Humoral and Cellular Immune Responses Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Variants and Human Coronaviruses After Single BNT162b2 Vaccination

  1. Metodi V Stankov
  2. Anne Cossmann
  3. Agnes Bonifacius
  4. Alexandra Dopfer-Jablonka
  5. Gema Morillas Ramos
  6. Nina Gödecke
  7. Anna Zychlinsky Scharff
  8. Christine Happle
  9. Anna-Lena Boeck
  10. Anh Thu Tran
  11. Isabell Pink
  12. Marius M Hoeper
  13. Rainer Blasczyk
  14. Martin S Winkler
  15. Inga Nehlmeier
  16. Amy Kempf
  17. Heike Hofmann-Winkler
  18. Markus Hoffmann
  19. Britta Eiz-Vesper
  20. Stefan Pöhlmann
  21. Georg M N Behrens

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies are key in combating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, delays of boost immunization due to limited availability of vaccines may leave individuals vulnerable to infection and prolonged or severe disease courses. The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOC)—B.1.1.7 (United Kingdom), B.1.351 (South Africa), and P.1 (Brazil)—may exacerbate this issue, as the latter two are able to evade control by antibodies.

Methods

We assessed humoral and T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type (WT), VOC, and endemic human coronaviruses (hCoVs) that were induced after single and double vaccination with BNT162b2.

Results

Despite readily detectable immunoglobulin G (IgG) against the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein at day 14 after a single vaccination, inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 S-driven host cell entry was weak and particularly low for the B.1.351 variant. Frequencies of SARS-CoV-2 WT and VOC-specific T cells were low in many vaccinees after application of a single dose and influenced by immunity against endemic hCoV. The second vaccination significantly boosted T-cell frequencies reactive for WT and B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants.

Conclusions

These results call into question whether neutralizing antibodies significantly contribute to protection against COVID-19 upon single vaccination and suggest that cellular immunity is central for the early defenses against COVID-19.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1093/cid/ciab555
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.16.21255412: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: Study approval: The study was approved by the Internal Review Board of Hannover Medical School (MHH, approval number 3639_2017, 8973_BO-K_2020, 9226_BO_K_2020, 9255_BO_K_2020, 9459_BO_K_2020) and University Medicine Göttingen (approval number SeptImmun Study 25/4/19 Ü).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    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 10.1101/2021.04.16.21255412 on medRxiv