Pre-existing antibodies and age shape the immune response following EV-A71 vaccine: a prospective serological study among the Chinese pediatric population
Zhou, J.; Zhou, X.; Chen, J.; Grassly, N. C.; Yu, H.
10.1101/2025.09.17.25335968 medRxivShow abstract
Hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD), primarily caused by enterovirus A71 (EV-A71), poses significant pediatric health risks in the Asia-Pacific region, with vaccination being critical for prevention. Using longitudinal serological data from 1 585 Chinese children in a 2019-2020 prospective study (combining clinical trial and cohort samples), the present study assessed how pre-vaccination antibody titers and age influence EV-A71 vaccine response. EV-A71-specific antibodies were measured via a modified cytopathogenic effect assay, with geometric mean titers (GMTs) and fold increases (GMFIs) analyzed. At baseline, 3.9% (N = 61) of children were seropositive. After vaccination, those with high pre-existing titers exhibited higher GMTs, compared to those with low-level or undetectable titers (GMTs: 10.30 [95% CI: 9.09, 11.52] vs. 7.58 [95% CI: 6.86, 8.29] vs. 6.92 [95% CI: 6.82, 7.02]; GMFIs: 3.36 [95% CI: 1.97, 4.75] vs. 4.23 [95% CI: 3.48, 4.98] vs. 4.92 [95% CI: 4.82, 5.02]). Generalized additive models revealed that predicted GMTs peaked (8.78) at a baseline titer of 10.20, while GMFIs declined with higher pre-vaccination titers. Vaccine-induced responses also varied with age, showing periodic increases in children under 36 months. Collectively, these findings quantify the effects of pre-existing antibodies and age on the antibody level following vaccination, highlighting the importance of tailoring immunization schedules based on both pre-existing immunity and age. Accordingly, immune-naive children should be vaccinated as early as possible.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Initial protection against Omicron in children and adolescents by BNT162b2 95%
- A Phase 1: Safety and Immunogenicity Trial of an Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine-BBV152 95%
- Safety and immunogenicity clinical trial of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBV152 (a phase 2, double-blind, randomised controlled trial) and the persistence of immune responses from a phase 1 follow-up report 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Enhanced neutralization against SARS-CoV-2 by vaccine booster exhibits reduction of Omicron variant 97%
- Robust induction of B cell and T cell responses by a third dose of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine 95%
- One year landscape of the inactivated virus vaccine triggered RBD-specific IgG, IgM and IgA responses against the Omicron variant 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- An in-depth investigation of the safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine 95%
- Comparison of the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of a reduced and standard booster dose of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in healthy adults after two doses of inactivated vaccine 95%
- COVID-19 vaccination-induced antibody responses and waning by age and comorbidity status in a large population-based prospective cohort study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Heterologous vaccination with inactivated and mRNA vaccines increases B and T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 96%
- Effect of booster vaccination against Delta and Omicron variants in Iceland 95%
- Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a new SARS-CoV-2 recombinant Gamma variant RBD-based protein adjuvanted vaccine, used as heterologous booster in healthy adults: a Phase 1 interim report 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Heterologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 prime-boost vaccination elicits potent neutralizing antibody responses and T cell reactivity 94%
- Dynamics of humoral and cellular immune responses after homologous and heterologous SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 94%
- Antibody Responses After a Single Dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine in Healthcare Workers Previously Infected with SARS-CoV-2 93%
"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.