RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a heterologous COVID-19 prime-boost vaccination compared with homologous vaccine regimens
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.06.13.21258859
DO 10.1101/2021.06.13.21258859
A1 Tina Schmidt
A1 Verena Klemis
A1 David Schub
A1 Janine Mihm
A1 Franziska Hielscher
A1 Stefanie Marx
A1 Amina Abu-Omar
A1 Sophie Schneitler
A1 Sören L. Becker
A1 Barbara C. Gärtner
A1 Urban Sester
A1 Martina Sester
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/06/15/2021.06.13.21258859.abstract
AB Heterologous priming with the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vector-vaccine followed by boosting with an mRNA-vaccine is currently recommended in Germany, although data on immunogenicity and reactogenicity are not available. Here we show that the heterologous regimen induced spike-specific IgG, neutralizing antibodies, and spike-specific CD4 T-cells, which were significantly more pronounced than after homologous vector boost, and higher or comparable in magnitude to the homologous mRNA regimens. Moreover, spike-specific CD8 T-cell levels after heterologous vaccination were significantly higher than after both homologous regimens. Cytokine expression profiling showed a predominance of polyfunctional T-cells expressing IFNγ, TNFα and IL-2 with subtle differences between regimens. Both recipients of the homologous vector-regimen and the heterologous vector/mRNA-combination were most affected by the priming vector-vaccination, whereas heterologous boosting was well tolerated and comparable to homologous mRNA-boosting. Taken together, heterologous vector-mRNA boosting induces strong humoral and cellular immune responses with acceptable reactogenicity profile. This knowledge will have implications for future vaccine strategies.Competing Interest StatementM.S. has received grant support from Astellas and Biotest to the organization Saarland University outside the submitted work, and honoraria for lectures from Biotest and Novartis. All other authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose.Clinical Trialnot applicable (no clinical trial)Funding StatementFinancial support was given by the State Chancellery of the Saarland.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Aerztekammer des Saarlandes (reference 76/20)All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll figures have associated raw data. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.BAUantibody binding unitsCOVID-19coronavirus disease 2019DLdetection limitELISAenzyme-linked immunosorbent assayIFNinterferonIHpercentage of inhibitionILinterleukinSARS-CoV-2Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2SEBStaphylococcus aureus enterotoxin BTNFtumor necrosis factor