ABSTRACT
Background Attenuated immune responses to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been reported in solid organ transplant recipients. Most studies have assessed serological responses alone, and there is limited immunological data on vector-based vaccines in this population. This study compares the immunogenicity of BNT162b2 with ChAdOx1 in a cohort of kidney transplant patients, assessing both serological and cellular responses.
Methods 920 patients were screened for spike protein antibodies (anti-S) following 2 doses of either BNT162b2 (n=490) or ChAdOx1 (n=430). 106 patients underwent assessment with T-cell ELISpot assays. 65 health care workers were used as a control group.
Results Anti-S was detected in 569 (61.8%) patients. Seroconversion rates in infection-naïve patients who received BNT162b2 were higher compared with ChAdOx1, at 269/410 (65.6%) and 156/358 (43.6%) respectively, p<0.0001. Anti-S concentrations were higher following BNT162b, 58(7.1-722) BAU/ml, compared with ChAdOx1, 7.1(7.1-39) BAU/ml, p<0.0001. Calcineurin inhibitor monotherapy, vaccination occurring >1st year post-transplant and receiving BNT162b2 was associated with seroconversion.
Only 28/106 (26.4%) of patients had detectable T-cell responses. There was no difference in detection between infection-naïve patients who received BNT162b2, 7/40 (17.5%), versus ChAdOx1, 2/39 (5.1%), p=0.15. There was also no difference in patients with prior infection who received BNT162b2, 8/11 (72.7%), compared with ChAdOx1, 11/16 (68.8%), p=0.83.
Conclusions Enhanced humoral responses were seen with BNT162b2 compared with ChAdOx1 in kidney transplant patients. T-cell responses to both vaccines were markedly attenuated. Clinical efficacy data is still required but immunogenicity data suggests weakened responses to both vaccines in transplant patients, with ChAdOx1 less immunogenic compared with BNT162b2.
Competing Interest Statement
Peter Kelleher and Michelle Willicombe have received support to use the T-SPOT Discovery SARS-CoV-2 by Oxford Immunotec
Funding Statement
The OCTAVE trial, which is part of the COVID-19 Immunity National Core Study Programme, was sponsored by the University of Birmingham and funded by a grant from UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) administered by the Medical Research Council (grant reference number MC_PC_20031). It has been designated an Urgent Public Health (UPH) study by the National Institute of Health Research. This research is also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust and Imperial College London. The authors would like to thank the West London Kidney Patient Association, all the patients and staff at ICHNT (The Imperial COVID vaccine group and dialysis staff, and staff within the North West London Pathology laboratories). The authors are also grateful for the support from Hari and Rachna Murgai, The Nan Diamond Fund and the Auchi Charitable Foundation. MP is supported by an NIHR clinical lectureship.
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:
All patients were recruited into one of two studies. The first is the OCTAVE study, an Observational Cohort Study of T-cells, Antibodies and Vaccine Efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 in people with chronic diseases and/or secondary immunodeficiency, which is part of the UK COVID-19 Immunity National Core Study Programme. The OCTAVE study was approved by the Health Research Authority, Research Ethics Committee (Reference:21/HRA/0489). The second study is a prospective longitudinal study, The effect of COVID-19 on Renal and Immunosuppressed patients, sponsored by Imperial College London. This study was approved by the Health Research Authority, Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 20/WA/0123).
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
Data Availability
The data is not openly available on an external link. Requests for data should be made to the corresponding author.
