Favresse Julien, Tré-Hardy Marie, Gillot Constant, Cupaiolo Roberto, Wilmet Alain, Beukinga Ingrid, Blairon Laurent, Bayart Jean-Louis, Closset Mélanie, Wauthier Loris, Cabo Julien, David Clara, Elsen Marc, Dogné Jean-Michel, Douxfils Jonathan
Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology Research Unit, Namur Research Institute for Life Sciences, Namur Thrombosis and Hemostasis Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Namur, Namur, Belgium.
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Clinique St-Luc Bouge, Namur, Belgium.
Heliyon. 2024 Aug 10;10(16):e36116. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36116. eCollection 2024 Aug 30.
Some studies suggest that the monovalent mRNA-1273 vaccine is more effective than BNT162b2 in producing higher levels of antibodies. However, limited data are available, and the methods used are not directly comparable.
Blood samples were obtained before the booster (third dose) and after 14, 90, and 180 days in two similar cohorts who received the original BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine designed to target wild type SARS-CoV-2. The aim of our study is to compare their effectiveness by assessing the levels of binding and neutralizing antibodies specifically against each of the BA.1 variant, BA.5 variant, and the XBB.1.5 subvariant.
Once the peak was reached after two weeks, a drastic decline in binding and neutralizing antibodies was observed up to 6 months after the homologous booster administration. The humoral response was however more sustained with the mRNA-1273 booster, with half-lives of 167, 55, and 48 days for binding, BA.1, and BA.5 neutralizing antibodies compared to 144, 30, and 29 days for the BNT162b2 booster, respectively. Compared to the BA.1 variant, the neutralizing capacity was significantly decreased at 6 months with the BA.5 variant (fold-decrease: 1.67 to 3.20) and the XBB.1.5. subvariant (fold-decrease: 2.86 to 5.48).
Although the decrease in the humoral response was observed with both mRNA vaccines over time, a more sustained response was observed with the mRNA-1273 vaccine. Moreover, the emergence of Omicron-based variants causes a reduced neutralizing capacity, notably with the XBB.1.5. subvariant. The administration of subsequent boosters would therefore be needed to restore a sufficiently high neutralizing response.
一些研究表明,单价mRNA-1273疫苗在产生更高水平抗体方面比BNT162b2更有效。然而,可用数据有限,且所使用的方法无法直接比较。
在两个相似队列中,于加强针(第三剂)接种前以及接种后14天、90天和180天采集血样,这两个队列分别接种了针对野生型SARS-CoV-2的原始BNT162b2或mRNA-1273疫苗。我们研究的目的是通过评估针对BA.1变体、BA.5变体和XBB.1.5亚变体各自的结合抗体和中和抗体水平来比较它们的有效性。
在同源加强针接种后两周达到峰值后,在长达6个月的时间里观察到结合抗体和中和抗体急剧下降。然而,mRNA-1273加强针的体液反应更持久,结合抗体、针对BA.1的中和抗体和针对BA.5的中和抗体的半衰期分别为167天、55天和48天,而BNT162b2加强针的半衰期分别为144天、30天和29天。与BA.1变体相比,在6个月时,针对BA.5变体(下降倍数:1.67至3.20)和XBB.1.5亚变体(下降倍数:2.86至5.48)的中和能力显著降低。
尽管随着时间推移,两种mRNA疫苗的体液反应均有所下降,但mRNA-1273疫苗的反应更持久。此外,基于奥密克戎的变体的出现导致中和能力降低,尤其是XBB.1.5亚变体。因此,需要接种后续加强针来恢复足够高的中和反应。