Third dose vaccine With BNT162b2 and its response on Long COVID after Breakthrough infections

  1. Ashraful Hoque
  2. Md Marufur Rahman
  3. Hossain Imam
  4. Nurun Nahar
  5. Forhad Uddin Hasan Chowdhury

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Breakthrough events are not rare after emerging of Delta variant. On the other hand, long COVID is an unsolved issue where sufferers suffer a lot. Some study has shown that COVID-19 vaccine has improved some clinical and libratory parameters in long COVID. But what will be the possible measures against long COVID after the breakthrough event is still a burning question.

Method

We have observed the third dose by BNT162b2 in a small group(n=20) who were diagnosed as long COVID after breakthrough infections, in Sheikh Hasina National Institute of Burn & Plastic Surgery Institute, Dhaka, Bangladesh. CRP(C-reactive protein) and Anti S1 RBD IgG responses were measured.

Result

All 20 participants in the study received both dosage of “ChAdOx1-nCoV-19” in between February 2021 to April 2021 and had breakthrough infection in the same or following month which led to long COVID syndrome. They all received a third dose of “BNT162b2”. A before and after 3 rd dose (14 days after) CRP from participants serum was measured. A Wilcoxon matched paired signed rank test revealed significant (P value <0.05) reduction of inflammatory marker (CRP) after receiving the 3 rd vaccine dose. Pre and post 3 rd dose quantitative anti S1-RBD IgG response was measured and compared that revealed significant boosting effect that clearly correlates with the CRP response.

Conclusion

Coverage of vaccines all over the world is still not expected level to control this pandemic. WHO has not recommended the use of a third/booster dose of COVID vaccines. Though our results show some sort of hope for the long COVID in breakthrough events after getting the third dose more study is needed to conclude this issue.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.08.21266037: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Committee of the Sheikh Hasina National Institute of Burnand Plastic Surgery, Dhaka (approval memo number: SHNIBPS/July-14(09)).
    Consent: Informed written consent was taken from each participant.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Serological testing for CRP was done by Invitrogen CRP Human ELISA kit by ThermoFisher Scientific and antibodies to the RBD of the S1 subunit of the viral spike protein (IgG) was performed from the plasma samples using a commercially available Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kit(Diasino, China) as per instruction supplied by the manufacturer after getting the third dose by BNT162b2.
    viral spike protein (IgG
    suggested: None
    Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kit(Diasino
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    The analysis was performed in Graphpad Prism 9.0.
    Graphpad Prism
    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:
    Limitations and Future Suggestions: This short sample size cannot produce generalizability. Therefore, subsequent clinical studies with larger sample sizes with different age group should be enclosed to confirm our findings.

    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.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • 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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.11.08.21266037v1 on medRxiv