Immunogenicity of a third dose viral-vectored COVID-19 vaccine after receiving two-dose inactivated vaccines in healthy adults

  1. Ritthideach Yorsaeng
  2. Nungruthai Suntronwong
  3. Harit Phowatthanasathian
  4. Suvichada Assawakosri
  5. Sitthichai Kanokudom
  6. Thanunrat Thongmee
  7. Preeyaporn Vichaiwattana
  8. Chompoonut Auphimai
  9. Lakkhana Wongsrisang
  10. Donchida Srimuan
  11. Thaksaporn Thatsanatorn
  12. Sirapa Klinfueng
  13. Natthinee Sudhinaraset
  14. Nasamon Wanlapakorn
  15. Yong Poovorawan

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.11.083
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.16.21263692: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The study protocols were approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Faculty of Medicine of Chulalongkorn University (IRB numbers 192/64 and 546/64).
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    To quantify only IgG specific to the RBD, we utilized SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay (Abbott Diagnostics, Abbott Park, Ill) according to the manufacturer’s instruction.
    Abbott
    suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)
    Statistical analysis was done using Prism 8.0 (GraphPad, San Diego, CA).
    Prism
    suggested: (PRISM, RRID:SCR_005375)
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study had a few noteworthy limitations. First, only immunological data was collected and therefore this investigation lacks information regarding the efficacy of a heterologous third AZD1222 vaccination. Second, demographic data collected highlighted a gender disparity with a large majority of female participants in the booster group. Additionally, a difference in the average age between groups was noted between homologous and the three-dose regimen. Lastly, a cell-mediated response was not examined. Only a humoral response was investigated, accounting for a portion of an immunological response to vaccination. In conclusion, a three-dose heterologous regimen, two initial CoronaVac followed with a third AZD1222 vaccine, indicated a strong immunological response. Additional research into age-related efficacy, vaccination timing, and cell-mediated response, and effectiveness data should be considered for a comprehensive understanding of the benefit of this vaccine schedule. Further investigations into the vaccine-induced protection against SARS-CoV-2 emerging variants and their impact on this vaccination regimen’s effectiveness are to be further investigated.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.09.16.21263692v1 on medRxiv