care unit. We detected no COVID-19 cases in the vaccinated 264 patient cohort, despite regular screening (95% CI [0,5.6%]). Accordingly, patient serum post 265 vaccination neutralized SARS-CoV-2 S1 protein binding to recombinant human ACE2 in a 266 competitive immunoassay ( Figure S3). Hence, our results corroborate the increasing evidence 267 that the here investigated COVID-19 vaccines have clinically meaningful efficacy in ICT 268 treated cancer patients (Fendler et al., 2021;Monin et al., 2021). 269 To explore whether vaccination status was associated with oncological outcomes, we 270 compared overall survival of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients ( Figure 4C). Vaccinated 271 patients showed prolonged survival as compared to unvaccinated patients (HR 0.24, p=0.002) 272 ( Figure 4C). This effect could not be explained by COVID-19 related deaths alone 273 (Supplementary Table 1) but was stable in all relevant patient subgroups ( Figure S4). is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint  is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint

Supplementary Table 1 -Cause of death in vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients 297
The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts before and after matching. is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint

Discussion 331
In a prospectively planned cohort study, we here describe a set of CRS-related cytokines 332 commonly upregulated after COVID-19 vaccination in ICT treated cancer patients despite the 333 absence of clinical CRS phenotypes. None of our patients showed evidence for clinically 334 relevant CRS after vaccination suggesting that CRS is an infrequent event after COVID-19 335 vaccination under ICT. Moreover, comparison to unvaccinated patients suggested that 336 COVID-19 vaccination does not profoundly increase the rate of immune related or grade ≥3 337 adverse events but may decrease the rate of COVID-19 infection in ICT treated patients. Induction of IL-6 has been reported after mRNA-based lipoplex tumor vaccination and 352 symptoms are generally mild and self-limiting (Sahin, Oehm, et al., 2020). Moreover, we found 353 higher IL-2 levels after vaccination, which may be explained by T cell activation and preferable 354 TH1 T cell polarization as shown in healthy adults vaccinated with BNT162b2 (Sahin, Muik, et 355 al., 2020). Our patients also showed coordinated release of CCL2 and CXCL8 levels after is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ;https://doi.org/10.1101https://doi.org/10. /2021 loaded lipid nanoparticles of the BNT162b2 vaccine (Liang et al., 2017). While CCL2 and IL-358 2 were also reported to be induced in the above-mentioned case report of CRS in a mismatch 359 repair deficient colorectal cancer (CRC) patient, the CRS hallmark cytokines IL-6 and CXCL8 360 levels remained largely constant in this patient (Au et al., 2021). Our study did not include a 361 CRC or mismatch-repair deficient patient who received COVID-19 vaccination. It is possible 362 that the clinical course observed by Au et al. is a CRC or mismatch repair deficiency specific 363 effect given the distinct T cell inhibitory mechanisms in these tumors which may render T cells 364 more responsive to PD-1 disinhibition (Au et al., 2021;Pelka et al.). 365 Notably, one patient in our study experienced grade 2 CRS before any COVID-19 vaccination 366 was administered, highlighting that CRS can occur independent of vaccination under ICT and 367 may not necessarily be vaccine-related. This is particularly important in cancer patients in a 368 palliative setting with limited treatment options, as CRS treatments such as glucocorticoids 369 may impair ICT efficacy and deprive patients of an important treatment option (Iorgulescu et 370 al., 2021;Maslov et al., 2021). Our results suggest that CRS-related cytokines are commonly 371 induced after COVID-19 vaccination and not sufficient to establish the diagnosis of CRS. 372 Clinically relevant CRS should therefore be diagnosed in symptomatic patients after an 373 exhaustive differential diagnosis. 374 Two cases of severe COVID-19 (95% CI [1.6%,22.5%]) occurred in our unvaccinated cohort 375 but none in our vaccinated patients. We observed induction of neutralizing antibodies after 376 vaccination thus corroborating current evidence that COVID-19 vaccines may have 377 meaningful activity in ICT-treated cancer patients (Fendler et al., 2021)  is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ;https://doi.org/10.1101https://doi.org/10. /2021 underwent regular rapid antigen-testing (q1w-q4w) it seems unlikely that we missed a relevant 385 number of COVID-19 cases. It is also possible that the small sample size of our heterogenous 386 cohort has skewed the survival analysis despite the similarity of vaccinated and unvaccinated 387 patients in many clinical covariates. Our results should therefore be validated in larger patient 388 cohorts. Alternatively, patients with worse disease status and symptoms may be more hesitant 389 and less likely to get vaccinated. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that unvaccinated 390 patients experienced numerically more severe adverse events even though this difference 391 was not statistically significant. This observation may also be a result of increased health 392 awareness or higher compliance regarding oncological therapy in vaccinated patients, an 393 outcome we did not assess in this study. Another possible explanation is that the cytokine 394 boost induced by vaccination may have reinforced anti-tumor immunity. Specifically, IL-2 395 induction, as observed in our vaccinated patients, can break ICT resistance in subcutaneous 396 murine models (Sun et al., 2019). Overall, the tested COVID-19 vaccines were linked to 397 favorable outcomes in our study and may have meaningful clinical activity in ICT treated 398 cancer patients. 399 Despite these important insights, our study also has several limitations which should be 400 considered in its interpretation. Adverse events under SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were not the 401 primary endpoint of this study. Therefore, sample size was not optimized for this endpoint and 402 our trial is not powered to estimate the exact frequency of rare AE under ICT and COVID-19 403 vaccination. Moreover, AE were assessed upon presentation at our day clinic every 1-6 weeks 404 and not at a standardized early timepoint as performed for randomized controlled vaccination 405 trials (Polack et al., 2020). While serious AEs were generally reported instantly, lower grade 406 AEs may be underreported due to recall bias. Finally, all serum cytokine and antibody titer 407 analyses are research grade and absolute concentrations from this study should not be used 408 is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ;https://doi.org/10.1101https://doi.org/10. /2021 In summary, induction of CRS-related cytokines after COVID-19 vaccination is common in 412 ICT-treated cancer patients, but generally clinically inapparent and hence not sufficient to is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ;https://doi.org/10.1101https://doi.org/10. /2021 The primary outcome measure of the trial was prediction of radiological response which will 438 be reported elsewhere. Secondary outcome measures included the serum proteome and 439 peripheral blood immune cell composition overall, grade 3 adverse events as well as 440 progression-free and overall survival. Patient health information is pseudonymized. The study 441 size was defined by sample size estimation based on the primary outcome parameter. 442 The trial was conducted in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki in its current edition. 443 The trial received institutional ethics review board approval at Ethics Commission I Medical 444 Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University (S-373/2020, S-207/2005, ) and Ethics Commission 445 II Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University (2021-567). Trial personal was subject to 446 medical confidentiality ( § 9 Abs. 1 MBO-Ä), the general data protection regulation (DSGVO) 447 and the data protection act of the state of Baden-Württemberg (LSDG). 448

Analysis of serum cytokines and neutralizing antibodies 449
Blood was collected either peripherally or via a port catheter in coagulation matrix containing 450 serum tubes (#01.1602, Sarstedt, Germany). Samples were kept at room temperature until 451 preparation (<24h). For serum preparation, tubes were centrifuged at 2500g for 10min at room 452 temperature, and the upper phase was transferred into 500µl aliquots and stored at -80°C. is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ;https://doi.org/10.1101https://doi.org/10. /2021 concentrations below the lower limit of detection were set to 0. The acquisition and processing 464 of the raw data was performed by a clinician scientist who was blinded to the patients' identity 465 and metadata and who was not involved in downstream data analysis. Notably, the patients' 466 pseudonyms contained the temporal sequence of the samples. 467

General data analysis 468
All data analysis was performed using Python 3 in a Jupyter notebook or Graph Pad Prism cytokine-cytokine correlation matrix. We calculated pairwise Euclidian distances using scipy's 480 (1.7.2) scipy.spatial.distance.pdist function. Using scipy's scipy.cluster.hierarchy.linkage 481 function with the UPGMA method, we obtained the row and column linkages from the 482 untransposed and transposed Euclidian distance matrix respectively and transformed these 483 into flat clusters by applying scipy.cluster.hierarchy.fcluster function using a cophenetic 484 distance of 1.6. 485 We sampled the normalized log1p transformed cytokine concentration dataframe object with 486 replacement with the same sample size as the initial dataframe and repeated the above-487 mentioned procedure to obtain flat clusters. This sampling and clustering was repeated 488 n=10,000 times. For each pair of cytokines we then counted their co-occurrence in a cluster 489 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a perpetuity.
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint and summed the values for all 10,000 separate clusterings dividing the counts for each pair of 490 cytokines by 10 000 to obtain an approximation of the probability for each pair of cytokines to 491 fall into the same cluster. 492

Survival analysis 493
Survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves and Log-rank tests (Mantel-Cox) using 494 GraphPad Prism and the lifelines package (0.26.3). We inspected the Kaplan-Meier curves 495 and did not see any obvious violation of the proportional hazards assumption. Using the 496 lifelines package, we also calculated a Cox-proportional hazards model using sex, age at trial 497 inclusion, stage, ECOG and vaccination status. We excluded BMI, tumor type and therapy 498 type. BMI was not available for several patients which would have decreased the population 499 size. When including therapy type and tumor type the Cox model did not converge, likely due 500 to the large number of categories for these variables. When no events were observed in one 501 group we reported hazard-ratios using the Mantel-Hanszel method implemented in Graph Pad 502 Prism 9.2.0. Otherwise, we used the logrank method implemented in Graph Pad Prism 9.2.0. 503 Propensity score matching 504 Propensity score matching was performed using the pymatch package (0.3.4). Propensity 505 scores were calculated for each patient based on age and sex. Based on these propensity 506 scores we assigned each unvaccinated patient a vaccinated counterpart with replacement. 507 This led to efficient matching, defined as a reduction in the age and sex imbalance of the 508 vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts ( Figure S2B). We did not include other variables into the 509 calculation of the propensity score because they led to inefficient matching with greater 510 imbalance of the cohorts after matching. 511 After matching the patients, we calculated the interval from start of immunotherapy to the first 512 COVID-19 vaccination for each vaccinated patient. By adding this interval to the start date of 513 immunotherapy of the respective matched unvaccinated patient we created a 'virtual' 514 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a perpetuity.
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint vaccination date for each unvaccinated patient. We then compared adverse events of 515 vaccinated and unvaccinated patients after this (virtual) vaccination date. 516

Statistical analysis and estimation of CRS frequency 517
Confidence intervals for CRS frequencies were calculated as Clopper-Pearson intervals 518 based on the beta distribution using the statsmodels.stats.proportion.proportion_confint 519 function of the statsmodels package (0.10.2). P values were calculated using Wilcoxon one 520 sample tests or Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank tests for continuous/ordinal one sample 521 or paired two sample data respectively using scipy's scipy.stats.wilcoxon function (1.7.2). For 522 categorical data/contingency tables we used Fisher's exact test (GraphPad Prism 9.2.0). All p 523 values are two-tailed. For cytokine data analysis p values were corrected for multiple 524 comparisons with the Benjamini&Hochberg method using R 4.1.1 and the p.adjust function. 525 For clinical data analysis we did not use multiple comparisons correction to increase our power 526 to detect differences vaccine-related adverse events (which we did not find). 527

Conflicts of interest: 528
Thomas Walle reports previous and current stock ownership of various pharmaceutical 529 companies manufacturing SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and diagnostics including BionTech, Astra-530 Zeneca and Roche. Thomas Walle reports research support from CanVirex, Basel, 531 Switzerland, a company developing viral vector-based immunotherapies and vaccines 532 (financial support for blood sampling materials). Guy Ungerechts is founder and current 533 CMO/CSO of CanVirex. All other authors report no conflicts of interest. is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in (which was not certified by peer review) preprint The copyright holder for this this version posted December 11, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.08.21267430 doi: medRxiv preprint

Acknowledgements 554
We thank all participating patients and their relatives for their consent to this research. We 555 thank the NCT Day Clinic 1, Day Clinic 2 and Dermatology Outpatient Clinic nursing staff for 556 blood sampling. We thank DKFZ Flow Cytometry Core Facility for technical support and 557 infrastructure. T.W. and A.S. have been funded by a fellowship of the DKFZ Clinician 558 Scientist Program, supported by the Dieter Morszeck Foundation. 559