Virus World
379.8K views | +0 today
Follow
Virus World
Virus World provides a daily blog of the latest news in the Virology field and the COVID-19 pandemic. News on new antiviral drugs, vaccines, diagnostic tests, viral outbreaks, novel viruses and milestone discoveries are curated by expert virologists. Highlighted news include trending and most cited scientific articles in these fields with links to the original publications. Stay up-to-date with the most exciting discoveries in the virus world and the last therapies for COVID-19 without spending hours browsing news and scientific publications. Additional comments by experts on the topics are available in Linkedin (https://www.linkedin.com/in/juanlama/detail/recent-activity/)
Curated by Juan Lama
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Juan Lama
Scoop.it!

Durability of Bivalent Boosters against Omicron Subvariants

Durability of Bivalent Boosters against Omicron Subvariants | Virus World | Scoop.it

On September 1, 2022, the Moderna and Pfizer–BioNTech bivalent vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) containing equal amounts of spike messenger RNA from the ancestral and omicron BA.4–BA.5 subvariants replaced their monovalent counterparts as booster doses for persons who are 12 years of age or older in the United States. We previously reported surveillance data from North Carolina on the effectiveness of these two bivalent boosters against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) during the first 3 months after deployment (September 1 to December 8, 2022); the BA.4–BA.5 subvariants were predominant during the first 2.5 months of this period.1 Here, we present two additional months of data that were obtained during a period when the omicron BQ.1–BQ.1.1 and XBB–XBB.1.5 subvariants had become predominant to show the durability of protection conferred by these two bivalent boosters against a wider range of clinical outcomes than were included in our previous report. The data sources and study design have been described previously,1-3 and updated information is provided in the Methods section of the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org. The current study used data regarding booster doses and clinical outcomes from September 1, 2022, to February 10, 2023, for all North Carolina residents who were 12 years of age or older. During this period, a total of 6,306,311 residents were eligible to receive bivalent boosters; of these residents, 1,279,802 received the injections. A total of 19,462 of the 154,581 SARS-CoV-2 infections, 253 of the 2208 Covid-19–related hospitalizations, and 79 of the 867 Covid-19–related deaths occurred after receipt of the bivalent booster (Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix).

 

We considered four outcome measures: infection, severe infection resulting in hospitalization, severe infection resulting in hospitalization or death, and severe infection resulting in death. We fit the Cox regression model with a time-varying hazard ratio for severe infection and fit the proportional-rates model with a time-varying rate ratio for recurrent infection for each additional booster dose that was received (i.e., first booster vs. primary vaccination, second booster vs. first booster, or third booster vs. second booster); all measures were adjusted for the baseline characteristics shown in Table S1. We estimated the booster effectiveness on a particular day as 1 minus the hazard ratio or rate ratio on that day multiplied by 100%. 

 

Effectiveness against severe infection resulting in hospitalization was slightly lower, and effectiveness against infection was much lower. The effectiveness against severe infection resulting in death was the highest despite uncertainty because of the small number of events. We also analyzed the data separately for participants who received bivalent boosters before November 1, 2022 (when the BA.4–BA.5 subvariants were predominant) and after November 1, 2022 (when the BQ.1–BQ.1.1 subvariants were more prevalent and then were gradually replaced by the XBB–XBB.1.5 subvariants). The results are shown in the right column of Figure 1 and in Tables S3 and S4. The effectiveness was broadly similar between the two booster cohorts. Finally, we performed subgroup analyses according to the participant’s age and previous infection status and according to the manufacturers of the bivalent vaccine and the previous vaccine. Effectiveness against infection was higher for the Moderna bivalent vaccine than for the Pfizer–BioNTech bivalent vaccine and higher among previously infected participants than among those with no previous infection (Fig. S1).

The two types of bivalent boosters were associated with an additional reduction in the incidence of omicron infection among participants who had previously been vaccinated or boosted. Although the two bivalent vaccines were designed to target the BA.4–BA.5 subvariants, they were also associated with a lower risk of infection or severe infection with the BQ.1–BQ.1.1 and XBB–XBB.1.5 subvariants. The effectiveness was higher against hospitalization and death than against infection and waned gradually from its peak over time.

 

Published in NEJM (April 12, 2023):

https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2302462 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Juan Lama
Scoop.it!

mRNA Bivalent Booster Enhances Neutralization Against BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1 | bioRxiv

mRNA Bivalent Booster Enhances Neutralization Against BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1 | bioRxiv | Virus World | Scoop.it

The emergence of the highly divergent SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has jeopardized the efficacy of vaccines based on the ancestral spike. The bivalent COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccine within the United States is comprised of the ancestral and the Omicron BA.5 spike. Since its approval and distribution, additional Omicron subvariants have been identified with key mutations within the spike protein receptor binding domain that are predicted to escape vaccine sera. Of particular concern is the R346T mutation which has arisen in multiple subvariants, including BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1.

 

Using a live virus neutralization assay, we evaluated serum samples from individuals who had received either one or two monovalent boosters or the bivalent booster to determine neutralizing activity against wild-type (WA1/2020) virus and Omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.5, BA.2.75.2, and BQ.1.1. In the one monovalent booster cohort, relative to WA1/2020, we observed a reduction in neutralization titers of 9-15-fold against BA.1 and BA.5 and 28-39-fold against BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1. In the BA.5-containing bivalent booster cohort, the neutralizing activity improved against all the Omicron subvariants. Relative to WA1/2020, we observed a reduction in neutralization titers of 3.7- and 4-fold against BA.1 and BA.5, respectively, and 11.5- and 21-fold against BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1, respectively. These data suggest that the bivalent mRNA booster vaccine broadens humoral immunity against the Omicron subvariants.

 

Preprint in bioRxiv (Nov. 1, 2022):

 https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.10.31.514636 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Juan Lama
Scoop.it!

Antibody Responses to Omicron BA.4/BA.5 Bivalent mRNA Vaccine Booster Shot | bioRxiv

Antibody Responses to Omicron BA.4/BA.5 Bivalent mRNA Vaccine Booster Shot | bioRxiv | Virus World | Scoop.it

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant and its numerous sub-lineages have exhibited a striking ability to evade humoral immune responses induced by prior vaccination or infection. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently granted Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) to new bivalent formulations of the original Moderna and Pfizer mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines that target both the ancestral strain as well as the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 variant. Despite their widespread use as a vaccine boost, little is known about the antibody responses induced in humans. Here, we collected sera from several clinical cohorts: individuals after three or four doses of the original monovalent mRNA vaccines, individuals receiving the new bivalent vaccines as a fourth dose, and individuals with BA.4/BA.5 breakthrough infection following mRNA vaccination.

 

Using pseudovirus neutralization assays, these sera were tested for neutralization against an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain, several Omicron sub-lineages, and several related sarbecoviruses. At ~3-5 weeks post booster shot, individuals who received a fourth vaccine dose with a bivalent mRNA vaccine targeting BA.4/BA.5 had similar neutralizing antibody titers as those receiving a fourth monovalent mRNA vaccine against all SARS-CoV-2 variants tested, including BA.4/BA.5. Those who received a fourth monovalent vaccine dose had a slightly higher neutralizing antibody titers than those who received the bivalent vaccine against three related sarbecoviruses: SARS-CoV, GD-Pangolin, and WIV1. When given as a fourth dose, a bivalent mRNA vaccine targeting Omicron BA.4/BA.5 and an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain did not induce superior neutralizing antibody responses in humans, at the time period tested, compared to the original monovalent vaccine formulation.

 

Preprint available in bioRxiv (Oct. 24, 2022):

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.22.513349v1 

 https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.10.22.513349 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Juan Lama
Scoop.it!

Bivalent BNT162b2mRNA Original/Omicron BA.4-5 booster Vaccination: Adverse Reactions and Inability to Work Compared to the Monovalent COVID-19 Booster - medRxiv

Bivalent BNT162b2mRNA Original/Omicron BA.4-5 booster Vaccination: Adverse Reactions and Inability to Work Compared to the Monovalent COVID-19 Booster - medRxiv | Virus World | Scoop.it

In the light of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC), bivalent COVID-19 vaccines combining the wild-type spike mRNA with an Omicron VOC BA.1 or BA.4-5 spike mRNA became available. This non-randomized controlled study examined adverse reactions, PRN (pro re nata) medication intake and inability to work after a fourth COVID-19 vaccination among 76 healthcare workers. As fourth dose either the original, monovalent BNT162b2mRNA (48.7%) or the bivalent BNT162b2mRNA original/Omicron BA.4-5 vaccine (51.3%) was administered. The rate of adverse reactions for the second booster dose was significantly higher among participants receiving the bivalent 84.6% (95% CI 70.3%-92.8%; 33/39) compared to the monovalent 51.4% (95% CI 35.9-66.6%; 19/37) vaccine (p=0.0028). Also, there was a trend towards an increased rate of inability to work and intake of PRN medication following bivalent vaccination. In view of preprints reporting inconclusive results in neutralizing antibody levels between the compared vaccines, our results and further studies on safety and reactogenicity of bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccines are highly important to aid clinical decision making in the choice between bivalent and monovalent vaccinations.

 

Preprint available in medRxiv (Nov.8, 2022):

https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.11.07.22281982 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Juan Lama
Scoop.it!

Immunogenicity of the BA.5 Bivalent mRNA Vaccine Boosters | bioRxiv

Immunogenicity of the BA.5 Bivalent mRNA Vaccine Boosters | bioRxiv | Virus World | Scoop.it

Waning immunity following mRNA vaccination and the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has led to reduced mRNA vaccine efficacy against both symptomatic infection and severe disease. Bivalent mRNA boosters expressing the Omicron BA.5 and ancestral WA1/2020 Spike proteins have been developed and approved, because BA.5 is currently the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant and substantially evades neutralizing antibodies (NAbs). Our data show that BA.5 NAb titers were comparable following monovalent and bivalent mRNA boosters.

 

Preprint available in bioRxiv:

https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.10.24.513619 

No comment yet.