Search

COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus, has raised significant interest in understanding potential cross-immunity mechanisms. Recent evidence suggests that T-cells associated with common cold coronaviruses (229E, NL63, OC43, HKU1) may provide some level of cross-immunity against SARS-CoV-2. It is also known that the prevalence of smokers among patients admitted to hospital for COVID-19 is lower than expected according to the corresponding country's smoking prevalence, which is known as smoker's paradox in COVID-19. No clear consensus to explain it has yet been reached. This phenomenon suggests a complex interaction between smoking and immune response. Nonetheless, very few works have studied the prevalence of smokers in those infected by common cold coronaviruses, and its relation to COVID-19 has not been investigated. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to study the prevalence of smokers among patients infected by common cold coronaviruses, and to compare them to the corresponding country's smoking prevalence. L'Abbé plots were used to visually assess the consistency of the observed effects across the different studies included in the meta-analysis. Additionally, significant differences were found in smoking prevalence among the various types of ccCoV, indicating the need for further research into the biological mechanisms driving these disparities. The results show that smoking prevalence is higher among those patients infected by these coronaviruses than in the general population (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 0.81–2.33). A study was separately done for the four coronavirus types, and the prevalence of smokers was higher in three of the four than that corresponding to country, gender and study year: OC43 (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 0.64–5.82); HKU1 (OR = 3.62, 95% CI: 1.21–10.85); NL63 (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 0.64–5.82); 229E (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.50–1.90). The heterogeneity of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Chi-squared test, I-squared (I2), and Tau-squared (τ2). This detailed statistical analysis enhances the robustness of our findings and highlights the variations in smoking prevalence among different ccCoVs. Our data suggest that COVID-19 might be less prevalent among smokers due to greater cross-immunity from a larger number or more recent infections by common cold coronaviruses than the non-smoking population, which would explain smoker's paradox in COVID-19. IMPLICATIONS. The low prevalence of current smokers among SARS-CoV-2 patients is a finding recurrently repeated, even leading to postulate the "smoker's paradox" in COVID-19. This fact compelled us to study the prevalence of smokers among patients infected by common cold coronaviruses, and to compare them to the corresponding country's smoking prevalence. Our data could explain smoker's paradox in COVID-19 by a greater cross immunity due to a larger number, or more recent infections by common cold coronaviruses than the non-smoking population. This manuscript allow understand potential unrevealed mechanism for low prevalence of current smokers among SARS-CoV-2 patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus, has raised significant interest in understanding potential cross-immunity mechanisms. Recent evidence suggests that T-cells associated with common cold coronaviruses (229E, NL63, OC43, HKU1) may provide some level of cross-immunity against SARS-CoV-2. It is also known that the prevalence of smokers among patients admitted to hospital for COVID-19 is lower than expected according to the corresponding country’s smoking prevalence, which is known as smoker’s paradox in COVID-19. No clear consensus to explain it has yet been reached. This phenomenon suggests a complex interaction between smoking and immune response. Nonetheless, very few works have studied the prevalence of smokers in those infected by common cold coronaviruses, and its relation to COVID-19 has not been investigated. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to study the prevalence of smokers among patients infected by common cold coronaviruses, and to compare them to the corresponding country’s smoking prevalence. L’Abbé plots were used to visually assess the consistency of the observed effects across the different studies included in the meta-analysis. Additionally, significant differences were found in smoking prevalence among the various types of ccCoV, indicating the need for further research into the biological mechanisms driving these disparities. The results show that smoking prevalence is higher among those patients infected by these coronaviruses than in the general population (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 0.81–2.33). A study was separately done for the four coronavirus types, and the prevalence of smokers was higher in three of the four than that corresponding to country, gender and study year: OC43 (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 0.64–5.82); HKU1 (OR = 3.62, 95% CI: 1.21–10.85); NL63 (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 0.64–5.82); 229E (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.50–1.90). The heterogeneity of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Chi-squared test, I-squared (I2), and Tau-squared (τ2). This detailed statistical analysis enhances the robustness of our findings and highlights the variations in smoking prevalence among different ccCoVs. Our data suggest that COVID-19 might be less prevalent among smokers due to greater cross-immunity from a larger number or more recent infections by common cold coronaviruses than the non-smoking population, which would explain smoker’s paradox in COVID-19. IMPLICATIONS. The low prevalence of current smokers among SARS-CoV-2 patients is a finding recurrently repeated, even leading to postulate the “smoker’s paradox” in COVID-19. This fact compelled us to study the prevalence of smokers among patients infected by common cold coronaviruses, and to compare them to the corresponding country’s smoking prevalence. Our data could explain smoker’s paradox in COVID-19 by a greater cross immunity due to a larger number, or more recent infections by common cold coronaviruses than the non-smoking population. This manuscript allow understand potential unrevealed mechanism for low prevalence of current smokers among SARS-CoV-2 patients.

BackgroundImmunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is now widespread; however, the degree of cross-immunity between SARS-CoV-2 and endemic, seasonal human coronaviruses (HCoVs) remains unclear.MethodsSARS-CoV-2 and HCoV cross-immunity was evaluated in adult participants enrolled in a US sub-study in the phase III, randomized controlled trial (NCT04516746) of AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) primary-series vaccination for one-year. Anti-HCoV spike-binding antibodies against HCoV-229E, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-OC43, and HCoV-NL63 were evaluated in participants following study dosing and, in the AZD1222 group, after a non-study third-dose booster. Timing of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion (assessed via anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels) and incidence of COVID-19 were evaluated in those who received AZD1222 primary-series by baseline anti-HCoV titers.ResultsWe evaluated 2,020/21,634 participants in the AZD1222 group and 1,007/10,816 in the placebo group. At the one-year data cutoff (March 11, 2022) mean duration of follow up was 230.9 (SD: 106.36, range: 1–325) and 94.3 (74.12, 1–321) days for participants in the AZD1222 (n = 1,940) and placebo (n = 962) groups, respectively. We observed little elevation in anti-HCoV humoral titers post study-dosing or post-boosting, nor evidence of waning over time. The occurrence and timing of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion and incidence of COVID-19 were not largely impacted by baseline anti-HCoV titers.ConclusionWe found limited evidence for cross-immunity between SARS-CoV-2 and HCoVs following AZD1222 primary series and booster vaccination. Susceptibility to future emergence of novel coronaviruses will likely persist despite a high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 immunity in global populations.

ABSTRACT Numerous clinical parameters link to severe coronavirus disease 2019, but factors that prevent symptomatic disease remain unknown. We investigated the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and endemic human coronavirus (HCoV) antibody responses on symptoms in a longitudinal children cohort (n = 2,917) and a cross-sectional cohort including children and adults (n = 882), all first exposed to SARS-CoV-2 (March 2020 to March 2021) in Switzerland. Saliva (n = 4,993) and plasma (n = 7,486) antibody reactivity to the four HCoVs (subunit S1 [S1]) and SARS-CoV-2 (S1, receptor binding domain, subunit S2 [S2], nucleocapsid protein) was determined along with neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron (BA.2) in a subset of individuals. Inferred recent SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a strong correlation between mucosal and systemic SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike responses. Individuals with pre-existing HCoV-S1 reactivity exhibited significantly higher antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in both plasma (IgG regression coefficients = 0.20, 95% CI = [0.09, 0.32], P < 0.001) and saliva (IgG regression coefficient = 0.60, 95% CI = [0.088, 1.11], P = 0.025). Saliva neutralization activity was modest but surprisingly broad, retaining activity against Wuhan (median NT50 = 32.0, 1Q–3Q = [16.4, 50.2]), Alpha (median NT50 = 34.9, 1Q–3Q = [26.0, 46.6]), and Delta (median NT50 = 28.0, 1Q–3Q = [19.9, 41.7]). In line with a rapid mucosal defense triggered by cross-reactive HCoV immunity, asymptomatic individuals presented with higher pre-existing HCoV-S1 activity in plasma (IgG HKU1, odds ratio [OR] = 0.53, 95% CI = [0.29,0.97], P = 0.038) and saliva (total HCoV, OR = 0.55, 95% CI = [0.33, 0.91], P = 0.019) and higher SARS-CoV-2 reactivity in saliva (IgG S2 fold change = 1.26, 95% CI = [1.03, 1.54], P = 0.030). By investigating the systemic and mucosal immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 and HCoVs in a population without prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2 or vaccination, we identified specific antibody reactivities associated with lack of symptom development.IMPORTANCEKnowledge of the interplay between human coronavirus (HCoV) immunity and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is critical to understanding the coexistence of current endemic coronaviruses and to building knowledge potential future zoonotic coronavirus transmissions. This study, which retrospectively analyzed a large cohort of individuals first exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in Switzerland in 2020–2021, revealed several key findings. Pre-existing HCoV immunity, particularly mucosal antibody responses, played a significant role in improving SARS-CoV-2 immune response upon infection and reducing symptoms development. Mucosal neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2, although low in magnitude, retained activity against SARS-CoV-2 variants underlining the importance of maintaining local mucosal immunity to SARS-CoV-2. While the cross-protective effect of HCoV immunity was not sufficient to block infection by SARS-CoV-2, the present study revealed a remarkable impact on limiting symptomatic disease. These findings support the feasibility of generating pan-protective coronavirus vaccines by inducing potent mucosal immune responses.

Piscirickettsia salmonis, the primary bacterial disease in Chilean salmon farming, necessitates a constant refinement of control strategies. This study hypothesized that the current vaccination strategy for SRS control in the Chilean Atlantic salmon aquaculture industry, which has been in place since 2017 (ALPHA JECT® 5.1 plus LiVac®), solely relies on vaccines formulated with the EM-90 genogroup of P. salmonis (PS-EM-90), triggering a partial cross-immunity response in fish infected with the LF-89 genogroup (PS-LF-89). Relative Percent Survival (RPS) and cell-mediated immune (CMI) response were evaluated in Atlantic salmon post-smolts vaccinated with the standard vaccination strategy but challenged with both PS-EM-90 and PS-LF-89, in addition to other vaccination strategies considering primo vaccination and booster with other commercial vaccines and the possible enhancing effects of the combination with a natural immunomodulator (PAQ-Xtract®) administered orally. The intraperitoneal (I.P.) challenge was performed after 2395°-days (DD) after the start of the immunostimulant delivery, 1905 DD after the primo vaccination, and 1455 DD after the booster vaccination. Unvaccinated fish showed 73.6 and 41.7 % mortality when challenged with PS-EM-90 and PS-LF-89, respectively. Fish infected with PS-LF-89 died significantly faster (21 days post-infection, dpi) than fish challenged with PS-EM-90 (28 dpi) (p = 0.0043) and had a higher probability of death (0.4626) than fish challenged with PS-EM-90. RPS had a significant positive correlation with the PS-EM-90 load of the P. salmonis genogroup (r = 0.540, p < 0.01) but not with the PS-LF-89 load (r = 0.155, p > 0.05). This demonstrated that the immunization strategies were more effective in lowering PS-EM-90 loads, resulting in higher survival rates in fish challenged with PS-EM-90. The current industry vaccination strategy recorded a 100 % RPS when fish were challenged with PS-EM-90, but the RPS dropped significantly to 77 % when fish were challenged with PS-LF-89, meaning that the strategy did not show complete cross-protection. But after adding PAQ-Xtract®, the RPS improved from 77 % to 92 % in fish that were vaccinated with the standard method but then challenged with PS-LF-89. The most effective vaccination strategy was based on LiVac® as primo vaccination and ALPHA JECT® 5.1 plus LiVac® as booster vaccination, with or without PAQ-Xtract®, in both PS-EM-90 (100 %) and PS-LF-89 (96 %) challenged fish. The serum concentration of anti- P. salmonis IgM did not show a correlation with the protection of immunization strategies expressed in survival. Low serum IL-12 and high serum IFNγ concentrations showed a correlation with higher bacterial loads and lower survival. Aggregate analysis showed a significant correlation between higher numbers of CD8+ cells in the head-kidney, higher fish survival, and a lower bacterial load. The immunization strategies were safe for fish and induced only mild microscopic lesions in the gut. Taken together, our results help to better understand the biological interaction between P. salmonis and post-smolt vaccinated Atlantic salmon to deepen the knowledge on vaccine-induced protection, CMI immune response, and cross-immunity applied to improve the current immunization strategy for SRS control in the Chilean salmon industry. • Current vaccination strategy for SRS showed incomplete cross-protection for PS-LF-89. • PAQ-Xtract® improved RPS of standard strategy challenged with PS-LF-89. • The level of anti-P. salmonis IgM showed no correlation with protection in any strategy. • Low IL-12 and high IFNg showed correlation with high bacterial loads and lower RPS. • The higher number of CD8+ T cells in the head-kidney correlated with longer survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increased human-to-human transmission of monkeypox virus (MPXV) is cause for concern, and antibodies directed against vaccinia virus (VACV) are known to confer cross-protection against Mpox. We used 430 serum samples derived from the Scottish patient population to investigate antibody-mediated cross-neutralization against MPXV. By combining electrochemiluminescence immunoassays with live-virus neutralization assays, we show that people born when smallpox vaccination was routinely offered in the United Kingdom have increased levels of antibodies that cross-neutralize MPXV. Our results suggest that age is a risk factor of Mpox infection, and people born after 1971 are at higher risk of infection upon exposure.

Background: Immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is now widespread; however, the degree of cross-immunity between SARS-CoV-2 and endemic, seasonal human coronaviruses (HCoVs) remains unclear., Methods: SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV cross-immunity was evaluated in adult participants enrolled in a US sub-study in the phase III, randomized controlled trial (NCT04516746) of AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) primary-series vaccination for one-year. Anti-HCoV spike-binding antibodies against HCoV-229E, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-OC43, and HCoV-NL63 were evaluated in participants following study dosing and, in the AZD1222 group, after a non-study third-dose booster. Timing of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion (assessed via anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels) and incidence of COVID-19 were evaluated in those who received AZD1222 primary-series by baseline anti-HCoV titers., Results: We evaluated 2,020/21,634 participants in the AZD1222 group and 1,007/10,816 in the placebo group. At the one-year data cutoff (March 11, 2022) mean duration of follow up was 230.9 (SD: 106.36, range: 1-325) and 94.3 (74.12, 1-321) days for participants in the AZD1222 (n = 1,940) and placebo (n = 962) groups, respectively. We observed little elevation in anti-HCoV humoral titers post study-dosing or post-boosting, nor evidence of waning over time. The occurrence and timing of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion and incidence of COVID-19 were not largely impacted by baseline anti-HCoV titers., Conclusion: We found limited evidence for cross-immunity between SARS-CoV-2 and HCoVs following AZD1222 primary series and booster vaccination. Susceptibility to future emergence of novel coronaviruses will likely persist despite a high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 immunity in global populations., Competing Interests: Authors AA, AS, DW, DL, EK, JG, and KS are/were employees of AstraZeneca and may hold AstraZeneca stock. AA declares patents in connection with Meso Scale Diagnostics. AF reports receiving institutional grants for research from Pfizer, Merck, Sharpe and Dohme, Janssen CyanVac, Moderna VaxCo, and BioFire Diagnostics, fees for serving on Novavax COVID-19 vaccine Safety Monitoring Board, travel fees from GlaxoSmithKline and Moderna, serving on a board of directors for ADMA biologics and consulting/personal fees from ADMA Biologics, GFS, and Sanofi Pasteur. DL is an employee of Cytel Cambridge, MA, USA. EK is an employee of Sanofi Swiftwater, PA, USA. H-VT declares grants from the NIH and NIAID during the study and grants from Shionogi and GlaxoSmithKline. MS declares grants from the NIH and NIAID during the conduct of the study and institutional research grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Global Services, Merck, and Sanofi Pasteur, as well as a travel grant from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. This study received funding from AstraZeneca. The funder had the following involvement with the study with input from the external authors: study design; collection, analysis and interpretation of data; the writing of this article and the decision to submit it for publication. The first draft of the manuscript was written under the direction of the authors by a medical writer funded by AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2024 Stanley, Aksyuk, Wilkins, Green, Lan, Shoemaker, Tieu, Sobieszczyk, Falsey and Kelly.)

Numerous clinical parameters link to severe coronavirus disease 2019, but factors that prevent symptomatic disease remain unknown. We investigated the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and endemic human coronavirus (HCoV) antibody responses on symptoms in a longitudinal children cohort ( n = 2,917) and a cross-sectional cohort including children and adults ( n = 882), all first exposed to SARS-CoV-2 (March 2020 to March 2021) in Switzerland. Saliva ( n = 4,993) and plasma ( n = 7,486) antibody reactivity to the four HCoVs (subunit S1 [S1]) and SARS-CoV-2 (S1, receptor binding domain, subunit S2 [S2], nucleocapsid protein) was determined along with neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron (BA.2) in a subset of individuals. Inferred recent SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a strong correlation between mucosal and systemic SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike responses. Individuals with pre-existing HCoV-S1 reactivity exhibited significantly higher antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in both plasma (IgG regression coefficients = 0.20, 95% CI = [0.09, 0.32], P < 0.001) and saliva (IgG regression coefficient = 0.60, 95% CI = [0.088, 1.11], P = 0.025). Saliva neutralization activity was modest but surprisingly broad, retaining activity against Wuhan (median NT50 = 32.0, 1Q-3Q = [16.4, 50.2]), Alpha (median NT50 = 34.9, 1Q-3Q = [26.0, 46.6]), and Delta (median NT50 = 28.0, 1Q-3Q = [19.9, 41.7]). In line with a rapid mucosal defense triggered by cross-reactive HCoV immunity, asymptomatic individuals presented with higher pre-existing HCoV-S1 activity in plasma (IgG HKU1, odds ratio [OR] = 0.53, 95% CI = [0.29,0.97], P = 0.038) and saliva (total HCoV, OR = 0.55, 95% CI = [0.33, 0.91], P = 0.019) and higher SARS-CoV-2 reactivity in saliva (IgG S2 fold change = 1.26, 95% CI = [1.03, 1.54], P = 0.030). By investigating the systemic and mucosal immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 and HCoVs in a population without prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2 or vaccination, we identified specific antibody reactivities associated with lack of symptom development.IMPORTANCEKnowledge of the interplay between human coronavirus (HCoV) immunity and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is critical to understanding the coexistence of current endemic coronaviruses and to building knowledge potential future zoonotic coronavirus transmissions. This study, which retrospectively analyzed a large cohort of individuals first exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in Switzerland in 2020-2021, revealed several key findings. Pre-existing HCoV immunity, particularly mucosal antibody responses, played a significant role in improving SARS-CoV-2 immune response upon infection and reducing symptoms development. Mucosal neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2, although low in magnitude, retained activity against SARS-CoV-2 variants underlining the importance of maintaining local mucosal immunity to SARS-CoV-2. While the cross-protective effect of HCoV immunity was not sufficient to block infection by SARS-CoV-2, the present study revealed a remarkable impact on limiting symptomatic disease. These findings support the feasibility of generating pan-protective coronavirus vaccines by inducing potent mucosal immune responses., Competing Interests: H.F.G. reports having received honoraria from Gilead Sciences, Merck, ViiV, GSK, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, and Novartis for serving on DSMB and/or advisory boards and has received a travel grant from Gilead Sciences. In addition, he has received grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), the Swiss HIV Cohort Study, the Yvonne Jacob Foundation, and the NIH and unrestricted research grants from Gilead Sciences, all paid to the institution. A.T. has received honoraria from Roche Diagnostics for consultant activity, grants from the SNSF, the Swiss HIV Cohort Study, and the Pandemiefonds of the UZH foundation, and unrestricted research grants from Gilead Sciences. I.A.A. has received honoraria from MSD and Sanofi, a travel grant from Gilead Sciences, and a grant from Promedica foundation. R.D.K. has received grants from SNSF, the National Institutes of Health, and Gilead Sciences. C.P. has received a grant from the Collegium Helveticum.