Background: As there are limited data of the immunogenicity of the Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV in different populations, antibody responses against different SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and T cell responses, we investigated the immunogenicity of the vaccine, in individuals in Sri Lanka. Methods: SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies were measured in 282 individuals who were seronegative at baseline, and ACE2 receptor blocking antibodies, antibodies to the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the wild type (WT), B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and B.1.617.2, ex vivo and cultured IFNγ ELISpot assays, intracellular cytokine secretion assays and B cell ELISpot assays were carried out in a sub cohort of the vaccinees at 4 weeks and at 6 weeks (2 weeks after the second dose). Results: 95% of the vaccinees seroconverted, although the seroconversion rates were significantly lower (p<0.001) in individuals >60 years (93.3%) compared to those who were 20 to 39 years (98.9%). 81.25% had ACE2 receptor blocking antibodies at 6 weeks, and there was no difference in these antibody titres in vaccine sera compared to convalescent sera (p=0.44). Vaccinees had significantly less (p<0.0001) antibodies to the RBD of WT and B.1.1.7, although there was no difference in antibodies to the RBD of B.1.351 and B.1.617.2 compared to convalescent sera. 27.7% of 46.4% of vaccinees had ex vivo IFNγ and cultured ELISpot responses respectively, and IFNγ and CD107a responses were detected by flow cytometry. Conclusions: Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV appeared to induce high seroconversion rates and induce a similar level of antibody responses against ACE2 receptor, B.1.617.2 and B.1.351 as seen following natural infection.
Background: To determine the kinetics and persistence of immune responses following the Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV, we investigated immune responses in a cohort of Sri Lankan individuals. Methods: SARS-CoV-2 specific total antibodies were measured in 20-to-39 year (n=61), 40-to-59-year and those >60 years of age (n=22) by ELISA, 12 weeks after the second dose of the vaccine. ACE2 receptor blocking antibodies (ACE2R-Ab), antibodies to the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the ancestral virus (WT) and variants of concern, were measured in a sub cohort. T cell responses and memory B cell responses were assessed by ELISpot assays. Results: 193/203 (95.07%) of individuals had detectable SARS-CoV-2 specific total antibodies, while 67/110 (60.9%) had ACE2R-Ab. 14.3% to 16.7% individuals in the 20 to 39 age groups had detectable antibodies to the RBD of the WT and VOC, while the positivity rates of those >60 years of age was <10%. 14/49 (28.6%) had IFNγ ELISpot responses to overlapping peptides of the spike protein, while memory B cell responses were detected in 9/20 to the S1 recombinant protein. The total antibody levels and ACE2R-Ab declined after 2 to 12 weeks from the second dose, while ex vivo T cell responses remained unchanged. The decline in ACE2R-Ab levels was significant among the 40 to 59 (p=0.0007) and ≥60 (p=0.005) age groups. Conclusions: Antibody responses declined in all age groups, especially in those >60 years, while T cell responses persisted. The effect of waning of immunity on hospitalization and severe disease should be assessed by long term efficacy studies.
Background To determine the kinetics and persistence of immune responses following the Sinopharm/BBIBP‐CorV, we investigated immune responses in a cohort of Sri Lankan individuals. Methods SARS‐CoV‐2 specific total antibodies were measured in 20–39 years ( n = 61), 40–59 years ( n = 120) and those >60 years of age ( n = 22) by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay, 12 weeks after the second dose of the vaccine. Angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor blocking antibodies (ACE2R‐Ab), antibodies to the receptor‐binding domain (RBD) of the ancestral virus (WT) and variants of concern, were measured in a sub cohort. T cell responses and memory B cell responses were assessed by ELISpot assays. Results A total of 193/203 (95.07%) of individuals had detectable SARS‐CoV‐2 specific total antibodies, while 67/110 (60.9%) had ACE2R‐Ab. A total of 14.3%–16.7% individuals in the 20–39 age groups had detectable antibodies to the RBD of the WT and variants of concern, while the positivity rates of those ≥60 years of age was <10%. A total of 14/49 (28.6%) had Interferon gamma ELISpot responses to overlapping peptides of the spike protein, while memory B cell responses were detected in 9/20 to the S1 recombinant protein. The total antibody levels and ACE2R‐Ab declined from 2 to 12 weeks from the second dose, while ex vivo T cell responses remained unchanged. The decline in ACE2R‐Ab levels was significant among the 40–59 ( p = .0007) and ≥60 ( p = .005) age groups. Conclusions Antibody responses declined in all age groups, especially in those ≥60 years, while T cell responses persisted. The effect of waning of immunity on hospitalization and severe disease should be assessed by long term efficacy studies.
Background: To understand the kinetics of immune responses with different dosing gaps of the AZD1222 vaccine, we compared antibody and T cell responses in two cohorts with two different dosing gaps. Methods: Antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 virus were assessed in 297 individuals with a dosing gap of 12 weeks, sampled 12 weeks post second dose (cohort 1) and in 77 individuals with a median dosing gap of 21.4 weeks (cohort 2) sampled 6 weeks post second dose. ACE2-blocking antibodies (ACE2-blocking Abs), antibodies to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of variants of concern (VOC), and ex vivo T cell responses were assessed in a subcohort. Results: All individuals (100%) had SARS-CoV-2-specific total antibodies and 94.2% of cohort 1 and 97.1% of cohort 2 had ACE2-blocking Abs. There was no difference in antibody titers or positivity rates in different age groups in both cohorts. The ACE2-blocking Abs (p < .0001) and antibodies to the RBD of the VOCs were significantly higher in cohort 2 compared to cohort 1. 41.2% to 65.8% of different age groups gave a positive response by the hemagglutination assay to the RBD of the ancestral virus and VOCs in cohort 1, while 53.6%-90% gave a positive response in cohort 2. 17/57 (29.8%) of cohort 1 and 17/29
BackgroundTo understand the kinetics of immune responses with different dosing gaps of the AZD1222 vaccine, we compared antibody and T cell responses in two cohorts with two different dosing gaps.MethodsAntibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 virus were assessed in 297 individuals with a dosing gap of 12 weeks, sampled at 12 weeks post second dose (cohort 1) and in 77 individuals with a median dosing gap of 21.4 weeks (cohort 2) sampled 6 weeks post second dose. ACE2 receptor blocking antibodies (ACE2R-Abs), antibodies to the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the virus and variants of concern (VOC) and ex vivo T cell responses were assessed in a sub cohort.ResultsAll individuals (100%) had SARS-CoV-2 specific total antibodies and 94.2% of cohort 1 and 97.1% of cohort 2 had ACE2R-blocking Abs. There was no difference in antibody titres or positivity rates in different age groups in both cohorts. The ACE2R-blocking Abs (p<0.0001) and antibodies to the RBD of the VOCs were significantly higher in cohort 2, compared to cohort 1. 41.2% to 65.8% of different age groups gave a positive response by the haemagglutination assay to the RBD of the ancestral virus and VOCs in cohort 1, while 53.6% to 90% gave a positive response in cohort 2. 17/57 (29.8%) of cohort 1 and 17/29 (58.6%) of cohort 2 had ex vivo IFNγ ELISpot responses above the positive threshold. The ACE2R-blocking antibodies and ex vivo IFNγ ELISpot responses at 12 weeks post-first dose, significantly correlated with levels 12 weeks post second dose (Spearman’s r=0.46, p=0.008) and (Spearman’s r=0.71, p<0.0001) respectively.ConclusionsBoth dosing schedules resulted in high levels of antibody and T cell responses post vaccination, although those with a longer dosing gap had a higher magnitude of responses, possibly as immune responses were measured 6 weeks post second dose compared to 12 weeks post second dose.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.