Comparison of the immunogenicity of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac COVID ‐19 vaccines in Hong Kong
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background and objective
Few head‐to‐head evaluations of immune responses to different vaccines have been reported.
Methods
Surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) antibody levels of adults receiving either two doses of BNT162b2 ( n = 366) or CoronaVac ( n = 360) vaccines in Hong Kong were determined. An age‐matched subgroup (BNT162b2 [ n = 49] vs. CoronaVac [ n = 49]) was tested for plaque reduction neutralization (PRNT) and spike‐binding antibody and T‐cell reactivity in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.
Results
One month after the second dose of vaccine, BNT162b2 elicited significantly higher PRNT 50 , PRNT 90 , sVNT, spike receptor binding, spike N‐terminal domain binding, spike S2 domain binding, spike FcR binding and antibody avidity levels than CoronaVac. The geometric mean PRNT 50 titres in those vaccinated with BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccines were 251.6 and 69.45, while PRNT 90 titres were 98.91 and 16.57, respectively. All of those vaccinated with BNT162b2 and 45 (91.8%) of 49 vaccinated with CoronaVac achieved the 50% protection threshold for PRNT 90. Allowing for an expected seven‐fold waning of antibody titres over 6 months for those receiving CoronaVac, only 16.3% would meet the 50% protection threshold versus 79.6% of BNT162b2 vaccinees. Age was negatively correlated with PRNT 90 antibody titres. Both vaccines induced SARS‐CoV‐2‐specific CD4 + and CD8 + T‐cell responses at 1 month post‐vaccination but CoronaVac elicited significantly higher structural protein‐specific CD4 + and CD8 + T‐cell responses.
Conclusion
Vaccination with BNT162b2 induces stronger humoral responses than CoronaVac. CoronaVac induces higher CD4 + and CD8 + T‐cell responses to the structural protein than BNT162b2.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265635: (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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:There were some limitations in our study. The choice of vaccine was not randomized and there might be a selection bias in those opting for each vaccine. Our study only focused on investigating the immunogenicity at 1 month after two doses of vaccination. …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265635: (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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:There were some limitations in our study. The choice of vaccine was not randomized and there might be a selection bias in those opting for each vaccine. Our study only focused on investigating the immunogenicity at 1 month after two doses of vaccination. The durability of immune responses needs to be monitored; and indeed, this cohort will be followed up to address this question in the coming years. Our estimates to adjust for antibody waning was based on reports on CoronaVac, comparable to data for BioNTech was lacking. Thus our assumption of comparable rates of antibody waning for the two vaccines may not be correct. We did not collect plasma prior to the second dose of vaccine to assess the effect of the first dose of the vaccine, or acute phase responses, where earlier responses may account for the final post vaccine differences as our primary study endpoint was neuralization titers after vaccination. Similar comparisons between vaccines in teenagers and older adults will be needed.
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.
-