Abstract
The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages resulted in drastically increased transmission rates and reduced protection from vaccine-induced immunity. To counteract these effects, multiple booster strategies were used in different countries, although data comparing their efficiency in improving protective immunity remains sparse, especially among vulnerable populations, including older adults. The inactivated CoronaVac vaccine was among the most widely distributed worldwide, particularly in China, and South America. However, whether homologous versus heterologous booster doses in those fully vaccinated with CoronaVac induce distinct humoral responses and whether these responses vary across age groups remain unknown. We analyzed plasma antibody responses from CoronaVac-vaccinated younger or older individuals in central and south America that received a homologous CoronaVac or heterologous BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 booster vaccines. We found that both IgG levels against SARS-CoV-2 spike or RBD, as well as neutralization titers against Omicron sublineages, were substantially reduced in participants that received homologous CoronaVac when compared to heterologous BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 booster. This effect was specifically prominent in recipients older than 50 years of age. In this group, CoronaVac booster induced low virus-specific IgG levels and failed to elevate their neutralization titers against any omicron sublineage. Our results point to significant inefficiency in mounting protective anti-viral humoral immunity in those who were primed with CoronaVac followed by CoronaVac booster, particularly among older adults, urging a heterologous regimen in high-risk populations fully vaccinated with CoronaVac.
One Sentence Summary Homologous CoronaVac boosters do not improve neutralization responses against current VOCs in older adults in contrast to heterologous regimens.
Competing Interest Statement
A.I. serves as a consultant for RIGImmune, Xanadu and Revelar Biotherapeutics. B.A.F. had lecture fees and sponsored travel by AstraZeneca. L.E.R.Z. served in the advisor board for Zodiac and had lecture fees by AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, Astellas. N.D.G. is a consultant for Tempus Labs to develop infectious disease diagnostic assays. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Funding Statement
AstraZeneca Externally sponsored scientific research program: Brazilian clinical cohort set-up team. Women Health Research at Yale Pilot Project Program: AI. Fast Grant from Emergent Ventures at the Mercatus Center: AI and NDG. Mathers Foundation, and the Ludwig Family Foundation, the Department of Internal Medicine at the Yale School of Medicine, Yale School of Public Health and the Beatrice Kleinberg Neuwirth Fund Howard Hughes Medical Institute: AI. CAPES-YALE fellowship: VSM.
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:
Ethics statement: This study was approved by the National Research Bioethics Committee of Brazil (CONEP, CAAE 50457721.9.0000.0175) and National Bioethics Committee of the Dominican Republic (CONABIOS). The participants received two doses of the inactivated whole-virion vaccine CoronaVac followed by a single BNT162b2, ChAdOx-S, or CoronaVac booster dose. The interval between the second dose of CoronaVac and booster shot was at least four weeks. The Brazilian cohort received ChAdOx1-S and CoronaVac boosters, that were administrated between November 27, 2021 and February 03, 2022. The Dominican Republic received two doses of CoronaVac followed by the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 booster, that was administrated between July 30 and August 27, 2021. Informed consent was obtained from all enrolled vaccinated individuals. None of the participants experienced serious adverse effects after vaccination.
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.
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
All the background information of participants and data generated in this study are included in Source Data Figure1. The genome information and aligned consensus genomes for SARS-CoV-2 variants used in this study are available on NCBI (GenBank Accession numbers: ancestral lineage A MZ468053, Delta MZ468047, Omicron (BA.1) OL965559, Omicron (BA.2.12.1) ON411581, Omicron (XAF) OP031604, Omicron (BA.5) OP031606). Additional correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to the corresponding authors.