Abstract
Background Vaccines remain the cornerstone for containing the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. mRNA vaccines provide protection in clinical trials using a two-dose approach, separated by a three to four week gap. UK policy in 2021 is to extend the dosing interval from three to twelve weeks and other countries are likely to follow suit given the demand for mRNA vaccines and ongoing uncontrolled transmission. There is a paucity of data in the elderly, even though these individuals are the first to receive vaccines due to risk of severe disease. Here we assessed real world immune responses following vaccination with mRNA-based vaccine BNT162b2.
Methods We did a prospective cohort study of 101 individuals presenting for first dose vaccination, with a subset having the second dose. Following the first and second doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine, we measured binding antibody (IgA, IgG and IgG1-4) responses to Spike and Spike RBD, serum neutralising antibody responses to wild type (Wuhan-1 with D614G) and the B.1.1.7 Spike variant using a lentiviral pseudotyping system. We also analysed B cell repertoires and autoantibodies were measured. We measured spike specific IFNγ and IL-2 T cell responses and CMV serostatus. We correlated age with immune responses and compared responses after the first and second doses.
Results Median age was 81 years amongst 101 participants after the first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Geometric mean neutralisation titres in participants over 80 years old after the first dose were lower than in younger individuals [83.4 (95% CI 52.0-133.7) vs 46.6 (95% CI 33.5-64.8) p 0.01]. A lower proportion of participants 80 years and older achieved adequate neutralisation titre of >1:20 for 50% neutralisation as compared to those under 80 (21% vs 51%, p 0.003). Binding IgG responses correlated with neutralisation. Sera from participants in both age groups showed significantly lower neutralisation potency against B.1.1.7 Spike pseudotyped viruses as compared to wild type. The adjusted ORs for inadequate neutralisation in the 80 years and above age group were 3.7 (95% CI 1.2-11.2) and 4.4 (95% CI 1.5-12.6) against wild type and B.1.1.7 pseudotyped viruses. We observed a trend towards lower somatic hypermutation in participants with suboptimal neutralisation, and elderly participants demonstrated clear reduction in class switched somatic hypermutation, driven by the IgA1/2 isotype. SARS-CoV-2 Spike specific T-cell IFNγ and IL-2 responses were impaired in the older age group after 1 dose and although IFNγ increased between vaccine doses, IL-2 responses did not significantly increase.
Conclusions There was a significantly higher risk of suboptimal neutralising antibody and T cell response following first dose vaccination with BNT162b2 in half of participants above the age of 80, persisting up to 12 weeks. We caution against extending the dosing interval in this high risk population where B.1.1.7 and other variants of concern are circulating.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
NIHR Bioresource
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the East of England Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee (17EE0025). PBMC from unexposed volunteers previously recruited by the NIHR BioResource Centre Cambridge through the ARIA study (2014-2016), with ethical approval from the Cambridge Human Biology Research Ethics Committee (HBREC.2014.07) and currently North of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 1 (NS/17/0110).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
larger numbers, T cell data expanded. autoantibody data, BCR repertoire data
Data Availability
Data are available on request from the corresponding author
