Search

Correlates of protection for recent emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants have not been determined. In this test-negative case-control study, we report lower odds of infection with XBB variants among those boosted during the last six months. Additionally, we demonstrate that XBB-specific neutralizing antibodies are independent correlates of protection., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Gili Regev-Yochay reports a relationship with Pfizer that includes: consulting or advisory and funding grants. Gili Regev-Yochay reports a relationship with Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Inc. that includes: consulting or advisory. Gili Regev-Yochay reports a relationship with Merck & Co Inc. that includes: consulting or advisory. Gili Regev-Yochay reports a relationship with AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP that includes: consulting or advisory. Gili Regev-Yochay reports a relationship with Moderna Inc. that includes: consulting or advisory. Yaniv Lustig reports a relationship with Pfizer Inc. that includes: funding grants. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: We describe an epidemiological investigation of a SARS-CoV-2-XBB.1 outbreak among healthcare workers (HCWs) returning from a 5-days educational tour abroad., Methods: We prospectively followed participants for symptoms and sampled blood for neutralization assays of four SARS-CoV-2 variants (wild type, XBB, EG.5.1, and BA.2.86) at 1, 3, and 6 months after their return. When available, samples from the 3 months preceding the outbreak were also tested. We compared geometric mean titers (GMT) of neutralizing antibodies of infected versus uninfected HCWs and febrile versus afebrile infected HCWs., Results: Nineteen (10%) of 181 HCWs were infected, all had mild COVID-19, 90% (17/19) had symptoms, and 16% (3/19) reported fever. Infected individuals tended to have lower pre-exposure XBB-neutralizing antibody titers (GMT of 32 versus 107 ID50, P = 0.248). Neutralization against XBB and newer subvariants peaked at 3 months and was higher among infected individuals (GMT 702 versus 156 [P < 0.001], 558 versus 163 [P = 0.001], and 558 vs. 182 [P = 0.002], ID50 for XBB, EG.5.1., and BA.2.86, respectively). By six months, these differences were no longer observed. Fever was positively associated with XBB neutralization (GMT 3474 versus 485, ID50 P = 0.005)., Conclusions: Recently infected individuals are protected from reinfection with newer subvariants. However, protection is likely short lived., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

JN.1, the dominating SARS-CoV-2 variant, is antigenically distinct from ancestral BA.1, BA.5 and XBB.1.5 variants, raising concern about effectiveness of updated COVID-19 vaccines. Here, we compared the neutralizing antibody response against JN.1, 1-month after receipt of the three available Moderna mRNA vaccines. Sera obtained from 37, 30 and 30 XBB.1.5, BA.1 and BA.4-5 -vaccine recipients, respectively, were tested for anti-RBD IgG and for JN-1 specific neutralizing antibody levels. Geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) in JN.1 specific neutralizing titers was 27 (95 % CI: 17-43.1), 10.1 (95 % CI: 6.48-15.7) and 8.77 (95 % CI: 5.69-13.5) following XBB.1.5, BA.1 and BA.4-5 vaccines, respectively, translating into a 64 % lower adjusted response (geometric mean ratio [GMR] = 0.36, 95 % CI: 0.21-0.6) in the BA.1 arm, and a 75 % lower response (GMR = 0.25, 95 % CI: 0.15-0.43) in the BA.4-5 arm. This suggests that XBB.1.5 vaccination will most likely, result in improved effectiveness against JN.1 compared with other COVID-19 vaccines., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Spyros Chalkias, Rituparna Das and Gamal Elfatarany are employees of Moderna, Inc. and may hold stock/stock options in the company. Gili Regev-Yochay served as a consultant to Merck, GSK, Astrazenca, Pfizer and Moderna., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Although a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron-XBB.1.5 variant is available worldwide and recent infection is protective, the lack of recorded infection data highlights the need to assess variant-specific antibody neutralization levels. We analyzed IgG levels against receptor-binding domain-specific SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strain as a correlate for high neutralizing titers against XBB variants.

Background: Identifying COVID-19 correlates of protection and immunity thresholds is important for policy makers and vaccine development. We aimed to identify correlates of protection of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccination against COVID-19., Methods: In this prospective cohort study, households within a radius of 40 km of the Sheba Medical Center in Israel in which a new SARS-CoV-2 infection (defined as the index case) was detected within the previous 24 h were approached between July 25 and Nov 15, 2021. We included adults (aged >18 years) who had received one or two vaccine doses, had an initial negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR and no previous infection reported, and had a valid IgG and neutralising antibody result. The exposure of interest was baseline immune status, including IgG antibody concentration, neutralising antibody titre, and T-cell activation. The outcomes of interest were PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection between day 2 and day 21 of follow-up and intensity of disease symptoms (self-reported via a telephone questionnaire) among participants who had a confirmed infection. Multivariable logistic and ordered logit ordinal regressions were used for the adjusted analysis. To identify immunological thresholds for clinical protection, we estimated the conditional probability of infection and moderate or severe disease for individuals with pre-exposure IgG and neutralising antibody concentrations above each value observed in the study data., Findings: From 16 675 detected index cases in the study region, 5718 household members agreed to participate, 1461 of whom were eligible to be included in our study. 333 (22·8%) of 1461 household members who were not infected with SARS-CoV-2 at baseline were infected within 21 days of follow-up. The baseline (pre-exposure) IgG and neutralising antibodies were higher in participants who remained uninfected than in those who became infected (geometric mean IgG antibody concentration 168·2 binding antibody units [BAU] per mL [95% CI 158·3-178·7] vs 130·5 BAU/mL [118·3-143·8] and geometric mean neutralising antibody titre 197·5 [181·9-214·4] vs 136 ·7 [120·3-155·4]). Increasing IgG and neutralising antibody concentrations were also significantly associated with a reduced probability of increasing disease severity. Odds of infection were significantly reduced each time baseline IgG antibody concentration increased by a factor of ten (odds ratio [OR] 0·43 [95% CI 0·26-0·70]) and each time baseline neutralising antibody titre increased by a factor of two (0·82 [0·74-0·92]). In our cohort, the probability of infection if IgG antibody concentrations were higher than 500 BAU/mL was 11% and the probability of moderate disease severity was 1%; the probability of infection if neutralising antibody titres were above or equal to 1024 was 8% and the probability of moderate disease severity was 2%. T-cell activation rates were not significantly associated with reduced probability of infection (OR 1·04, 95% CI 0·83-1·30)., Interpretation: Both IgG and neutralising antibodies are correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our data suggest that IgG concentrations higher than 500 BAU/mL and neutralising antibody titres of 1024 or more are thresholds for immunological protection from SARS-CoV-2 delta variant infection. Potentially, updated protective thresholds against emerging variants of concern could be calculated, which could support decision makers on administration of new vaccination strategies and on the optimal period between vaccine doses., Funding: Israeli Ministry of Health., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests GRY served as a member of an advisory board for Moderna, and received consulting fees from Medison and speaking fees from Teva, MSD, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Medison. YL received a grant from Pfizer outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

REGEN-COV, a combination of the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab and imdevimab, has been approved as a treatment for high-risk patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 within five days of their diagnosis. We performed a retrospective cohort study, and used data repositories of Israel's largest healthcare organization to determine the real-world effectiveness of REGEN-COV treatment against COVID-19-related hospitalization, severe disease, and death. We compared patients infected with Delta variant and treated with REGEN-COV (n = 289) to those infected but not-treated with REGEN-COV (n = 1,296). Demographic and clinical characteristics were used to match patients and for further adjustment as part of the C0x model. Estimated treatment effectiveness was defined as one minus the hazard ratio. Treatment effectiveness of REGEN-COV was 56.4% (95% CI: 23.7-75.1%) in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization, 59.2% (95% CI: 19.9-79.2%) in preventing severe COVID-19, and 93.5% (95% CI: 52.1-99.1%) in preventing COVID-19 death in the 28 days after treatment. In conclusion, REGEN-COV was effective in reducing the risk of severe sequelae in high-risk COVID-19 patients., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Limited evidence is available on the real-world effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and specifically against infection with the omicron variant among children 5 to 11 years of age., Methods: Using data from the largest health care organization in Israel, we identified a cohort of children 5 to 11 years of age who were vaccinated on or after November 23, 2021, and matched them with unvaccinated controls to estimate the vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 among newly vaccinated children during the omicron wave. Vaccine effectiveness against documented severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and symptomatic Covid-19 was estimated after the first and second vaccine doses. The cumulative incidence of each outcome in the two study groups through January 7, 2022, was estimated with the use of the Kaplan-Meier estimator, and vaccine effectiveness was calculated as 1 minus the risk ratio. Vaccine effectiveness was also estimated in age subgroups., Results: Among 136,127 eligible children who had been vaccinated during the study period, 94,728 were matched with unvaccinated controls. The estimated vaccine effectiveness against documented infection was 17% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7 to 25) at 14 to 27 days after the first dose and 51% (95% CI, 39 to 61) at 7 to 21 days after the second dose. The absolute risk difference between the study groups at days 7 to 21 after the second dose was 1905 events per 100,000 persons (95% CI, 1294 to 2440) for documented infection and 599 events per 100,000 persons (95% CI, 296 to 897) for symptomatic Covid-19. The estimated vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 was 18% (95% CI, -2 to 34) at 14 to 27 days after the first dose and 48% (95% CI, 29 to 63) at 7 to 21 days after the second dose. We observed a trend toward higher vaccine effectiveness in the youngest age group (5 or 6 years of age) than in the oldest age group (10 or 11 years of age)., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that as omicron was becoming the dominant variant, two doses of the BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine provided moderate protection against documented SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic Covid-19 in children 5 to 11 years of age. (Funded by the European Union through the VERDI project and others.)., (Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Evidence regarding the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine in patients with impaired immunity is limited. Initial observations suggest a lower humoral response in these patients. We evaluated the relative effectiveness of the mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine in patients with hematological neoplasms compared with matched controls. Data on patients with hematological neoplasms after 2 vaccine doses were extracted and matched 1:1 with vaccinated controls. Subpopulation analyses focused on patients receiving therapy for hematological neoplasm, patients without treatment who were only followed, and recipients of specific treatments. The analysis focused on COVID-19 outcomes from days 7 through 43 after the second vaccine dose in these areas: documented COVID-19 infection by polymerase chain reaction; symptomatic infection; hospitalizations; severe COVID-19 disease; and COVID-19-related death. In a population of 4.7 million insured people, 32 516 patients with hematological neoplasms were identified, of whom 5017 were receiving therapy for an active disease. Vaccinated patients with hematological neoplasms, compared with vaccinated matched controls, had an increased risk of documented infections (relative risk [RR] 1.60, 95% CI 1.12-2.37); symptomatic COVID-19 (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.05-2.85); COVID-19-related hospitalizations (RR 3.13, 95% CI 1.68-7.08); severe COVID-19 (RR 2.27, 95% CI 1.18-5.19); and COVID-19-related death (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.72-4.47). Limiting the analysis to patients on hematological treatments showed a higher increased risk. This analysis shows that vaccinated patients with hematological neoplasms, in particular patients receiving treatment, suffer from COVID-19 outcomes more than vaccinated individuals with intact immune system. Ways to enhance COVID-19 immunity in this patient population, such as additional doses, should be explored., (© 2022 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

HLA haplotypes were found to be associated with increased risk for viral infections or disease severity in various diseases, including SARS. Several genetic variants are associated with COVID-19 severity. Studies have proposed associations, based on a very small sample and a large number of tested HLA alleles, but no clear association between HLA and COVID-19 incidence or severity has been reported. We conducted a large-scale HLA analysis of Israeli individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection by PCR. Overall, 72,912 individuals with known HLA haplotypes were included in the study, of whom 6413 (8.8%) were found to have SARS-CoV-2 by PCR. A total of 20,937 subjects were of Ashkenazi origin (at least 2/4 grandparents). One hundred eighty-one patients (2.8% of the infected) were hospitalized due to the disease. None of the 66 most common HLA loci (within the five HLA subgroups: A, B, C, DQB1, DRB1) was found to be associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or hospitalization in the general Israeli population. Similarly, no association was detected in the Ashkenazi Jewish subset. Moreover, no association was found between heterozygosity in any of the HLA loci and either infection or hospitalization. We conclude that HLA haplotypes are not a major risk/protecting factor among the Israeli population for SARS-CoV-2 infection or severity. Our results suggest that if any HLA association exists with the disease it is very weak, and of limited effect on the pandemic., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

The correlation between anti–severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody levels and infection was reported. Here, we estimated the role of pre–fourth dose levels using data from 1098 healthcare workers. The risk of infection was reduced by 46% (95% confidence interval, 29%–59%) for each 10-fold increase in prebooster levels. Prebooster antibody levels could be used to optimally time boosters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many countries are experiencing a resurgence of COVID-19, driven predominantly by the delta (B.1.617.2) variant of SARS-CoV-2. In response, these countries are considering the administration of a third dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine as a booster dose to address potential waning immunity over time and reduced effectiveness against the delta variant. We aimed to use the data repositories of Israel's largest health-care organisation to evaluate the effectiveness of a third dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine for preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes.Methods: Using data from Clalit Health Services, which provides mandatory health-care coverage for over half of the Israeli population, individuals receiving a third vaccine dose between July 30, 2020, and Sept 23, 2021, were matched (1:1) to demographically and clinically similar controls who did not receive a third dose. Eligible participants had received the second vaccine dose at least 5 months before the recruitment date, had no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection, and had no contact with the health-care system in the 3 days before recruitment. Individuals who are health-care workers, live in long-term care facilities, or are medically confined to their homes were excluded. Primary outcomes were COVID-19-related admission to hospital, severe disease, and COVID-19-related death. The third dose effectiveness for each outcome was estimated as 1 - risk ratio using the Kaplan-Meier estimator.Findings: 1 158 269 individuals were eligible to be included in the third dose group. Following matching, the third dose and control groups each included 728 321 individuals. Participants had a median age of 52 years (IQR 37-68) and 51% were female. The median follow-up time was 13 days (IQR 6-21) in both groups. Vaccine effectiveness evaluated at least 7 days after receipt of the third dose, compared with receiving only two doses at least 5 months ago, was estimated to be 93% (231 events for two doses vs 29 events for three doses; 95% CI 88-97) for admission to hospital, 92% (157 vs 17 events; 82-97) for severe disease, and 81% (44 vs seven events; 59-97) for COVID-19-related death.Interpretation: Our findings suggest that a third dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine is effective in protecting individuals against severe COVID-19-related outcomes, compared with receiving only two doses at least 5 months ago.Funding: The Ivan and Francesca Berkowitz Family Living Laboratory Collaboration at Harvard Medical School and Clalit Research Institute. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the research on the protection provided to children through parental vaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine. The households without prior infection consisting of two parents and unvaccinated children were studied, with a period of Alpha variant with two doses versus no vaccination and Delta variant with booster dose versus two vaccine doses. It was found that having two vaccinated parents was associated with decreased risk than a single vaccinated parent.