Back

Mucosal and systemic responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in infection naive and experienced individuals

Sajadi, M. M.; Myers, A.; Logue, J.; Saadat, S.; Shokatpour, N.; Quinn, J.; Newman, M.; Deming, M.; Tehrani, Z. R.; Karimi, M.; Abbasi, R.; Crotty, S.; Harris, A. D.

2021-12-14 immunology
10.1101/2021.12.13.472159 bioRxiv
Show abstract

With much of the world infected with or vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, understanding the immune responses to the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein in different situations is crucial to controlling the pandemic. We studied the clinical, systemic, mucosal, and cellular responses to two doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in 62 individuals with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 exposure that were divided into three groups based on serostatus and/or degree of symptoms: Antibody negative, Asymptomatic, and Symptomatic. In the previously SARS-CoV-2-infected (SARS2-infected) Asymptomatic and Symptomatic groups, symptoms related to a recall response were elicited after the first vaccination. Anti-S trimer IgA and IgG levels peaked after 1st vaccination in the SARS2-infected groups, and were higher that the in the SARS2-naive group in the plasma and nasal samples at all time points. Neutralizing antibodies titers were also higher against the WA-1 and B.1.617.2 (Delta) variants of SARS-CoV-2 in the SARS2-infected compared to SARS2-naive vaccinees. After the first vaccination, differences in cellular immunity were not evident between groups, but the AIM+ CD4+ cell response correlated with durability of humoral immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 S protein. In those SARS2-infected, the number of vaccinations needed for protection, the durability, and need for boosters are unknown. However, the lingering differences between the SARS2-infected and SARS2-naive up to 10 months post-vaccination could explain the decreased reinfection rates in the SARS2-infected vaccinees recently reported and suggests that additional strategies (such as boosting of the SARS2-naive vaccinees) are needed to narrow the differences observed between these groups.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.