RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Safety and Immunogenicity of CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 Against the SARS-CoV-2 Circulating Variants of Concern (Alpha, Delta, Beta) in Thai Healthcare Workers
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.10.03.21264451
DO 10.1101/2021.10.03.21264451
A1 Angkasekwinai, Nasikarn
A1 Sewatanon, Jaturong
A1 Niyomnaitham, Suvimol
A1 Phumiamorn, Supaporn
A1 Sukapirom, Kasama
A1 Sapsutthipas, Sompong
A1 Sirijatuphat, Rujipas
A1 Wittawatmongkol, Orasri
A1 Senawong, Sansnee
A1 Mahasirimongkol, Surakameth
A1 Trisiriwanich, Sakalin
A1 Chokephaibulkit, Kulkanya
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/07/2021.10.03.21264451.abstract
AB Importance Inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac) and chimpanzee adenovirus-vector vaccine (ChAdOx1) have been more available in resource-limited settings. However, the data comparing between these two vaccines in the same setting are limited.Objectives To determine adverse events (AEs) and immunogenicity of CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 in health care workers (HCWs).Design This prospective study was conducted from February to July 2021.Setting A single center, university-based tertiary care center in Bangkok.Participants Healthy HCWs.Exposure Two doses of CoronaVac (4 weeks apart) or ChAdOx1 (8 weeks apart) intramuscularly.Main Outcomes and Measures Self-reported AEs were collected for 7 days following each vaccination using electronic diary. The immunogenicity was determined by the level of IgG antibodies against receptor binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S1 subunit). The 50% plaque reduction neutralization tests against original Wuhan strain and circulating VOCs were performed in subset of samples at 2 weeks after the second dose.Results Of the 360 HCWs, 180 received each vaccine. The median (interquartile range: IQR) age was 35 (29-44) years old and 84.2% were female. Participants who received ChAdOx1 reported higher frequency of AEs than those received CoronaVac after both the first dose (84.4% vs. 66.1%, P < 0.001) and second dose (75.6% vs. 60.6%, P = 0.002), with more AEs in those younger than 30 years of age for both vaccines. The seroconversion rate was 75.6% and 100% following the first dose of CoronaVac and ChAdOx1, respectively. All participants seroconverted at 2 weeks after the second dose. The anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG levels induced by CoronaVac was lower than ChAdOX1 with geometric means of 164.4 and 278.5 BAU/mL, respectively (P = 0.0066). Both vaccines induced similar levels of neutralizing antibodies against the Wuhan strain, geometric mean titer (GMT) of 337.4 vs 331.2; however, CoronaVac induced significantly lower GMT against Alpha (23.1 vs. 92.5), Delta (21.2 vs. 69.7), and Beta (10.2 vs. 43.6) variants, respectively.Conclusions and Relevance CoronaVac induces lower measurable antibodies but with lower frequency of AEs than ChAdOx1. The low neutralizing antibodies against the circulating VOCs induced by CoronaVac supports the need for earlier boosting to prevent breakthrough infections.Trial Registration TCTR20210720002 https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/Question What is the difference between CoronaVac and ChAdOx1 vaccines on safety and immunogenicity against the circulating variants of concern (VOCs) in the same setting?Findings This prospective study in 360 healthy health care workers reported higher frequency of adverse events following ChAdOx1 than CoronaVac particularly in those younger than 30 years old. The ChAdOx1 induced 3.3-4.3 times higher neutralising antibodies against VOCs than CoronaVac.Meaning The 2-dose CoronaVac vaccination induced significantly lower level of neutralizing antibody against the circulating VOCs. An earlier booster may be needed to prevent breakthrough infection.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialTCTR20210720002 https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/Funding StatementThis study was supported by the National Research Council of Thailand and Abbott Laboratories Ltd. supported the reagents for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG and anti-SARS-CoV-2 NP IgG in this study.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was approved by the Siriraj Institutional Review Board (COA no. Si 171/2021).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesNot Available