Reduced sera neutralization to Omicron SARS-CoV-2 by both inactivated and protein subunit vaccines and the convalescents
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Omicron variant continues to spread all over the world. There are lots of scientific questions remaining to be answered for such a devastating variant. There are a dozen of vaccines already in clinical use. The very urgent scientific question would be whether or not these vaccines can protect Omicron variant. Here, we tested the sera from both convalescents and vaccine recipients receiving either inactivated or protein subunits vaccines (CoronaVac from Sinovac, or BBIBP-CoV from Sinopharm, or ZF2001 from Zhifei longcom) for the binding antibody titers (ELISA) and neutralization antibodies titers (pseudovirus neutralization assay). We showed that Omicron do have severe immune escape in convalescents, with 15 of 16 were negative in neutralization. By contrast, in vaccinees who received three jabs of inactivated or protein subunit vaccine, the neutralizing activity was much better preserved. Especially in the ZF2001 group with an extended period of the second and third jab (4-6 months) remains 100% positive in Omicron neutralization, with only 3.1-folds reduction in neutralizing antibody (NAb) titer. In this case, we proposed that, the multi-boost strategy with an extended interval between the second and third jab for immune maturation would be beneficial for NAb against devastating variants such as Omicron.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.16.472391: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not 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: …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.16.472391: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not 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.
- No funding statement was detected.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-