Relative effectiveness of monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosters in preventing severe COVID-19 due to omicron BA.5 infection up to 4 months post-administration in people aged 60 years or older in Italy: a retrospective matched cohort study

Effectiveness of the fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccines against severe COVID-19 among adults 40 years or older in Brazil: a population-based cohort study

Background

The emergence of COVID-19 variants with immune scape and the waning of primary vaccine schemes effectiveness have prompted many countries to indicate first and second booster COVID-19 vaccine doses to prevent severe COVID-19. However, current available evidence on second booster dose effectiveness are mostly limited to high-income countries, older adults, and mRNA-based vaccination schemes scenarios. We aimed to investigate the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of the fourth dose compared to three doses for severe COVID-19 outcomes in Brazil; and compare the rVE of a fourth dose with an mRNA vaccine compared to adenovirus-based product in the same settings.

Methods

We performed a target emulated trial using a population-based cohort of individuals aged 40 years or older who have received a homologous primary scheme of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, or BNT162b2, and any third dose product and were eligible for the fourth dose in Brazil. The primary outcome was COVID-19 associated hospitalization or death. We built Cohort A matching individuals vaccinated with a fourth dose to individuals who received three doses to estimate the rVE of the fourth dose. We built Cohort B, a subset of Cohort A, matching mRNA-based (mRNA) to adenovirus-based fourth dose vaccinated individuals to compare their relative hazards for severe COVID-19.

Findings

46,693,484 individuals were included in Cohort A and 6,763,016 in Cohort B. 45% of them were aged between 40 and 60 years old, and 48% between 60 and 79 years old. In Cohort A, the most common previous series was a ChAdOx1 two-dose followed by BNT162b2 (44%), and a CoronaVac two-dose followed by a BNT162b2 (36%). Among those fourth dose vaccinated, 36.9% received ChAdOx1, 32.7% Ad26.COV2.S, 25.8% BNT162b2, and 4.7% CoronaVac. In Cohort B, among those who received an adenovirus fourth dose, 53.7% received ChAdOx1 and 46.3% received Ad26.COV2.S. The estimated rVE for the primary outcome of four doses compared to three doses was 44.1% (95% CI 42.3-46.0), with some waning during follow-up (rVE 7-60 days 46.8% [95% CI 44.4-49.1], rVE after 120 days 33.8% [95% CI 18.0-46.6]). Among fourth dose vaccinated individuals, mRNA-based vaccinated individuals had lower hazards for hospitalization or death compared to adenovirus-vaccinated individuals (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.87). After 120 days, no difference in hazards between groups was observed (HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.93-1.97). Similar findings were observed for hospitalization and death separately, except no evidence for differences between fourth dose brands for death in Cohort B.

Interpretation

In a heterogeneous scenario of primary and first booster vaccination combinations, a fourth dose provided meaningful and durable protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes. Compared to adenovirus-based booster, a fourth dose wild-type mRNA vaccine was associated with immediate lower hazards of hospitalization or death unsustained after 120 days.

Funding

None.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of bivalent mRNA booster vaccines against Omicron variants

BACKGROUND

A global shift to bivalent mRNA vaccines is ongoing to counterbalance the diminishing effectiveness of the original monovalent vaccines due to the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants, yet substantial variation in the bivalent vaccine effectiveness (VE) exists across studies and a complete picture is lacking.

METHODS

We searched papers evaluating absolute or relative effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 BA.1 type or BA.4/5 type bivalent mRNA vaccines on eight publication databases published from September 1st, 2022, to November 8th, 2023. Pooled VE against Omicron-associated infection and severe events (hospitalization and/or death) was estimated in reference to unvaccinated, ≥2 original monovalent doses, and ≥ 3 original monovalent doses.

RESULTS

From 630 citations identified, 28 studies were included, involving 55,393,303 individuals. Bivalent boosters demonstrated higher effectiveness against symptomatic or any infection for all ages combined, with an absolute VE of 53.5 % (95 % CI: -22.2-82.3 %) when compared to unvaccinated and relative VE of 30.8 % (95 % CI: 22.5-38.2 %) and 28.4 % (95 % CI: 10.2-42.9 %) when compared to ≥ 2 and ≥ 3 original monovalent doses, respectively. The corresponding VE estimates for adults ≥ 60 years old were 22.5 % (95 % CI: 16.8-39.8 %), 31.4 % (95 % CI: 27.7-35.0 %), and 30.6 % (95 % CI: -13.2-57.5 %). Pooled bivalent VE estimates against severe events were higher, 72.9 % (95 % CI: 60.5-82.4 %), 57.6 % (95 % CI: 42.4-68.8 %), and 62.1 % (95 % CI: 54.6-68.3 %) for all ages, and 72.0 % (95 % CI: 51.4-83.9 %), 63.4 % (95 % CI: 41.0-77.3 %), and 60.7 % (95 % CI: 52.4-67.6 %) for adults ≥ 60 years old, compared to unvaccinated, ≥2 original monovalent doses, and ≥ 3 original monovalent doses, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The bivalent boosters demonstrated superior protection against severe outcomes than the original monovalent boosters across age groups, highlighting the critical need for improving vaccine coverage, especially among the vulnerable older subpopulation.

A Bivalent Omicron-BA.4/BA.5-Adapted BNT162b2 Booster in ≥12-Year-Olds

BACKGROUND

Protection against contemporary severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants requires sequence-adapted vaccines.

METHODS

In this ongoing phase 2/3 trial, 12-17-year-olds (n = 108), 18-55-year-olds (n = 313), and >55-year-olds (n = 306) who previously received 3 original BNT162b2 30-µg doses, received a fourth dose (second booster) of 30-µg bivalent original/Omicron-BA.4/BA.5-adapted BNT162b2 (BNT162b2-Omi.BA.4/BA.5). For comparisons with original BNT162b2, participants were selected from another phase 3 trial. Immunologic superiority 1 month after vaccination, with respect to 50% neutralizing titers (lower bound [LB] of 2-sided 95% confidence interval [CI] for geometric mean ratio [GMR], >1), and noninferiority with respect to seroresponse rates (LB of 2-sided 95% CI for rate difference, greater than -5%), for Omicron BA.4/BA.5 were assessed in >55-year-olds versus original BNT162b2 as a second booster. Noninferiority with respect to neutralizing titer level (LB of 2-sided 95% CI for GMR, > 0.67) and seroresponse rate (LB of 2-sided 95% CI for rate difference, greater than -10%) of Omicron BA.4/BA.5 immune response for BNT162b2-Omi.BA.4/BA.5 in 18-55 versus >55-year-olds was assessed.

RESULTS

One month after vaccination in >55-year-olds, the model-adjusted GMR of Omicron BA.4/BA.5 neutralizing titers for the BNT162b2-Omi.BA.4/BA.5 versus BNT162b2 groups (2.91 [95% CI, 2.45-3.44]) demonstrated the superiority of BNT162b2-Omi.BA.4/BA.5. Adjusted difference in the percentages of >55-year-olds with seroresponse (26.77% [95% CI, 19.59-33.95]) showed noninferiority of BNT162b2-Omi.BA.4/BA.5 to BNT162b2. Noninferiority of BNT162b2-Omi.BA.4/BA.5 in 18-55-year-olds compared with >55-year-olds was met for model-adjusted GMR and seroresponse. Geometric mean titers in 12-17-year-olds increased from baseline to 1 month after vaccination. The BNT162b2-Omi.BA.4/BA.5 safety profile was similar to the profiles for booster doses of bivalent Omicron BA.1-modified BNT162b2 and original BNT162b2 reported in previous studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on immunogenicity and safety data up to 1 month after vaccination in participants who previously received 3 original BNT162b2 doses, a BNT162b2-Omi.BA.4/BA.5 30-µg booster has a favorable benefit-risk profile.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT05472038.

Effectiveness of the Sanofi/GSK (VidPrevtyn Beta) and Pfizer-BioNTech (Comirnaty Original/Omicron BA.4-5) bivalent vaccines against hospitalisation in England

Background

The Sanofi/GSK AS03-adjuvanted (VidPrevtyn Beta) vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA (Comirnaty Original/Omicron BA.4-5) bivalent vaccine were offered to adults aged 75 years and over in England from 3rd April 2023. This is the first time an adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine has been administered as part of a UK COVID-19 vaccination programme. In clinical trials, antibody levels generated were comparable with mRNA vaccines but there are no real-world data on the effectiveness or duration of protection.

Methods

We used a test-negative case-control study design to estimate the incremental vaccine effectiveness of the Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer bivalent BA.4-5 boosters against hospitalisation amongst those aged 75 years and older in England. Cases (those testing positive) and controls (those testing negative) were identified from the national COVID-19 PCR testing data undertaken in hospital settings. The study period included tests from 3rd April 2023 to 27th August 2023. Tests were linked to the COVID-19 vaccination register and to the national hospital admission database, restricting to those with an acute respiratory infection coded in the primary diagnosis field. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated using multivariable logistic regression amongst those who had last received an autumn 2022 booster given at least 3 months prior. The test result was the outcome and vaccination status the exposure. Analyses were adjusted for week of test, gender, age, clinical risk group status, care home resident status, region, index of multiple deprivation, ethnicity, influenza vaccination status and recent COVID-19 positivity.

Findings

There were 14,169 eligible tests from hospitalised individuals aged 75 years and older; 3005 cases (positive tests) and 11,164 controls (negative tests). Effectiveness was highest in the period 9-13 days post vaccination for both manufacturers at about 50%; 43.7% (95% CI, 20.1-60.3%) and 56.1% (95% CI, 25.2-74.2%) for Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer BA.4-5, respectively. There was evidence of waning with a reduction to about 30% for both manufacturers after 5-9 weeks. The longest time interval post vaccination for which we were able to estimate effectiveness was 10+ weeks post vaccination, at which point vaccine effectiveness was 17.6% (95% CI, -3.6 to 34.5%) and 37.9% (95% CI, 13.2-55.5%) for the Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer BA.4-5 boosters, respectively.

Interpretation

Both boosters provided good protection against hospitalisation amongst older adults. The finding that the adjuvanted vaccine targeting the distant Beta strain had similar effectiveness to the bivalent mRNA vaccine targeting more closely matched Omicron sub-lineages is notable and highlights the need for further real-world studies into the effectiveness of vaccines from different vaccine platforms and formulations in the presence of matched and unmatched strains.

Funding

No external funding.

Understanding the time-driven shifts of vaccine effectiveness against any and severe COVID-19 before and after the surge of Omicron variants within 2.5 years of vaccination: A meta-regression

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic required rapid development of vaccines within a short period of time which did not allow to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the long-term.

METHODS

A computerized literature search was undertaken to identify eligible studies, with no language restrictions, published between 1 December 2020 and 30 June 2023.

RESULTS

Out of a total of 27,597 publications, 761 studies were included. Early VE of 87.2% decreased to 55.1% after 9 months among populations fully immunized not only with mRNA (proxy mRNA) vaccines, and 66.3% decreased to 23.5% in populations immunized exclusively with non-mRNA vaccines. Protection against severe COVID-19 declined to 80.9% for proxy mRNA vaccines and 67.2% for non-mRNA vaccines. Omicron variants significantly diminished VE. Within 6-8 months of receiving a single booster of an mRNA vaccine, VE declined to 14.0% and 67.7% for any and severe COVID-19, respectively. Multiple mRNA booster doses restored protection that declined to 29.5% and 70.6% for any and severe COVID-19, respectively, within 5-7 months.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes of this meta-regression underscore the evolving nature of COVID-19 in response to vaccination, dosing schedules, and emerging variants, and provide crucial insights for public health interventions and vaccination strategies.

From Detection to Protection: Antibodies and Their Crucial Role in Diagnosing and Combatting SARS-CoV-2

Understanding the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is crucial to comprehending disease progression and the significance of vaccine and therapeutic development. The emergence of highly contagious variants poses a significant challenge to humoral immunity, underscoring the necessity of grasping the intricacies of specific antibodies. This review emphasizes the pivotal role of antibodies in shaping immune responses and their implications for diagnosing, preventing, and treating SARS-CoV-2 infection. It delves into the kinetics and characteristics of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 and explores current antibody-based diagnostics, discussing their strengths, clinical utility, and limitations. Furthermore, we underscore the therapeutic potential of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, discussing various antibody-based therapies such as monoclonal antibodies, polyclonal antibodies, anti-cytokines, convalescent plasma, and hyperimmunoglobulin-based therapies. Moreover, we offer insights into antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, emphasizing the significance of neutralizing antibodies in order to confer immunity to SARS-CoV-2, along with emerging variants of concern (VOCs) and circulating Omicron subvariants. We also highlight challenges in the field, such as the risks of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and shed light on the challenges associated with the original antigenic sin (OAS) effect and long COVID. Overall, this review intends to provide valuable insights, which are crucial to advancing sensitive diagnostic tools, identifying efficient antibody-based therapeutics, and developing effective vaccines to combat the evolving threat of SARS-CoV-2 variants on a global scale.

Effectiveness of XBB.1.5 Monovalent COVID-19 Vaccines During a Period of XBB.1.5 Dominance in EU/EEA Countries, October to November 2023: A VEBIS-EHR Network Study

Using a common protocol across seven countries in the European Union/European Economic Area, we estimated XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalisation and death in booster-eligible ≥ 65-year-olds, during October-November 2023. We linked electronic records to construct retrospective cohorts and used Cox models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios and derive VE. VE for COVID-19 hospitalisation and death was, respectively, 67% (95%CI: 58-74) and 67% (95%CI: 42-81) in 65- to 79-year-olds and 66% (95%CI: 57-73) and 72% (95%CI: 51-85) in ≥ 80-year-olds. Results indicate that periodic vaccination of individuals ≥ 65 years has an ongoing benefit and support current vaccination strategies in the EU/EEA.

Bivalent mRNA COVID vaccines elicit predominantly cross-reactive CD4+ T cell clonotypes

Bivalent COVID vaccines containing mRNA for ancestral and Omicron BA.5 spike proteins do not induce stronger T cell responses to Omicron BA.5 spike proteins than monovalent vaccines that contain only ancestral spike mRNA. The reasons for this finding have not been elucidated. Here, we show that healthy donors (HDs) and people living with HIV (PLWH) on antiretroviral therapy mostly target T cell epitopes that are not affected by BA.5 mutations. We use the functional expansion of specific T cells (FEST) assay to determine the percentage of CD4+ T cells that cross-recognize both spike proteins and those that are monoreactive for each protein. We show a predominance of cross-reactive CD4+ T cells; less than 10% percent of spike-specific CD4+ T cell receptors were BA.5 monoreactive in most HDs and PLWH. Our data suggest that the current bivalent vaccines do not induce robust BA.5-monoreactive T cell responses.

Effectiveness of a fourth SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose in previously infected individuals from Austria

INTRODUCTION

Evidence is limited on the effectiveness of a fourth vaccine dose against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in populations with prior severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. We estimated the risk of COVID-19 deaths and SARS-CoV-2 infections according to vaccination status in previously infected individuals in Austria.

METHODS

This is a nationwide retrospective observational study. We calculated age and gender adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) of COVID-19 deaths (primary outcome) and SARS-CoV-2 infections (secondary outcome) from 1 November to 31 December 2022, primarily comparing individuals with four versus three vaccine doses. Relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) was calculated as (1-HR) X 100.

RESULTS

Among 3,986,312 previously infected individuals, 281,291 (7,1%) had four and 1,545,242 (38.8%) had three vaccinations at baseline. We recorded 69 COVID-19 deaths and 89,056 SARS-CoV-2 infections. rVE for four versus three vaccine doses was -24% (95% CI: -120 to 30) against COVID-19 deaths, and 17% (95% CI: 14-19) against SARS-CoV-2 infections. This latter effect rapidly diminished over time and infection risk with four vaccinations was higher compared to less vaccinated individuals during extended follow-up until June 2023. Adjusted HR (95% CI) for all-cause mortality for four versus three vaccinations was 0.79 (0.74-0.85).

DISCUSSION

In previously infected individuals, a fourth vaccination was not associated with COVID-19 death risk, but with transiently reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections and reversal of this effect in longer follow-up. All-cause mortality data suggest healthy vaccinee bias.

Relative effectiveness of bivalent COVID-19 vaccine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

The rapid development of COVID-19 bivalent vaccines (BVs) has encompassed both the original virus strains and the variant strain. However, the effectiveness of BVs is largely unknown. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of BVs.

Methods

Literature research was conducted through PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science up until November 4, 2023. Both randomized control trials and observational studies were considered for inclusion. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random effects model. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the risk of bias in cohort and case-control studies.

Results

A total of 1,174 articles were reviewed and 22 eligible studies were included. All included studies were observational (15 cohort studies, 7 case-control studies). The total number of participants was 39,673,160, and the number of people vaccinated with BVs as an intervention group was 11,585,182. Two mRNA BVs were mainly involved, including the ancestral strain and the BA.1 or BA.4-5 variants. Meta-analysis results showed, compared with the monovalent vaccines (MVs), the relative effectiveness (rVE) of the BVs in COVID-19-associated infections/symptomatic infections, illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths was 30.90% [95% confidence interval (CI), 8.43-53.37], 39.83% (95% CI, 27.34-52.32), 59.70% (95% CI, 44.08-75.32), and 72.23% (95% CI, 62.08-82.38), respectively. For those aged 50 years and older, BVs provided an additional 49.69% (95% CI, 41.44-57.94) effective protection compared with MVs. During the dominance period of the omicron XBB variant strain, BVs provided an additional 47.63% (95% CI, 27.45-67.82) effective protection compared with MVs.

Conclusion

Our findings show that the rVE of BVs in preventing COVID-19-associated infections, symptomatic infections, illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths is higher compared to MVs. Particularly for people over 50 years of age and during the Omicron variant XBB dominance phase, BVs provided superior protection. Therefore, BVs may have a broader application in the prevention and control of coronaviruses variant.

Oral administration of a recombinant modified RBD antigen of SARS-CoV-2 as a possible immunostimulant for the care of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Developing effective vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 that consider manufacturing limitations, equitable access, and acceptance is necessary for developing platforms to produce antigens that can be efficiently presented for generating neutralizing antibodies and as a model for new vaccines.

RESULTS

This work presents the development of an applicable technology through the oral administration of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD antigen fused with a peptide to improve its antigenic presentation. We focused on the development and production of the recombinant receptor binding domain (RBD) produced in E. coli modified with the addition of amino acids extension designed to improve antigen presentation. The production was carried out in shake flask and bioreactor cultures, obtaining around 200 mg/L of the antigen. The peptide-fused RBD and peptide-free RBD proteins were characterized and compared using SDS-PAGE gel, high-performance chromatography, and circular dichroism. The peptide-fused RBD was formulated in an oil-in-water emulsion for oral mice immunization. The peptide-fused RBD, compared to RBD, induced robust IgG production in mice, capable of recognizing the recombinant RBD in Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. In addition, the peptide-fused RBD generated neutralizing antibodies in the sera of the dosed mice. The formulation showed no reactive episodes and no changes in temperature or vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated the effectiveness of the designed peptide added to the RBD to improve antigen immunostimulation by oral administration.

B-cell and antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2: infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2019 prompted scientific, medical, and biotech communities to investigate infection- and vaccine-induced immune responses in the context of this pathogen. B-cell and antibody responses are at the center of these investigations, as neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) are an important correlate of protection (COP) from infection and the primary target of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine modalities. In addition to absolute levels, nAb longevity, neutralization breadth, immunoglobulin isotype and subtype composition, and presence at mucosal sites have become important topics for scientists and health policy makers. The recent pandemic was and still is a unique setting in which to study de novo and memory B-cell (MBC) and antibody responses in the dynamic interplay of infection- and vaccine-induced immunity. It also provided an opportunity to explore new vaccine platforms, such as mRNA or adenoviral vector vaccines, in unprecedented cohort sizes. Combined with the technological advances of recent years, this situation has provided detailed mechanistic insights into the development of B-cell and antibody responses but also revealed some unexpected findings. In this review, we summarize the key findings of the last 2.5 years regarding infection- and vaccine-induced B-cell immunity, which we believe are of significant value not only in the context of SARS-CoV-2 but also for future vaccination approaches in endemic and pandemic settings.

Predictors of Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 Infection after Vaccination

The initial two-dose vaccine series and subsequent booster vaccine doses have been effective in modulating SARS-CoV-2 disease severity and death but do not completely prevent infection. The correlates of infection despite vaccination continue to be under investigation. In this prospective decentralized study (n = 1286) comparing antibody responses in an older- (≥70 years) to a younger-aged cohort (aged 30-50 years), we explored the correlates of breakthrough infection in 983 eligible subjects. Participants self-reported data on initial vaccine series, subsequent booster doses and COVID-19 infections in an online portal and provided self-collected dried blood spots for antibody testing by ELISA. Multivariable survival analysis explored the correlates of breakthrough infection. An association between higher antibody levels and protection from breakthrough infection observed during the Delta and Omicron BA.1/2 waves of infection no longer existed during the Omicron BA.4/5 wave. The older-aged cohort was less likely to have a breakthrough infection at all time-points. Receipt of an original/Omicron vaccine and the presence of hybrid immunity were associated with protection of infection during the later Omicron BA.4/5 and XBB waves. We were unable to determine a threshold antibody to define protection from infection or to guide vaccine booster schedules.

The Antiviral Activity of the Lectin Griffithsin against SARS-CoV-2 Is Enhanced by the Presence of Structural Proteins

Although COVID-19 transmission has been reduced by the advent of vaccinations and a variety of rapid monitoring techniques, the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself has shown a remarkable ability to mutate and persist. With this long track record of immune escape, researchers are still exploring prophylactic treatments to curtail future SARS-CoV-2 variants. Specifically, much focus has been placed on the antiviral lectin Griffithsin in preventing spike protein-mediated infection via the hACE2 receptor (direct infection). However, an oft-overlooked aspect of SARS-CoV-2 infection is viral capture by attachment receptors such as DC-SIGN, which is thought to facilitate the initial stages of COVID-19 infection in the lung tissue (called trans-infection). In addition, while immune escape is dictated by mutations in the spike protein, coronaviral virions also incorporate M, N, and E structural proteins within the particle. In this paper, we explored how several structural facets of both the SARS-CoV-2 virion and the antiviral lectin Griffithsin can affect and attenuate the infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus. We found that Griffithsin was a better inhibitor of hACE2-mediated direct infection when the coronaviral M protein is present compared to when it is absent (possibly providing an explanation regarding why Griffithsin shows better inhibition against authentic SARS-CoV-2 as opposed to pseudotyped viruses, which generally do not contain M) and that Griffithsin was not an effective inhibitor of DC-SIGN-mediated trans-infection. Furthermore, we found that DC-SIGN appeared to mediate trans-infection exclusively via binding to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, with no significant effect observed when other viral proteins (M, N, and/or E) were present. These results provide etiological data that may help to direct the development of novel antiviral treatments, either by leveraging Griffithsin binding to the M protein as a novel strategy to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection or by narrowing efforts to inhibit trans-infection to focus on DC-SIGN binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

COVID-19 Vaccination Effectiveness in the General Population of an Italian Province: Two Years of Follow-Up

We carried out a cohort study on the overall population of the province of Pescara, Italy, to assess the real-world effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination against infection, severe, or lethal COVID-19, two years after the start of the vaccination campaign. We included all the resident or domiciled subjects, and extracted the official demographic, vaccination, COVID-19, hospital and co-pay exemption datasets from 1 January 2021, up to 15 February 2023. Cox proportional hazards analyses were adjusted for gender, age, diabetes, hypertension, COPD, major cardio- and cerebrovascular events, cancer, and kidney diseases. Throughout the follow-up (466 days on average), 186,676 subjects received greater than or equal to three vaccine doses (of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, NVX-CoV2373, or JNJ-78436735), 47,610 two doses, 11,452 one dose, and 44,989 none. Overall, 40.4% of subjects were infected with SARS-CoV-2. Of them, 2.74% had severe or lethal (1.30%) COVID-19. As compared to the unvaccinated, the individuals who received greater than or equal to one booster dose showed a ≥85% lower risk of severe or lethal COVID-19. A massive impact of vaccination was found among the elderly: 22.0% of the unvaccinated, infected individuals died, as opposed to less than 3% of those who received greater than or equal to three vaccine doses. No protection against infection was observed, although this finding was certainly influenced by the Italian restriction policies to control the pandemic. Importantly, during the Omicron predominance period, only the group who received at least a booster dose showed a reduced risk of COVID-19-related death.

Relative effectiveness of bivalent Original/Omicron BA.4-5 mRNA vaccine in preventing severe COVID-19 in persons 60 years and above during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB.1.5 and other XBB sublineages circulation, Italy, April to June 2023

During predominant circulation of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB.1.5 and other XBB sublineages (April-June 2023), we found that a second or third booster of Comirnaty bivalent Original/Omicron BA.4-5 mRNA vaccine, versus a first booster received at least 120 days earlier, was effective in preventing severe COVID-19 for more than 6 months post-administration in persons 60 years and above. In view of autumn 2023 vaccination campaigns, use of bivalent Original/Omicron BA.4-5 mRNA vaccines might be warranted until monovalent COVID-19 vaccines targeting Omicron XBB.1 sublineages become available.