Real-world data shows increased reactogenicity in adults after heterologous compared to homologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccination, March-June 2021, England

Development of quality assessment tool for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of real-world studies: a Delphi consensus survey

The increasing adoption of real-world studies in healthcare for decision making and planning has further necessitated the need for a specific quality assessment tool for evidence synthesis. This study aimed to develop a quality assessment tool for systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) involving real-world studies (QATSM-RWS) using a formal consensus method. Based on scoping review, the authors identified a list of items for possible inclusion in the quality assessment tool. A Delphi survey was formulated based on the identified items. A total of 89 experts, purposively recruited, with research experience in real-world data were invited to participate in the first round of Delphi survey. The participants who responded in the first Delphi round were invited to participate (n = 15) in the phrasing of the items. Strong level of agreement was found on the proposed list of items after the first round of Delphi. A rate of agreement ≥ 0.70 was used to define which items to keep in the tool. A list of 14 items emerged as suitable for QATSM-RWS. The items were structured under five domains: introduction, methods, results, discussions, and others. All participants agreed with the proposed phrasing of the items. This is the first study that has developed a specific tool that can be used to appraise the quality of SR and MA involving real-world studies. QATSM-RWS may be used by policymakers, clinicians, and practitioners when evaluating and generating real-world evidence. This tool is now undergoing validation process.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women

This open-labeled non-inferiority trial evaluated immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous and homologous COVID-19 vaccination schedules in pregnant Thai women. 18-45-year-old pregnant women with no history of COVID-19 infection or vaccination and a gestational age of ≥12 weeks were randomized 1:1:1 into three two-dose primary series scheduled 4 weeks apart: BNT162b2-BNT162b2 (Group 1), ChAdOx1-BNT162b2 (Group 2), and CoronaVac-BNT162b2 (Group 3). Serum antibody responses, maternal and cord blood antibody levels at delivery, and adverse events (AEs) following vaccination until delivery were assessed. The 124 enrolled participants had a median age of 31 (interquartile range [IQR] 26.0-35.5) years and gestational age of 23.5 (IQR 18.0-30.0) weeks. No significant difference in anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG were observed across arms at 2 weeks after the second dose. Neutralizing antibody geometric mean titers against the ancestral Wuhan strain were highest in Group 3 (258.22, 95% CI [187.53, 355.56]), followed by Groups 1 (187.47, 95% CI [135.15, 260.03]) and 2 (166.63, 95% CI [124.60, 222.84]). Cord blood anti-RBD IgG was correlated with, and equal to or higher than, maternal levels at delivery (r = 0.719, P < .001) and inversely correlated with elapsed time after the second vaccination (r = -0.366, P < .001). No significant difference in cord blood antibody levels between groups were observed. Local and systemic AEs were mild-to-moderate and more frequent in Group 2. Heterologous schedules of CoronaVac-BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1-BNT162b2 induced immunogenicity on-par with BNT162b2-BNT162b2 and may be considered as alternative schedules for primary series in pregnant women in mRNA-limited vaccine settings.

Spontaneously reported adverse events following COVID-19 basic and booster immunizations in the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

The rapid roll-out of novel COVID-19 vaccines made near real-time post-marketing safety surveillance essential to identify rare and long-term adverse events following immunization (AEFIs). In light of the ongoing booster vaccination campaigns, it is key to monitor changes in observed safety patterns post-vaccination. The effect of sequential COVID-19 vaccinations, as well as heterologous vaccination sequences, on the observed post-vaccination safety pattern, remains largely unknown.

METHODS

The primary objective of this study was to describe the profile of spontaneously reported AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccination in the Netherlands, including the primary and booster series. Reports from consumers and healthcare professionals were collected via a COVID-19 vaccine-tailored online reporting form by the National Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb (Lareb) between 6 January 2021 and 31 August 2022. The data were used to describe the most frequently reported AEFIs per vaccination moment, the consumer experienced burden per AEFI, and differences in AEFIs reported for homologous and heterologous vaccination sequences.

RESULTS

Lareb received 227,884 spontaneous reports over a period of twenty months. Overall, a high degree of similarity in local and systemic AEFIs per vaccination moment was observed, with no apparent change in the number of reports of serious adverse events after multiple COVID-19 vaccinations. No differences in the pattern of reported AEFIs per vaccination sequence was observed.

CONCLUSION

Spontaneous reported AEFIs demonstrated a similar reporting pattern for homologous and heterologous primary and booster series of COVID-19 vaccination in the Netherlands.

Spontaneous reporting of adverse reactions associated with the COVID-19 vaccine in health care professionals: A descriptive observational study conducted in a Portuguese hospital

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was classified as a pandemic in March 2020 by the World Health Organization. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was the first to be authorized in the European Union, based on data from phase 1, 2, and 3 clinical trials of limited duration. Concerns have been raised regarding the vaccine's safety profile. Some of the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with vaccines may not have been identified during clinical trials. This study aimed to identify ADRs associated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in health care professionals at a Portuguese tertiary university hospital.

Methods

The data used in this analysis consist of ADRs reported through a spontaneous notification system from vaccines administered between December 27, 2020, and January 31, 2021. ADRs were categorized according to the MedDRA terminology.

Results

A total of 8,605 Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines were administered to 4568 health care professionals. ADRs were reported among 520 of the vaccines, with an incidence of 13.56% in women and 5.31% in men. The mean age of the population reporting ADRs was 41.52 years, with a standard deviation of 9.83 years. The most frequent ADRs were myalgia (n = 274), headache (n = 199), pyrexia (n = 164), injection site pain (n = 160), fatigue (n = 84), nausea (n = 81), chills (n = 65), lymphadenopathy (n = 64), and arthralgia (n = 53). Hypersensitivity reactions occurred in 15 health care professionals, with no anaphylactic reactions observed. A total of four Important Medical Events were observed, which consisted of two cases of syncope, one case of sudden hearing loss, and one case of transverse myelitis.

Conclusion

The vaccine was well-tolerated among the study participants. Reactogenicity was greater after the second dose. The incidence of ADRs was higher in women and individuals aged between 40 to 49 years. Systemic adverse reactions were most frequently reported. Systematic monitoring of ADRs of COVID-19 vaccines in real-life context is essential for a more robust establishment of its safety profile.

Safety and immunogenicity of heterologous ChAdOx1-nCoV19 and BNT162b2 vaccination: A meta-analysis of the heterologous COVID-19 vaccination outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Here, we systematically assessed the safety and immunogenicity of the heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination regimens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated the immunogenicity by the geometric mean titers ratio (GMTR) of the neutralizing antibody and anti-spike IgG. The safety of heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination was evaluated using the pooled risk ratios (RRs) calculated by the random-effects model about the adverse events. Our study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021265165.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included in the analyses. Compared to the homologous ChAd/ChAd vaccination, the heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination showed significantly higher immunogenicity in terms of the neutralizing antibody and GMTR of anti-spike IgG, but at the same time displayed higher incidence of total adverse reactions, especially for the local adverse reactions. Moreover, heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination showed similar immunogenicity to the homologous BNT/BNT vaccination (GMTR of neutralizing antibody and anti-spike IgG) and similar safety.

DISCUSSION

Heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination showed robust immunogenicity and tolerable safety.

Heterologous prime-boost immunization with ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2: reactogenicity and immunogenicity in a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Regarding reactogenicity and immunogenicity, heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens are considered as an alternative to conventional immunization schemes.

METHODS

Individuals receiving either heterologous (ChAdOx1-S [AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK]/BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech, Mainz, Germany]; n = 306) or homologous (messenger RNA [mRNA]-1273 [Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA]; n = 139) vaccination were asked to participate when receiving their second dose. Reactogenicity was assessed after 1 month, immunogenicity after 1, 3, and/or 6 months, including a third dose, through SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G, surrogate virus neutralization test, and a plaque reduction neutralization test against the Delta (B.1.167.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529; BA.1) variants of concern.

RESULTS

The overall reactogenicity was lower after heterologous vaccination. In both cohorts, SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G concentrations waned over time with the heterologous vaccination demonstrating higher neutralizing activity than homologous mRNA vaccination after 3 months to low neutralizing levels in the Delta plaque reduction neutralization test after 6 months. At this point, 3.2% of the heterologous and 11.4% of the homologous cohort yielded low neutralizing activity against Omicron. After a third dose of an mRNA vaccine, ≥99% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity against Delta. Depending on the vaccination scheme and against Omicron, 60% to 87.5% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity.

CONCLUSION

ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2 vaccination demonstrated an acceptable reactogenicity and immunogenicity profile. A third dose of an mRNA vaccine is necessary to maintain neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2. However, variants of concern-adapted versions of the vaccines would be desirable.

Efficacy and Synergy with Cisplatin of an Adenovirus Vectored Therapeutic E1E2E6E7 Vaccine against HPV Genome-Positive C3 Cancers in Mice

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infections are the main cause of cervical and oropharyngeal cancers. As prophylactic vaccines have no curative effect, an efficient therapy would be highly desired. Most therapeutic vaccine candidates target only a small subset of HPV regulatory proteins, namely, E6 and E7, and are therefore restricted in the breadth of their immune response. However, research has suggested E1 and E2 as promising targets to fight HPV+ cancer. Here, we report the design of adenoviral vectors efficiently expressing HPV16 E1 and E2 in addition to transformation-deficient E6 and E7. Vaccination elicited vigorous CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses against all encoded HPV16 proteins in outbred mice and against E1 and E7 in C57BL/6 mice. Therapeutic vaccination of C3 tumor-bearing mice led to significantly reduced tumor growth and enhanced survival for both small and established tumors. Tumor biopsies revealed increased numbers of tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells in treated mice. Cisplatin enhanced the effect of therapeutic vaccination, accompanied by enhanced infiltration of dendritic cells into the tumor. CD8+ T cells were identified as effector cells in T-cell depletion assays, seemingly under regulation by FoxP3+CD4+ regulatory T cells. Finally, therapeutic vaccination with Ad-Ii-E1E2E6E7 exhibited significantly enhanced survival compared with vaccination with two peptides each harboring a known E6/E7 epitope. We hypothesize that this difference could be due to the induction of additional T-cell responses against E1. These results support the use of this novel vaccine candidate targeting an extended set of antigens (Ad-Ii-E1E2E6E7), in combination with cisplatin, as an advanced strategy to combat HPV+ cancers.

Humoral and Cellular Immune Responses against SARS-CoV-2 after Third Dose BNT162b2 following Double-Dose Vaccination with BNT162b2 versus ChAdOx1 in Patients with Cancer

PURPOSE

Patients with cancer display reduced humoral responses after double-dose COVID-19 vaccination, whereas their cellular response is more comparable with that in healthy individuals. Recent studies demonstrated that a third vaccination dose boosts these immune responses, both in healthy people and patients with cancer. Because of the availability of many different COVID-19 vaccines, many people have been boosted with a different vaccine from the one used for double-dose vaccination. Data on such alternative vaccination schedules are scarce. This prospective study compares a third dose of BNT162b2 after double-dose BNT162b2 (homologous) versus ChAdOx1 (heterologous) vaccination in patients with cancer.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

A total of 442 subjects (315 patients and 127 healthy) received a third dose of BNT162b2 (230 homologous vs. 212 heterologous). Vaccine-induced adverse events (AE) were captured up to 7 days after vaccination. Humoral immunity was assessed by SARS-CoV-2 anti-S1 IgG antibody levels and SARS-CoV-2 50% neutralization titers (NT50) against Wuhan and BA.1 Omicron strains. Cellular immunity was examined by analyzing CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2-specific S1 and S2 peptides.

RESULTS

Local AEs were more common after heterologous boosting. SARS-CoV-2 anti-S1 IgG antibody levels did not differ significantly between homologous and heterologous boosted subjects [GMT 1,755.90 BAU/mL (95% CI, 1,276.95-2,414.48) vs. 1,495.82 BAU/mL (95% CI, 1,131.48-1,977.46)]. However, homologous-boosted subjects show significantly higher NT50 values against BA.1 Omicron. Subjects receiving heterologous boosting demonstrated increased spike-specific CD8+ T cells, including higher IFNγ and TNFα levels.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with cancer who received double-dose ChAdOx1, a third heterologous dose of BNT162b2 was able to close the gap in antibody response.

Sex-disaggregated outcomes of adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination: A Dutch cohort study and review of the literature

Background

Albeit the need for sex-disaggregated results of adverse events after immunization (AEFIs) is gaining attention since the COVID-19 pandemic, studies with emphasis on sexual dimorphism in response to COVID-19 vaccination are relatively scarce. This prospective cohort study aimed to assess differences in the incidence and course of reported AEFIs after COVID-19 vaccination between males and females in the Netherlands and provides a summary of sex-disaggregated outcomes in published literature.

Methods

Patient reported outcomes of AEFIs over a six month period following the first vaccination with BioNTech-Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna or the Johnson&Johnson vaccine were collected in a Cohort Event Monitoring study. Logistic regression was used to assess differences in incidence of 'any AEFI', local reactions and the top ten most reported AEFIs between the sexes. Effects of age, vaccine brand, comorbidities, prior COVID-19 infection and the use of antipyretic drugs were analyzed as well. Also, time-to-onset, time-to-recovery and perceived burden of AEFIs was compared between the sexes. Third, a literature review was done to retrieve sex-disaggregated outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination.

Results

The cohort included 27,540 vaccinees (38.5% males). Females showed around two-fold higher odds of having any AEFI as compared to males with most pronounced differences after the first dose and for nausea and injection site inflammation. Age was inversely associated with AEFI incidence, whereas a prior COVID-19 infection, the use of antipyretic drugs and several comorbidities were positively associated. The perceived burden of AEFIs and time-to-recovery were slightly higher in females.

Discussion

The results of this large cohort study correspond to existing evidence and contribute to the knowledge gain necessary to disentangle the magnitude of the effect sex in response to vaccination. Whilst females have a significant higher probability of experiencing an AEFI than males, we observed that the course and burden is only to a minor extent different between the sexes.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG following injection of the third dose vaccine: A systematic review with meta-analysis of heterologous versus homologous vaccination

Background

The mass vaccination is a key strategy to prevent and control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Today, several different types of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been developed worldwide. These vaccines are usually administered in a two-dose schedule, and the third dose is currently being administered in most countries. This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the immunogenicity of heterologous vs. homologous vaccination after administration of the third dose of COVID-19 vaccines.

Methods

Electronic databases and websites including Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google scholar were searched for relevant randomized clinical trial (RCT) studies. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of three RCTs were included in the study. These RCTs were included 2,613 healthy adults (18 years or older and without a history of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19) with 15 heterologous and five homologous prime-boost vaccination regimens. Anti-SARS-CoV-2-spike IgG levels at day 28 after administration of the third dose, were compared between the heterologous and homologous regimens.

Results

The highest antibody responses had been reported for the homologous vaccination regimen of m1273/m1273/m1273 (Moderna), followed by the heterologous regimen of BNT/BNT/m1273. In addition, the immunogenicity of viral vector and inactivated vaccines was remarkably enhanced when they had been boosted by a heterologous vaccine, especially mRNA vaccines.

Conclusion

This systematic review suggests that mRNA vaccines in a homologous regimen induce strong antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 compared to other vaccine platforms. In contrast, viral vector and inactivated vaccines show a satisfactory immunogenicity in a heterologous regimen, especially in combination with mRNA vaccines.

Evaluation and comparison of post-vaccination adverse effects among Janssen and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccinated adult individuals in Debre Tabor Town: A cross- sectional survey in Northwest Ethiopia

COVID 19 vaccination has recently been launched globally to halt the pandemic. But COVID 19 vaccines have some adverse effects that raise concerns in the global community. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the adverse effects of Janssen and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccinated adults. A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted from March 15 to 30, 2022 among 421 (211 Janssen and 210 Astra Zeneca vaccinated) adults recruited by a convenience sampling technique in Debre Tabor Town, Northwest Ethiopia. Data were collected via face-to-face interviews and by reviewing the immunization card. Chi-square test, independent t-test, and Mann-Whitney test were used to compare the adverse symptoms and related parameters between the two vaccines. A linear regression model was also used to identify predictors of the number of post-vaccination symptoms. The majority (75.8%) of participants reported at least one side effect after vaccination. Adverse symptoms had a significantly greater occurrence (p < .05) among recipients of the AstraZeneca vaccine (84.8%) than receivers of the Janssen vaccine (66.8%). The main adverse symptoms were injection site pain, fever, fatigue, arthralgia, and myalgia in both vaccines. Significant variations (p < .05) between the receipts of the two vaccines were shown in injection site pain, fever, and arthralgia. The total number of symptoms was significantly higher (p < .05) in participants with female sex, younger age, BMI <25 kg/m2, no prior COVID 19, and those who had received AstraZeneca vaccine. Thus, the authors advise that they should receive vaccines with no hesitation, while continuous tracking of vaccine safety is kept in place.

Real-world data: a brief review of the methods, applications, challenges and opportunities

Background

The increased adoption of the internet, social media, wearable devices, e-health services, and other technology-driven services in medicine and healthcare has led to the rapid generation of various types of digital data, providing a valuable data source beyond the confines of traditional clinical trials, epidemiological studies, and lab-based experiments.

Methods

We provide a brief overview on the type and sources of real-world data and the common models and approaches to utilize and analyze real-world data. We discuss the challenges and opportunities of using real-world data for evidence-based decision making This review does not aim to be comprehensive or cover all aspects of the intriguing topic on RWD (from both the research and practical perspectives) but serves as a primer and provides useful sources for readers who interested in this topic.

Results and Conclusions

Real-world hold great potential for generating real-world evidence for designing and conducting confirmatory trials and answering questions that may not be addressed otherwise. The voluminosity and complexity of real-world data also call for development of more appropriate, sophisticated, and innovative data processing and analysis techniques while maintaining scientific rigor in research findings, and attentions to data ethics to harness the power of real-world data.

Evaluation of immunogenicity and reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women

OBJECTIVE

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in pregnancy is associated with increased risk of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Vaccines are highly effective at preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but there are limited data on COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy. This study aimed to investigate the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women when administered according to the 12-week-interval dosing schedule recommended in the UK.

METHODS

This was a cohort study of pregnant women receiving COVID-19 vaccination between April and September 2021. The outcomes were immunogenicity and reactogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination. Pregnant women were recruited by phone, e-mail and/or text and were vaccinated according to vaccine availability at their local vaccination center. For immunogenicity assessment, blood samples were taken at specific timepoints after each dose to evaluate nucleocapsid protein (N) and spike protein (S) antibody titers. The comparator group comprised non-pregnant female healthcare workers in the same age group who were vaccinated as part of the national immunization program in a contemporaneous longitudinal cohort study. Longitudinal changes in serum antibody titers and association with pregnancy status were assessed using a two-step regression approach. Reactogenicity assessment in pregnant women was undertaken using an online questionnaire. The comparator group comprised non-pregnant women aged 18-49 years who had received two vaccine doses in primary care. The association of pregnancy status with reactogenicity was assessed using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 67 pregnant women, of whom 66 had received a mRNA vaccine, and 79 non-pregnant women, of whom 50 had received a mRNA vaccine, were included in the immunogenicity study. Most (61.2%) pregnant women received their first vaccine dose in the third trimester, while 3.0% received it in the first trimester and 35.8% in the second trimester. SARS-CoV-2 S-antibody geometric mean concentrations after mRNA vaccination were not significantly different at 2-6 weeks after the first dose but were significantly lower at 2-6 weeks after the second dose in infection-naïve pregnant compared with non-pregnant women. In pregnant women, prior infection was associated with higher antibody levels at 2-6 weeks after the second vaccine dose. Reactogenicity analysis included 108 pregnant women and 116 non-pregnant women. After the first dose, tiredness and chills were reported less commonly in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women (P = 0.043 and P = 0.029, respectively). After the second dose, feeling generally unwell was reported less commonly (P = 0.046) in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women.

CONCLUSIONS

Using an extended 12-week interval between vaccine doses, antibody responses after two doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine were found to be lower in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women. Strong antibody responses were achieved after one dose in previously infected women, regardless of pregnancy status. Pregnant women reported fewer adverse events after both the first and second dose of vaccine. These findings should now be addressed in larger controlled studies. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Self-Reported Reactogenicity After Different COVID-19 Vaccination Regimens

BACKGROUND

In Rhineland-Palatinate, most COVID-19 vaccinations are centrally registered by the Rhineland-Palatinate Division of Vaccine Documentation, which includes self-reported vaccination reactions (SRVR) and their level of perceived intensity. We analyzed the occurrence of SRVR reported between 12/2020 and 12/2021 in relation to the different vaccination regimens involving BioNTech/Pfizer (BNT) and Moderna (m1273) mRNA vaccines and AstraZeneca (ChAd) and Johnson & Johnson (Ad26) viral vector vaccines.

METHODS

Using sex-specific logistic regression models, we analyzed the occurrence of all local and systemic SRVR, as well as the occurrence of local and systemic SRVR that were self-rated as "severe" by the vaccinated persons, in relation to the vaccine of the first vaccination and the vaccination regimen of the second vaccination (BNT/BNT, ChAd/ChAd, m1273/m1273, ChAd/ BNT, ChAd/m1273). Vaccination with BNT or the BNT/BNT regimen formed the reference category for the estimated odds ratios (OR) with respective 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Of all those vaccinated, 40.7% provided valid information on SRVR after the first vaccination and 33.8% after the second vaccination. As a result, 887 052 individuals were included in the analyses. Their median age was 60 years, and 58% were women. The most common vaccination regimen was BNT/BNT (67.3%). The most common SRVR were pain at the injection site and fatigue. Self-reported reactogenicity after the first vaccination was lowest for BNT. Self-reported systemic reactogenicity was notably higher after vaccination with a vector vaccine. After the second vaccination, self-reported reactogenicity was lowest after a ChAd/ChAd regimen and highest after an m1273 second vaccination.

CONCLUSION

With overall acceptable tolerability, differences in self-reported reactogenicity were evident depending on the particular COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination regimens in question.

Cohort profile: top the Spread Ottawa (SSO)-a community-based prospective cohort study on antibody responses, antibody neutralisation efficiency and cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination

PURPOSE

To investigate the robustness and longevity of SARS-CoV-2 immune responses conferred by natural infection and vaccination among priority populations such as immunocompromised individuals and people with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 in a prospective cohort study (Stop the Spread Ottawa-SSO) in adults living in the Ottawa region. In this paper, we describe the study design, ongoing data collection and baseline characteristics of participants.

PARTICIPANTS

Since October 2020, participants who tested positive for COVID-19 (convalescents) or at high risk of exposure to the virus (under surveillance) have provided monthly blood and saliva samples over a 10-month period. As of 2 November 2021, 1026 adults had completed the baseline survey and 976 had attended baseline bloodwork. 300 participants will continue to provide bimonthly blood samples for 24 additional months (ie, total follow-up of 34 months).

FINDINGS TO DATE

The median age of the baseline sample was 44 (IQR 23, range: 18-79) and just over two-thirds (n=688; 67.1%) were female. 255 participants (24.9%) had a history of COVID-19 infection confirmed by PCR and/or serology. Over 600 participants (60.0%) work in high-risk occupations (eg, healthcare, teaching and transportation). 108 participants (10.5%) reported immunocompromising conditions or treatments at baseline (eg, cancer, HIV, other immune deficiency, and/or use of immunosuppressants).

FUTURE PLANS

SSO continues to yield rich research potential, given the collection of pre-vaccine baseline data and samples from the majority of participants, recruitment of diverse subgroups of interest, and a high level of participant retention and compliance with monthly sampling. The 24-month study extension will maximise opportunities to track SARS-CoV-2 immunity and vaccine efficacy, detect and characterise emerging variants, and compare subgroup humoral and cellular response robustness and persistence.

Increased transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 alpha variant (B.1.1.7) in children: three large primary school outbreaks revealed by whole genome sequencing in the Netherlands

Background

Variant of concern (VOC) SARS-CoV-2 alpha variant (B.1.1.7) was the dominant strain in the Netherlands between March 2021–June 2021. We describe three primary school outbreaks due to the alpha variant using whole genome sequencing with evidence of large-scale transmission among children, teachers and their household contacts.

Method

All outbreaks described were investigated by the South Limburg Public Health Service, the Netherlands. A case was defined as an individual with a real-time polymerase chain reaction test or antigen test positive for SARS-CoV-2. Whole genome sequencing was performed on random samples from at least one child and one teacher of each affected class.

Results

Peak attack rates in classes were 53%, 33% and 39%, respectively. Specific genotypes were identified for each school across a majority of affected classes. Attack rates were high among staff members, likely to promote staff-to-children transmission. Cases in some classes were limited to children, indicating child-to-child transmission. At 39%, the secondary attack rate (SAR) in household contacts of infected children was remarkably high, similar to SAR in household contacts of staff members (42%). SAR of household contacts of asymptomatic children was only 9%.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest increased transmissibility of the alpha variant in children compared to preceding non-VOC variants, consistent with a substantial rise in the incidence of cases observed in primary schools and children aged 5–12 since the alpha variant became dominant in March 2021. Lack of mandatory masking, insufficient ventilation and lack of physical distancing also probably contributed to the school outbreaks. The rise of the delta variant (B.1.617.2) since July 2021 which is estimated to be 55% more transmissible than the alpha variant, provides additional urgency to adequate infection prevention in school settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07623-9.

BNT162b2-boosted immune responses six months after heterologous or homologous ChAdOx1nCoV-19/BNT162b2 vaccination against COVID-19

Heterologous prime/boost vaccination with a vector-based approach (ChAdOx-1nCov-19, ChAd) followed by an mRNA vaccine (e.g. BNT162b2, BNT) has been reported to be superior in inducing protective immunity compared to repeated application of the same vaccine. However, data comparing immunity decline after homologous and heterologous vaccination as well as effects of a third vaccine application after heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination are lacking. Here we show longitudinal monitoring of ChAd/ChAd (n = 41) and ChAd/BNT (n = 88) vaccinated individuals and the impact of a third vaccination with BNT. The third vaccination greatly augments waning anti-spike IgG but results in only moderate increase in spike-specific CD4 + and CD8 + T cell numbers in both groups, compared to cell frequencies already present after the second vaccination in the ChAd/BNT group. More importantly, the third vaccination efficiently restores neutralizing antibody responses against the Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants of the virus, but neutralizing activity against the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant remains severely impaired. In summary, inferior SARS-CoV-2 specific immune responses following homologous ChAd/ChAd vaccination can be compensated by heterologous BNT vaccination, which might influence the choice of vaccine type for subsequent vaccination boosts.

Association of neutralizing breadth against SARS-CoV-2 with inoculation orders of heterologous prime-boost vaccines

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence suggests heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccination as a superior strategy than homologous schedules. Animal experiments and clinical observations have shown enhanced antibody response against influenza variants after heterologous vaccination; however, whether the inoculation order of COVID-19 vaccines in a prime-boost schedule affects antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 variants is not clear.

METHODS

We conducted immunological analyses in a cohort of health care workers (n = 486) recently vaccinated by three types of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines under homologous or heterologous prime-boost schedules. Antibody response against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (Wuhan-Hu-1) was assessed by total antibody measurements, surrogate virus neutralization tests, and pseudovirus neutralization assays (PNA). Furthermore, serum neutralization activity against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern was also measured by PNA.

FINDINGS

We observed strongest serum neutralization activity against the widely circulating SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.617.2 among recipients of heterologous BBIBP-CorV/CoronaVac and WIBP-CorV/CoronaVac. In contrast, recipients of CoronaVac/BBIBP-CorV and CoronaVac/WIBP-CorV showed significantly lower B.1.617.2 neutralization titers than recipients of reverse schedules. Laboratory tests revealed that neutralizing activity against common variants but not the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 was associated with the inoculation order of heterologous prime-boost vaccines. Multivariable regression analyses confirmed this association after adjusting for known confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data provide clinical evidence of inoculation order-dependent expansion of neutralizing breadth against SARS-CoV-2 in recipients of heterologous prime-boost vaccination and call for further studies into its underlying mechanism.

FUNDING

National Key R&D Program of China, National Development and Re-form Commission of China, National Natural Science Foundation of China, Shenzhen Science and Technology Innovation Commission, and US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Correlation between Adverse Events and Antibody Titers among Healthcare Workers Vaccinated with BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine

Objectives: The BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has been found to be highly effective in preventing COVID-19 but is associated with increased reactogenicity. We aimed to examine the correlation between immunogenicity and reactogenicity of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Methods: Subjects without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection that participated in active surveillance after being vaccinated with the BNT162b2 vaccine were included. Study participants reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) through questionnaires administered by text message after receiving each dose of the vaccine. A reactogenicity score was developed based on the type and duration of ADRs. In addition, anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) levels and neutralization assays were performed 7−21 and 7−38 days after the first and second vaccine doses, respectively. Associations between ADRs and antibody levels were assessed by Spearman correlations. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with ADRs. Results: A total of 831 health care workers were included. The mean age was 46.5 years (SD = 11.8) and 75.5% were females. 83.4% and 83.3% had at least one local ADR after the first and second doses, respectively. 33% and 83.2% had at least one systemic ADR after the first and second doses, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis found a significant correlation between ADR score and anti-RBD-IgG titers (r = 0.366; p < 0.0001) after adjustment for age, gender, and days after the second vaccination. High anti-RBD-IgG levels, being younger than 55 and being female, were all correlated with increased rates of ADRs. Conclusion: BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine reactogenicity appears to be correlated with higher post-vaccination antibody levels and is independently associated with younger age and female gender.

Safety of heterologous primary and booster schedules with ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines: nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the risk of adverse events associated with heterologous primary (two dose) and booster (three dose) vaccine schedules for covid-19 with Oxford-AstraZeneca's ChAdOx1-S priming followed by mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech's BNT162b2 or Moderna's mRNA-1273) as compared with homologous mRNA vaccine schedules for covid-19.

DESIGN

Nationwide cohort study.

SETTING

Denmark, 1 January 2021 to 26 March 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 18-65 years who received a heterologous vaccine schedule of priming with ChAdOx1-S and one or two mRNA booster doses (with either the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine) were compared with adults who received a homologous BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine schedule (ie, two dose v two dose, and three dose v three dose schedule).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The incidence of hospital contacts for a range of adverse cardiovascular and haemostatic events within 28 days after the second or third vaccine dose, comparing heterologous versus homologous vaccine schedules. Secondary outcomes included additional prioritised adverse events of special interest. Poisson regression was used to estimate incidence rate ratios with adjustment for selected covariates.

RESULTS

Individuals who had had a heterologous primary vaccine (n=137 495) or a homologous vaccine (n=2 688 142) were identified, in addition to those who had had a heterologous booster (n=129 770) or a homologous booster (n=2 197 213). Adjusted incidence rate ratios of adverse cardiovascular and haemostatic events within 28 days for the heterologous primary and booster vaccine schedules in comparison with the homologous mRNA vaccine schedules were 1.22 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.91) and 1.00 (0.58 to 1.72) for ischaemic cardiac events, 0.74 (0.40 to 1.34) and 0.72 (0.37 to 1.42) for cerebrovascular events, 1.12 (0.13 to 9.58) and 4.74 (0.94 to 24.01) for arterial thromboembolisms, 0.79 (0.45 to 1.38) and 1.09 (0.60 to 1.98) for venous thromboembolisms, 0.84 (0.18 to 3.96) and 1.04 (0.60 to 4.55) for myocarditis or pericarditis, 0.97 (0.45 to 2.10) and 0.89 (0.21 to 3.77) for thrombocytopenia and coagulative disorders, and 1.39 (1.01 to 1.91) and 1.02 (0.70 to 1.47) for other bleeding events, respectively. No associations with any of the outcomes were found when restricting to serious adverse events defined as stay in hospital for more than 24 h.

CONCLUSION

Heterologous primary and booster covid-19 vaccine schedules of ChAdOx1-S priming and mRNA booster doses as both second and third doses were not associated with increased risk of serious adverse events compared with homologous mRNA vaccine schedules. These results are reassuring but given the rarity of some of the adverse events, associations cannot be excluded.

An exploratory analysis of the response to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in males and females

BACKGROUND

There are known differences in vaccine reactogenicity and immunogenicity by sex. Females have been shown to report greater reactogenicity and generate higher humoral and cellular immune responses than males following vaccination with several different vaccines. Whether this is also the case for COVID-19 vaccines is currently unknown, as COVID-19 vaccine study data disaggregated by sex are not routinely reported. Therefore, we have assessed the influence of sex on reactogenicity, immunogenicity and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19.

METHODS

Vaccine efficacy was assessed in 15169 volunteers enrolled into single-blind randomised controlled trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in Brazil and the UK, with the primary endpoint defined as nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. All participants were electronically randomised to receive two standard doses of vaccine or the control product. Logistic regression models were fitted to explore the effect of age and sex on reactogenicity, and linear models fitted to log-transformed values for immunogenicity data. Reactogenicity data were taken from self-reported diaries of 788 trial participants. Pseudovirus neutralisation assay data were available from 748 participants and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG assay data from 1543 participants.

FINDINGS

7619 participants received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 7550 received the control. Vaccine efficacy in participants after two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (4243 females and 3376 males) was 66.1% (95% CI 55.9-73.9%) in males and 59.9% (95% CI 49.8-67.9%) in females; with no evidence of a difference in efficacy between the sexes (vaccine by sex interaction term P=0.3359). A small, statistically significant difference in anti-spike IgG was observed (adjusted GMR 1.14; 95% CI 1.04-1.26), with higher titres in females than males, but there were no statistically significant differences in other immunological endpoints. Whilst the majority of individuals reported at least one systemic reaction following a first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, females were twice as likely as males to report any systemic reaction after a first dose (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.37-2.77). Measured fever of 38°C or above was reported in 5% of females and 1% of males following first doses. Headache and fatigue were the most commonly reported reactions in both sexes.

INTERPRETATION

Our results show that there is no evidence of difference in efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in males and females. Greater reactogenicity in females was not associated with any difference in vaccine efficacy.

FUNDING

Studies were registered with ISRCTN 90906759 (COV002) and ISRCTN 89951424 (COV003) and follow-up is ongoing. Funding was received from the UK Research and Innovation, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Science, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, the Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior, Brazil, and AstraZeneca.

Adverse reactions to the first and second doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers

INTRODUCTION

In the current coronavirus infection 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the messenger RNA vaccines have been shown to help protect high-risk groups from COVID-19. Among healthcare workers vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, a survey was conducted to analyze the relationship between the incidence and severity of adverse reactions after vaccination.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective self-reported survey of adverse reactions among healthcare workers vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (Comirnaty®) in Japan. After the first and second dose of vaccine, local and systemic reactions for 8 days after vaccination were reported by volunteer participants using a website. After receiving vaccination, 374 respondents participated in this matched-pair study.

RESULTS

Both the incidence and severity of adverse reactions tended to be higher after the second vaccine dose than after the first dose. However, the incidence and numeric rating scale (NRS) score of muscle and skin pain were nearly the same after the first and second doses. In a comparison by sex, women had significantly higher incidence and NRS scores for adverse reactions such as headache, skin pain, erythema, and itching. The results also showed that younger age groups had higher incidence rates and NRS scores for all adverse reactions investigated, except for muscle pain, compared with older age groups.

CONCLUSION

Some adverse reactions to the Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty® COVID-19 vaccine showed gender and age differences. However, generally speaking, all side reactions disappear within a week. Therefore, these side reactions are not a significant concern in recommending vaccination.

Efficacy of heterologous boosting against SARS-CoV-2 using a recombinant interferon-armed fusion protein vaccine (V-01): a randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled phase III trial

Waning of neutralizing titres along with decline of protection efficacy after the second dose of COVID-19 vaccines was observed, including China-made inactivated vaccines. Efficacy of a heterologous boosting using one dose of a recombinant SARS-CoV-2 fusion protein vaccine (V-01) in inactivated vaccine-primed population was studied, aimed to restore the immunity. A randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled phase III trial was conducted in healthy people aged 18 years or older in Pakistan and Malaysia. Each eligible participant received one dose of the V-01 vaccine developed by Livzon Mabpharm Inc. or placebo within the 3-6 months after the two-dose primary regimen, and was monitored for safety and efficacy. The primary endpoint was protection against confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. A total of 10,218 participants were randomly assigned to receive a vaccine or placebo. Virus-neutralizing antibodies were assessed in 419 participants. A dramatic increase (11.3-fold; 128.3–1452.8) of neutralizing titres was measured in the V-01 group at 14 days after the booster. Over two months of surveillance, vaccine efficacy was 47.8% (95%CI: 22.6–64.7) according to the intention-to-treat principle. The most common adverse events were transient, mild-to-moderate pain at the injection site, fever, headache, and fatigue. Serious adverse events occurred almost equally in V-01 (0.12%) and placebo (0.16%) groups. The heterologous boosting with the V-01 vaccine was safe and efficacious, which could elicit robust humoral immunity under the epidemic of the Omicron variant.

Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05096832.

Heterologous prime-boost strategies for COVID-19 vaccines

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Heterologous prime-boost doses of COVID-19 vaccines ('mix-and-match' approach) are being studied to test for the effectiveness of Oxford (AZD1222), Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) and Novavax (NVX-CoV2373) vaccines for COVID in 'Com-Cov2 trial' in UK, and that of Oxford and Pfizer vaccines in 'CombivacS trial' in Spain. Later, other heterologous combinations of CoronaVac (DB15806), Janssen (JNJ-78436735), CanSino (AD5-nCOV) and other were also being trialled to explore their effectiveness. Previously, such a strategy was deployed for HIV, Ebola virus, malaria, tuberculosis, influenza and hepatitis B to develop the artificial acquired active immunity. The present review explores the science behind such an approach for candidate COVID-19 vaccines developed using 11 different platforms approved by the World Health Organization.

METHODS

The candidate vaccines' pharmaceutical parameters (e.g. platforms, number needed to vaccinate and intervals, adjuvanted status, excipients and preservatives added, efficacy and effectiveness, vaccine adverse events, and boosters), and clinical aspects must be analysed for the mix-and-match approach. Results prime-boost trials showed safety, effectiveness, higher systemic reactogenicity, well tolerability with improved immunogenicity, and flexibility profiles for future vaccinations, especially during acute and global shortages, compared to the homologous counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Still, large controlled trials are warranted to address challenging variants of concerns including Omicron and other, and to generalize the effectiveness of the approach in regular as well as emergency use during vaccine scarcity.

Reactogenicity after heterologous and homologous COVID-19 prime-boost vaccination regimens: descriptive interim results of a comparative observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Due to safety signals after vaccination with COVID-19 vector vaccines, several states recommended to complete the primary immunization series in individuals having received one dose of ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca) with an mRNA vaccine. However, data on safety and reactogenicity of this heterologous regimen are still scarce. The aim of this study was therefore to compare the reactogenicity and the frequency of medical consultations after boost vaccination in a heterologous regimen with ChAdOx1 and mRNA-vaccines (BNT162b2, BioNTech/Pfizer or mRNA-1273, Moderna) to homologous regimens with ChAdOx1 or mRNA-vaccines, respectively.

METHODS

In an observational cohort study reactogenicity and safety were assessed 14-19 days (short-term) and 40 to 56 days (long-term) after the boost vaccination using web-based surveys. In the short-term survey solicited and unsolicited reactions were assessed, while the long-term survey focussed on health problems leading to medical consultation after the vaccination, including those that were not suspected to be vaccine-related.

RESULTS

In total, 9146 participants completed at least one of the surveys (ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1: n = 552, ChAdOx1/mRNA: n = 2382, mRNA/mRNA: n = 6212). In the short-term survey, 86% with ChAdOx1/mRNA regimen reported at least one reaction, in the ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1 and mRNA/mRNA cohorts 58% and 76%, respectively (age and sex adjusted p < 0.0001). In the long-term survey, comparable proportions of individuals reported medical consultation (ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1 vs. ChAdOx1/mRNA vs. mRNA/mRNA: 15% vs. 18% vs. 16%, age and sex adjusted p = 0.398). Female gender was associated with a higher reactogenicity and more medical consultations. Younger age was associated with a higher reactogenicity, whereas elderly people reported more medical consultations.

CONCLUSION

Although the short-term reactogenicity was higher with the heterologous regimen than with the homologous regimens, other factors such as higher efficacy and limited resources during the pandemic may prevail in recommending specific regimens.

Heterologous gam-covid-vac (sputnik V) / mRNA-1273 (moderna) vaccination induces a stronger humoral response than homologous sputnik V in a real-world data analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the homologous prime-boost vaccination scheme of Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V, SpV) to its heterologous combination with mRNA-1273 (Moderna, Mod) vaccine.

METHODS

SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike (S)-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG concentration was assessed three to seven weeks after complete vaccination. Reactogenicity was evaluated by declared side events and medical assistance required until day 7 post-boost.

RESULTS

Of 190 participants enrolled, 105 received homologous SpV/SpV and the remaining heterologous SpV/Mod vaccination scheme, respectively. Median (interquartile range, IQR) age was 54 (37-63) years, 132 out of 190 (69.5%) were female and 46 out of 190 (24.2%) individuals had a prior confirmed COVID-19. Anti-S-RBD IgG median (IQR) titers were significantly higher for SpV/Mod [2511 (1476-3992) BAU/mL] than for SpV/SpV [582 (209-1609) BAU/mL, p<0.001] vaccination scheme. In a linear model adjusted for age, gender, time to the serological assay and time between doses, SpV/Mod [4.154 (6.585-615.554), p<0.001] and prior COVID [3.732 (8.641-202.010), p<0.001] were independently associated with higher anti-S-RBD IgG values. A higher frequency of mild and moderate adverse effects was associated with the heterologous scheme [20 of 85 (23.5%) vs 13 of 105 (12,4%), p=0.043) and 27 of 85 (31,8%) vs 14 of 105 (13,3%), p=0.002], respectively, although it was well tolerated by all individuals and no medical assistance was required, although it was well tolerated by all individuals and no medical assistance was required.

CONCLUSION

The heterologous SpV/Mod combination against SARS-CoV-2 is well tolerated and significantly increases humoral immune response as compared to the homologous SpV/SpV immunization.

Frequency and Nuisance Level of Adverse Events in Individuals Receiving Homologous and Heterologous COVID-19 Booster Vaccine

This study aimed to compare the occurrence and nuisance of adverse events following administration of each COVID-19 vaccine dose between two groups: individuals given three doses of mRNA vaccine (homologous group, 3 × mRNA, n = 252) and those given two doses of adenoviral vector vaccine further boosted with mRNA vaccine (heterologous group, 2 × AZ + 1 × mRNA, n = 205). Although the studied groups differed significantly in the frequency and number of side effects after the first and second vaccine dose, no relevant differences were seen following the booster administration. Arm pain and fatigue were the most common effects, regardless of the vaccination group and vaccine dose. In the homologous group, female sex, lower BMI, and no history of regular influenza vaccination were associated with a higher frequency of side effects of a booster dose. In the heterologous group, the history of COVID-19 was associated with an increased number of side effects seen after a booster. In both groups, the number of side effects related to the first and second dose correlated with the number observed after administration of a booster dose. Individuals receiving a homologous booster reported a higher nuisance of side effects than the heterologous group. It was similar to the level reported after the second dose in both groups. The use of pharmaceuticals to counteract the side effects was more frequent after a first dose in the 2 × AZ + 1 × mRNA group, but higher after second dose in individuals receiving the 3 × mRNA vaccination scheme. The frequency of pharmaceutical use after a booster dose was similar in both groups (approx. 60%). Paracetamol was most frequently chosen, regardless of the group and vaccine dose. In addition, the vast majority of participants (93%) declared to accept future doses of the COVID-19 vaccine if their administration would be recommended. This study provides an overview of the response to homologous and heterologous mRNA vaccine booster dose that may be valuable in shaping accurate and honest communication with vaccinated individuals, especially in those regions which are yet to pursue booster strategies.

Headache onset after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Background

Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to reduce the risk of developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the significant benefits in terms of reduced risk of hospitalization and death, different adverse events may present after vaccination: among them, headache is one of the most common, but nowadays there is no summary presentation of its incidence and no description of its main features.

Methods

We searched PubMed and EMBASE covering the period between January 1^st 2020 and August 6^th, 2021, looking for record in English and with an abstract and using three main search terms (with specific variations): COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination; headache/adverse events. We selected manuscript including information on subjects developing headache after injection, and such information had to be derived from a structured form (i.e. no free reporting). Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Analyses were carried out by vaccine vs. placebo, by first vs. second dose, and by mRNA-based vs. “traditional” vaccines; finally, we addressed the impact of age and gender on post-vaccine headache onset.

Results

Out of 9338 records, 84 papers were included in the review, accounting for 1.57 million participants, 94% of whom received BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Headache was generally the third most common AE: it was detected in 22% (95% CI 18–27%) of subjects after the first dose of vaccine and in 29% (95% CI 23–35%) after the second, with an extreme heterogeneity. Those receiving placebo reported headache in 10–12% of cases. No differences were detected across different vaccines or by mRNA-based vs. “traditional” ones. None of the studies reported information on headache features. A lower prevalence of headache after the first injection of BNT162b2 among older participants was shown.

Conclusions

Our results show that vaccines are associated to a two-fold risk of developing headache within 7 days from injection, and the lack of difference between vaccine types enable to hypothesize that headache is secondary to systemic immunological reaction than to a vaccine-type specific reaction. Some descriptions report onset within the first 24 h and that in around one-third of the cases, headache has migraine-like features with pulsating quality, phono and photophobia; in 40–60% of the cases aggravation with activity is observed. The majority of patients used some medication to treat headache, the one perceived as the most effective being acetylsalicylic acid.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01400-4.

Effect of gender, age and vaccine on reactogenicity and incapacity to work after COVID-19 vaccination: a survey among health care workers

Background

The aim of our study was to assess the impact the impact of gender and age on reactogenicity to three COVID-19 vaccine products: Biontech/Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) and AstraZeneca (ChAdOx). Additional analyses focused on the reduction in working capacity after vaccination and the influence of the time of day when vaccines were administered.

Methods

We conducted a survey on COVID-19 vaccinations and eventual reactions among 73,000 employees of 89 hospitals of the Helios Group. On May 19th, 2021 all employees received an email, inviting all employees who received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 to participate using an attached link. Additionally, the invitation was posted in the group’s intranet page. Participation was voluntary and non-traceable. The survey was closed on June 21st, 2021.

Results

8375 participants reported on 16,727 vaccinations. Reactogenicity was reported after 74.6% of COVID-19 vaccinations. After 23.0% vaccinations the capacity to work was affected. ChAdOx induced impairing reactogenicity mainly after the prime vaccination (70.5%), while mRNA-1273 led to more pronounced reactions after the second dose (71.6%). Heterologous prime-booster vaccinations with ChAdOx followed by either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 were associated with the highest risk for impairment (81.4%). Multivariable analyses identified the factors older age, male gender and vaccine BNT162b as independently associated with lower odds ratio for both, impairing reactogenicity and incapacity to work. In the comparison of vaccine schedules, the heterologous combination ChAdOx + BNT162b or mRNA-1273 was associated with the highest and the homologue prime-booster vaccination with BNT162b with the lowest odds ratios. The time of vaccination had no significant influence.

Conclusions

Around 75% of the COVID-19 vaccinations led to reactogenicity and nearly 25% of them led to one or more days of work loss. Major risk factors were female gender, younger age and the administration of a vaccine other than BNT162b2. When vaccinating a large part of a workforce against COVID-19, especially in professions with a higher proportion of young and women such as health care, employers and employees must be prepared for a noticeable amount of absenteeism. Assuming vaccine effectiveness to be equivalent across the vaccine combinations, to minimize reactogenicity, employees at risk should receive a homologous prime-booster immunisation with BNT162b2.

Trial registration: The study was approved by the Ethic Committee of the Aerztekammer Berlin on May 27th, 2021 (Eth-37/21) and registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS 00025745). The study was supported by the Helios research grant HCRI-ID 2021-0272.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of homologous two-dose ChAdOx1 versus heterologous vaccination with ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2

Small trials have suggested that heterologous vaccination with first-dose ChAdOx1 and second-dose BNT162b2 may generate a better immune response than homologous vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. In this cohort analysis, we use linked data from Catalonia (Spain), where those aged <60 who received a first dose of ChAdOx1 could choose between ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 for their second dose. Comparable cohorts were obtained after exact-matching 14,325/17,849 (80.3%) people receiving heterologous vaccination to 14,325/149,386 (9.6%) receiving homologous vaccination by age, sex, region, and date of second dose. Of these, 464 (3.2%) in the heterologous and 694 (4.8%) in the homologous groups developed COVID-19 between 1st June 2021 and 5th December 2021. The resulting hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) is 0.66 [0.59-0.74], favouring heterologous vaccination. The two groups had similar testing rates and safety outcomes. Sensitivity and negative control outcome analyses confirm these findings. In conclusion, we demonstrate that a heterologous vaccination schedule with ChAdOx1 followed by BNT162b2 was more efficacious than and similarly safe to homologous vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. Most of the infections in our study occurred when Delta was the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in Spain. These data agree with previous phase 2 randomised trials.

Choosing between Homologous or Heterologous COVID-19 Vaccination Regimens: A Cross-Sectional Study among the General Population in Italy

A shortage of COVID-19 vaccines and reports of side-effects led several countries to recommend a heterologous regimen for second vaccine doses. This study aimed to describe the reasons behind individuals’ choices of a homologous or a heterologous second vaccination. This cross-sectional study enrolled individuals under 60 who had received a first dose of Vaxzevria and could choose between a homologous or heterologous regimen for their second dose. Quantitative (socio-demographic, clinical characteristics) and qualitative data were collected and analysed through a generalized linear model and thematic analysis, respectively. Of the 1437 individuals included in the analysis, the majority (76.1%) chose a heterologous second dose of the COVID-19 vaccination. More females chose a heterologous vaccination regimen (p = 0.003). Younger individuals also tended to choose heterologous vaccination (p < 0.001). The main motivation in favour of heterologous vaccination was to follow the Italian Ministry of Health recommendations (n = 118; 53.9%). This study showed that most individuals, mainly younger people and females, chose a heterologous dose of COVID-19 vaccination after their first viral vector vaccine. Heterologous vaccinations could be an effective public health measure to control the pandemic as they are a safe and efficient alternative to homologous regimens.

Effect of Heterologous Vaccination Regimen with Ad5-nCoV CanSinoBio and BNT162b2 Pfizer in SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibodies Titers

The efficacy of one dose Ad5-nCoV has been concerning. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a single dose BNT162b2 in individuals after a completed Ad5-nCoV vaccination regiment compared to a group without this boost measuring SARS-CoV-2 Spike 1−2 IgG antibodies in plasma. This observational study included a subgroup analysis of patients who were immunized with Ad5-nCoV in a northern city of Mexico. During follow-up, some patients self-reported having received a BNT162b2 booster. We report baseline IgG levels, 21−28 days after the Ad5-nCoV dose, three months, and an additional 21−28 days after BNT162b2 (four months after Ad5-nCoV). Seventeen patients, age 40 (16), 52.9% men, were analyzed. We created four groups: G1 and G2 refer to patients without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccinated with Ad5-nCoV and Ad5-nCoV/BNT162b2 (n = 4 and n = 6), respectively; G3 and G4 included patients with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and immunized with Ad5-nCoV and Ad5-nCoV/BNT162b2 (n = 5 and n = 2), respectively. The Ad5-nCoV/BNT162b2 protocol reported higher antibody titers after 21−28 days. Median (IQR) values were: G1 46.7 (-), G2 1077.5 (1901), G3 1158.5 (2673.5), and G4 2090 (-) (p < 0.05). Headache and pain at injection site were the most frequent adverse reactions associated with Ad5-nCoV (n = 10, 83%) and BNT162b2 (n = 5, 83.3%), respectively. Patients receiving BNT162b2 after Ad5-nCoV had higher SARS-CoV-2 spike 1−2 IgG antibody titers and had no severe adverse reactions.

Duration of SARS-CoV-2 Immune Responses Up to Six Months Following Homologous or Heterologous Primary Immunization with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccines

Heterologous primary immunization against SARS-CoV-2 is part of applied recommendations. However, little is known about duration of immune responses after heterologous vaccine regimens. To evaluate duration of immune responses after primary vaccination with homologous adeno-vectored ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (ChAd) or heterologous ChAd/BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (BNT), anti-spike-IgG and SARS-CoV-2 VOC-neutralizing antibody responses were measured in 354 healthcare workers (HCW) at 2 weeks, 3 months, 5 months and 6 months after the second vaccine dose. T-cell responses were investigated using a whole blood interferon gamma (IFN-γ) release assay 2 weeks and 3 months post second vaccine dose. Two hundred and ten HCW immunized with homologous BNT were enrolled for comparison of antibody responses. In study participants naïve to SARS-CoV-2 prior to vaccination, heterologous ChAd/BNT resulted in 6-fold higher peak anti-spike IgG antibody titers compared to homologous ChAd vaccination. The half-life of antibody titers was 3.1 months (95% CI 2.8-3.6) following homologous ChAd vaccination and 1.9 months (95% CI 1.7-2.1) after heterologous vaccination, reducing the GMT difference between the groups to 3-fold 6 months post vaccination. Peak T-cell responses were stronger in ChAd/BNT vaccinees, but no significant difference was observed 3 months post vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to vaccination resulted in substantially higher peak GMTs and IFN-γ levels and enhanced SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody and T cell responses over time. Heterologous primary SARS-CoV-2 immunization with ChAd and BNT elicits a stronger initial immune response compared to homologous vaccination with ChAd. However, although the differences in humoral responses remain over 6 months, the difference in SARS-CoV-2 specific T cell responses are no longer significant three months after vaccination.

Real-world data on immune responses following heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccination schedule with Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines in England

Background

There are limited data on immune responses to heterologous COVID-19 immunisation schedules, especially following an extended ≥12-week interval between doses.

Methods

SARS-CoV-2 infection-naïve and previously-infected adults receiving ChAd-BNT (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, AstraZeneca followed by BNT162b2, Pfizer-BioNTech) or BNT-ChAd as part of the UK national immunisation programme provided blood samples at 30 days and 12 weeks after their second dose. Geometric mean concentrations (GMC) of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S-antibody) and nucleoprotein (N-antibody) IgG antibodies and geometric mean ratios (GMR) were compared with a contemporaneous cohort receiving homologous ChAd-ChAd or BNT-BNT.

Results

During March-October 2021, 75,827 individuals were identified as having received heterologous vaccination, 9,489 invited to participate, 1,836 responded (19.3%) and 656 were eligible. In previously-uninfected adults, S-antibody GMC at 30 days post-second dose were lowest for ChAd-ChAd (862 [95% CI, 694 – 1069]) and significantly higher for ChAd-BNT (6233 [5522–7035]; GMR 6.29; [5.04–7.85]; p<0.001), BNT-ChAd (4776 [4066–5610]; GMR 4.55 [3.56–5.81]; p<0.001) and BNT-BNT (5377 [4596–6289]; GMR 5.66 [4.49–7.15]; p<0.001). By 12 weeks after dose two, S-antibody GMC had declined in all groups and remained significantly lower for ChAd-ChAd compared to ChAd-BNT (GMR 5.12 [3.79–6.92]; p<0.001), BNT-ChAd (GMR 4.1 [2.96–5.69]; p<0.001) and BNT-BNT (GMR 6.06 [4.32–8.50]; p<0.001). Previously infected adults had higher S-antibody GMC compared to infection-naïve adults at all time-points and with all vaccine schedules.

Conclusions

These real-world findings demonstrate heterologous schedules with adenoviral-vector and mRNA vaccines are highly immunogenic and may be recommended after a serious adverse reaction to one vaccine product, or to increase programmatic flexibility where vaccine supplies are constrained.

Duration of Protection against Mild and Severe Disease by Covid-19 Vaccines

BACKGROUND

Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), have been used since December 2020 in the United Kingdom. Real-world data have shown the vaccines to be highly effective against Covid-19 and related severe disease and death. Vaccine effectiveness may wane over time since the receipt of the second dose of the ChAdOx1-S (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and BNT162b2 vaccines.

METHODS

We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 and related hospitalization and death in England. Effectiveness of the ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2 vaccines was assessed according to participant age and status with regard to coexisting conditions and over time since receipt of the second vaccine dose to investigate waning of effectiveness separately for the B.1.1.7 (alpha) and B.1.617.2 (delta) variants.

RESULTS

Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 with the delta variant peaked in the early weeks after receipt of the second dose and then decreased by 20 weeks to 44.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.2 to 45.4) with the ChAdOx1-S vaccine and to 66.3% (95% CI, 65.7 to 66.9) with the BNT162b2 vaccine. Waning of vaccine effectiveness was greater in persons 65 years of age or older than in those 40 to 64 years of age. At 20 weeks or more after vaccination, vaccine effectiveness decreased less against both hospitalization, to 80.0% (95% CI, 76.8 to 82.7) with the ChAdOx1-S vaccine and 91.7% (95% CI, 90.2 to 93.0) with the BNT162b2 vaccine, and death, to 84.8% (95% CI, 76.2 to 90.3) and 91.9% (95% CI, 88.5 to 94.3), respectively. Greater waning in vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization was observed in persons 65 years of age or older in a clinically extremely vulnerable group and in persons 40 to 64 years of age with underlying medical conditions than in healthy adults.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed limited waning in vaccine effectiveness against Covid-19-related hospitalization and death at 20 weeks or more after vaccination with two doses of the ChAdOx1-S or BNT162b2 vaccine. Waning was greater in older adults and in those in a clinical risk group.

Immunogenicity, safety, and reactogenicity of heterologous COVID-19 primary vaccination incorporating mRNA, viral-vector, and protein-adjuvant vaccines in the UK (Com-COV2): a single-blind, randomised, phase 2, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Given the importance of flexible use of different COVID-19 vaccines within the same schedule to facilitate rapid deployment, we studied mixed priming schedules incorporating an adenoviral-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [ChAd], AstraZeneca), two mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 [BNT], Pfizer-BioNTech, and mRNA-1273 [m1273], Moderna) and a nanoparticle vaccine containing SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and Matrix-M adjuvant (NVX-CoV2373 [NVX], Novavax).

METHODS

Com-COV2 is a single-blind, randomised, non-inferiority trial in which adults aged 50 years and older, previously immunised with a single dose of ChAd or BNT in the community, were randomly assigned (in random blocks of three and six) within these cohorts in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive a second dose intramuscularly (8-12 weeks after the first dose) with the homologous vaccine, m1273, or NVX. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of serum SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG concentrations measured by ELISA in heterologous versus homologous schedules at 28 days after the second dose, with a non-inferiority criterion of the GMR above 0·63 for the one-sided 98·75% CI. The primary analysis was on the per-protocol population, who were seronegative at baseline. Safety analyses were done for all participants who received a dose of study vaccine. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 27841311.

FINDINGS

Between April 19 and May 14, 2021, 1072 participants were enrolled at a median of 9·4 weeks after receipt of a single dose of ChAd (n=540, 47% female) or BNT (n=532, 40% female). In ChAd-primed participants, geometric mean concentration (GMC) 28 days after a boost of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG in recipients of ChAd/m1273 (20 114 ELISA laboratory units [ELU]/mL [95% CI 18 160 to 22 279]) and ChAd/NVX (5597 ELU/mL [4756 to 6586]) was non-inferior to that of ChAd/ChAd recipients (1971 ELU/mL [1718 to 2262]) with a GMR of 10·2 (one-sided 98·75% CI 8·4 to ∞) for ChAd/m1273 and 2·8 (2·2 to ∞) for ChAd/NVX, compared with ChAd/ChAd. In BNT-primed participants, non-inferiority was shown for BNT/m1273 (GMC 22 978 ELU/mL [95% CI 20 597 to 25 636]) but not for BNT/NVX (8874 ELU/mL [7391 to 10 654]), compared with BNT/BNT (16 929 ELU/mL [15 025 to 19 075]) with a GMR of 1·3 (one-sided 98·75% CI 1·1 to ∞) for BNT/m1273 and 0·5 (0·4 to ∞) for BNT/NVX, compared with BNT/BNT; however, NVX still induced an 18-fold rise in GMC 28 days after vaccination. There were 15 serious adverse events, none considered related to immunisation.

INTERPRETATION

Heterologous second dosing with m1273, but not NVX, increased transient systemic reactogenicity compared with homologous schedules. Multiple vaccines are appropriate to complete primary immunisation following priming with BNT or ChAd, facilitating rapid vaccine deployment globally and supporting recognition of such schedules for vaccine certification.

FUNDING

UK Vaccine Task Force, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and National Institute for Health Research. NVX vaccine was supplied for use in the trial by Novavax.

Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity of the Pfizer and AstraZeneca COVID-19 Vaccines

Background

The relationships of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination with reactogenicity and the humoral immune response are important to study. The current study aimed to assess the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of the Pfizer and AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines among adults in Madinah, Saudi Arabia.

Methods

A cross-sectional study, including 365 randomly selected adult Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine recipients who received a homologous prime-boost vaccination between February 1st and June 30th, 2021. Data of height and weight were collected to assess the weight status of percipients. An evaluation of seropositivity for anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies was assessed using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

Results

Among the participants, 69% (n = 250) reported at least one vaccine-related symptom. Pain at the injection site was the most frequently reported vaccine-related symptom. The mean total score for vaccine-related symptoms was significantly higher among participants who received the AstraZeneca vaccine, women, and participants with no previous COVID-19 infection (p < 0.05). Spike-specific IgG antibodies were detected in 98.9% of participants after the receipt of two vaccine doses, including 99.5% of Pfizer vaccine recipients and 98.3% of AstraZeneca vaccine recipients. Significantly, higher proportions of participants in the <35-year age group developed a humoral immune response after the first vaccine dose compared with the participants in other age groups.

Conclusion

Participants who received the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine reported fewer vaccine-related complications compared with those who received the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, but no serious side effects were reported in response to either vaccine. Health status and age were factors that may influence COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness for the generation of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

Predictors of Humoral Response to mRNA COVID19 Vaccines in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Longitudinal Study-The COViNEPH Project

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among kidney transplant recipients (KTR) is low. The main goal of this study was to analyze factors that may influence the humoral response to vaccination.

METHODS

We analyzed the titer magnitude of IgG antibodies directed against spike (S)-SARS-CoV-2 antigen after the second dose of the mRNA vaccine in 142 infection naïve KTR (83 men, i.e., 58.4%) with a median age (IQR) of 54 (41-63), and 36 respective controls without chronic kidney disease. mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 were applied in 26% and 74% of KTR, respectively.

RESULTS

S-specific immune response (seroconversion) was seen in 73 (51.41%) of KTR, and in all controls 36 (100%). Independent predictors of no response were elder age, shorter transplantation vintage, and a more than two-drug immunosuppressive protocol. In subgroup analyses, the seroconversion rate was highest among KTR without MMF/MPS treatment (70%), treated with no more than two immunosuppressants (69.2%), treated without corticosteroid (66.7%), younger patients aged <54 years (63.2%), and those vaccinated with the mRNA-1273 vaccine (62.16%). The independent predictors of higher S-antibody titer among responders were younger age, treatment with no more than two immunosuppressants, and the mRNA-1273 vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirmed a low rate of seroconversion after vaccination with the mRNA vaccine in KTR. The major modifiable determinants of humoral response were the composition of the immunosuppressive protocol, as well as the type of vaccine. The latter could be taken into consideration when initial vaccination as well as booster vaccination is considered in KTR.

Reactogenicity following two doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine: Real-world evidence from healthcare workers in Japan

As the first authorized COVID-19 vaccine in Japan, the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is utilized for mass vaccination. Although efficacy has been proved, real-world evidence on reactogenicity in Japanese personnel is needed to prepare the public. Healthcare workers in a large academic hospital in Japan received two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine from March 17 to May 19, 2021. Online questionnaires were distributed to registered recipients following each dose, from day 0 through day 8. Primary outcomes are the frequency of reactogenicity including local and systemic reactions. Length of absence from work was also analyzed. Most recipients self-reported reactogenicity after the first dose (97.3%; n = 3254; mean age [36.4]) and after the second dose (97.2%; n = 3165; mean age [36.5]). Systemic reactions following the second dose were substantially higher than the first dose, especially for fever (OR, 27.38; 95% CI, [22.00–34.06]; p < 0.001), chills (OR, 16.49; 95% CI, [13.53–20.11]; p < 0.001), joint pain (OR, 8.49; 95% CI, [7.21–9.99]; p < 0.001), fatigue (OR, 7.18; 95% CI, [6.43–8.02]; p < 0.001) and headache (OR, 5.43; 95% CI, [4.80–6.14]; p < 0.001). Reactogenicity was more commonly seen in young, female groups. 19.3% of participants took days off from work after the second dose (2.2% after the first dose), with 4.7% absent for more than two days. Although most participants reported reactogenicity, severe cases were limited. This study provides real-world evidence for the general population and organizations to prepare for BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in Japan and other countries in the region.

Immune Responses against SARS-CoV-2-Questions and Experiences

Understanding immune reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 is essential for coping with the COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, we discuss experiences and open questions about the complex immune responses to SARS-CoV-2. Some people react excellently without experiencing any clinical symptoms, they do not get sick, and they do not pass the virus on to anyone else ("sterilizing" immunity). Others produce antibodies and do not get COVID-19 but transmit the virus to others ("protective" immunity). Some people get sick but recover. A varying percentage develops respiratory failure, systemic symptoms, clotting disorders, cytokine storms, or multi-organ failure; they subsequently decease. Some develop long COVID, a new pathologic entity similar to fatigue syndrome or autoimmunity. In reality, COVID-19 is considered more of a systemic immune-vascular disease than a pulmonic disease, involving many tissues and the central nervous system. To fully comprehend the complex clinical manifestations, a profound understanding of the immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 is a good way to improve clinical management of COVID-19. Although neutralizing antibodies are an established approach to recognize an immune status, cellular immunity plays at least an equivalent or an even more important role. However, reliable methods to estimate the SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell capacity are not available for clinical routines. This deficit is important because an unknown percentage of people may exist with good memory T cell responsibility but a low number of or completely lacking peripheral antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Apart from natural immune responses, vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 turned out to be very effective and much safer than naturally acquired immunity. Nevertheless, besides unwanted side effects of the currently available vector and mRNA preparations, concerns remain whether these vaccines will be strong enough to defeat the pandemic. Altogether, herein we discuss important questions, and try to give answers based on the current knowledge and preliminary data from our laboratories.