Search

In this brief report, we compare the magnitude and durability of the serologic response of one versus two doses (separated by 56 days) of a variant vaccine (Moderna mRNA-1273 Beta/Omicron BA.1 bivalent vaccine) in adults.

BackgroundProtection from SARS-CoV-2 vaccines wanes over time and is compounded by emerging variants including Omicron subvariants. This study evaluated safety and immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccines.MethodsThis phase 2 open-label, randomized trial enrolled healthy adults previously vaccinated with a SARS-CoV-2 primary series and a single boost. Eligible participants were randomized to one of six Moderna COVID19 mRNA vaccine arms (50µg dose): Prototype (mRNA-1273), Omicron BA.1+Beta (1 or 2 doses), Omicron BA.1+Delta, Omicron BA.1 monovalent, and Omicron BA.1+Prototype. Neutralization antibody titers (ID50) were assessed for D614G, Delta, Beta and Omicron BA.1 variants and Omicron BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 subvariants 15 days after vaccination.ResultsFrom March 30 to May 6, 2022, 597 participants were randomized and vaccinated. Median age was 53 years, and 20% had a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. All vaccines were safe and well-tolerated. Day 15 geometric mean titers (GMT) against D614G were similar across arms and ages, and higher with prior infection. For uninfected participants, Day 15 Omicron BA.1 GMTs were similar across Omicron-containing vaccine arms (3724-4561) and higher than Prototype (1,997 [95%CI:1,482-2,692]). The Omicron BA.1 monovalent and Omicron BA.1+Prototype vaccines induced a geometric mean ratio (GMR) to Prototype for Omicron BA.1 of 2.03 (97.5%CI:1.37-3.00) and 1.56 (97.5%CI:1.06-2.31), respectively. A subset of samples from uninfected participants in four arms were also tested in a different laboratory at Day 15 for neutralizing antibody titers to D614G and Omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2.12.2 and BA.4/BA.5. Omicron BA.4/BA.5 GMTs were approximately one third BA.1 GMTs (Prototype 517 [95%CI:324-826] vs. 1503 [95%CI:949-2381]; Omicron BA.1+Beta 628 [95%CI:367-1,074] vs. 2125 [95%CI:1139-3965]; Omicron BA.1+Delta 765 [95%CI:443-1,322] vs. 2242 [95%CI:1218-4128] and Omicron BA.1+Prototype 635 [95%CI:447-903] vs. 1972 [95%CI:1337-2907).ConclusionsHigher Omicron BA.1 titers were observed with Omicron-containing vaccines compared to Prototype vaccine and titers against Omicron BA.4/BA.5 were lower than against BA.1 for all candidate vaccines.Clinicaltrials.govNCT05289037

IMPORTANCE: COVID-19 vaccination is recommended during pregnancy for the protection of the mother. Little is known about the immune response to booster vaccinations during pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: To measure immune responses to COVID-19 primary and booster mRNA vaccination during pregnancy and transplacental antibody transfer to the newborn. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of pregnant participants enrolled from July 2021 to January 2022, with follow up through and up to 12 months after delivery. SETTING: Multicenter study conducted at 9 academic sites. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant participants who received COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and their newborns. EXPOSURE(S): Primary or booster COVID-19 mRNA vaccination during pregnancy. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): SARS-CoV-2 binding and neutralizing antibody (nAb) titers after primary or booster COVID-19 mRNA vaccination during pregnancy and antibody transfer to the newborn. Immune responses were compared between primary and booster vaccine recipients in maternal sera at delivery and in cord blood, after adjusting for days since last vaccination. RESULTS: In this interim analysis, 167 participants received a primary 2-dose series and 73 received a booster dose of mRNA vaccine during pregnancy. Booster vaccination resulted in significantly higher binding and nAb titers, including to the Omicron BA.1 variant, in maternal serum at delivery and cord blood compared to a primary 2-dose series (range 0.55 to 0.88 log (10) higher, p

Additional file 3. Postpartum_WomenICF_Munoz et al.

Additional file 2. Pregnancy_and_InfantsICF_Munoz et al.

Relatively little is known about the human T-cell response to herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) in the female genital tract, a major site of heterosexual HSV-2 acquisition, transmission, and reactivation. In order to understand the role of local mucosal immunity in HSV-2 infection, T-cell lines were expanded from serial cervical cytobrush samples from 30 HSV-2-infected women and examined for reactivity to HSV-2. Approximately 3% of the CD3+ T cells isolated from the cervix were HSV-2 specific and of these, a median of 91.3% were CD4+, whereas a median of 3.9% were CD8+. HSV-2-specific CD4+ T cells expanded from the cervix were not only more frequent than CD8+ T cells but also exhibited greater breadth in terms of antigenic reactivity. T cells directed at the same HSV-2 protein were often detected in serial cervical cytobrush samples and in blood. Thus, broad and persistent mucosal T-cell responses to HSV-2 were detected in the female genital tract of HSV-2+ women suggesting that these cells are resident at the site of HSV-2 infection. Understanding the role of these T cells at this biologically relevant site will be central to the elucidation of adaptive immune mechanisms involved in controlling HSV-2 disease.

The Alphaherpesvirinae subfamily includes HSV types 1 and 2 and the sequence-divergent pathogen varicella zoster virus (VZV). T cells, controlled by TCR and HLA molecules that tolerate limited epitope amino acid variation, might cross-react between these microbes. We show that memory PBMC expansion with either HSV or VZV enriches for CD4 T cell lines that recognize the other agent at the whole-virus, protein, and peptide levels, consistent with bidirectional cross-reactivity. HSV-specific CD4 T cells recovered from HSV-seronegative persons can be explained, in part, by such VZV cross-reactivity. HSV-1-reactive CD8 T cells also cross-react with VZV-infected cells, full-length VZV proteins, and VZV peptides, as well as kill VZV-infected dermal fibroblasts. Mono- and cross-reactive CD8 T cells use distinct TCRB CDR3 sequences. Cross-reactivity to VZV is reconstituted by cloning and expressing TCRA/TCRB receptors from T cells that are initially isolated using HSV reagents. Overall, we define 13 novel CD4 and CD8 HSV-VZV cross-reactive epitopes and strongly imply additional cross-reactive peptide sets. Viral proteins can harbor both CD4 and CD8 HSV/VZV cross-reactive epitopes. Quantitative estimates of HSV/VZV cross-reactivity for both CD4 and CD8 T cells vary from 10 to 50%. Based on these findings, we hypothesize that host herpesvirus immune history may influence the pathogenesis and clinical outcome of subsequent infections or vaccinations for related pathogens and that cross-reactive epitopes and TCRs may be useful for multi-alphaherpesvirus vaccine design and adoptive cellular therapy.

In this brief report, we compare the magnitude and durability of the serologic response of one versus two doses (separated by 56 days) of a variant vaccine (Moderna mRNA-1273 Beta/Omicron BA.1 bivalent vaccine) in adults.

In a randomized clinical trial, we compare early neutralizing antibody responses after boosting with bivalent SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines based on either BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5 Omicron spike protein combined with wildtype spike. Responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants exhibited the greatest reduction in titers against currently circulating Omicron subvariants for both bivalent vaccines., Competing Interests: EJA has received grants from Pfizer, Moderna, Janssen, GSK, Sanofi, Micron, and Regeneron through institution as well as consulting fees from Pfizer, Janssen, Moderna, and Sanofi. EJA serves on safety/advisory boards for Sanofi, ACI Clinical/WCG and Kentucky Bioscience, Inc.ARB has received research support from NIH-NIAID, grants from Pfizer, Cyanvac, and Merck as well as consulting fees from Janssen and GSK.LRB has received grants from Wellcome Trust, Gates Foundation, NIH/Harvard Medical School through institution. Serves as member of DSMB for NIH and AMDAC for FDA. Dr Baden is involved in HIV and SARS-CoV-2 vaccine clinical trials conducted in collaboration with the NIH, HIV Vaccine Trials Network (HVTN), Covid Vaccine Prevention Network (CoVPN), International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI), Crucell/Janssen, Moderna, Military HIV Research Program (MHRP), the Gates Foundation, and Harvard Medical School.DJD has received a contract from Leidos Biomedical research to conduct the clinical trial through institution.ARF has received grants from Janssen, Pfizer, Merck, BioFire Diagnostics, and CyanVac through institution, consultant fees from Arrowhead and Icosavax, and honoraria as a speaker from Moderna and GlaxoSmithKline. ARF also serves on safety/advisory boards for Novavax and received travel/meeting support from GlaxoSmithKline.SEF has received f unding from Leidos to Saint Louis University to conduct Protocol DMID22-0004.DNF has as a contract from CDC and is the site PI for clinical trials from Gilead, Regeneron and MetroBiotech LLC. She is the PI on one investigator-initiated award from Gilead and the co-PI on another investigator initiated award from Gilead. DNF served on an HBV Advisory board for Gilead in 2021 and received payment for expert testimony not related to COVID in 2022.PAG has received funding for COVAIL clinical trial. PAG has also received consulting fees from Janssen Vaccines.LCI has received support for the present manuscript from NIH-NIAID/DMID, Moderna, Pfizer, and Sanofi. LCI has also received grants from GSK, Merck, Sharpe & Dohme Corp, CDC, Novavax, AHRQ, and NIH/NLM/NIMHD as well as consulting fees from Moderna, CDC, and Pediatric Emergency Medicine Associates, LLC. LCI has received honoraria as a speaker from American Academy of Pediatrics, Rockefeller University, and American Academy of Pediatrics- Georgia Chapter. LCI Serves on Data Safety Monitoring for NIH-Phase 2 Vaccine Trial for Monkeypox, Moderna Scientific Advisory Board- North America, and CoVID-19 Task Force, Georgia. LCI has a leadership role in the Pediatric Infectious Disease Society and serves as board member on the Emory University- Pediatric and Reproductive Environmental Health Scholars-Southeastern, the Center for Spatial Analytics of the Georgia Institute of Technology, and the American Academy of Pediatrics (Executive Board for Section on Infectious Diseases). LCI has received travel/meeting support from the American Academy of Pediatrics and Moderna.LAJ has received funding from NIH for support for this study, funding from Pfizer to support a clinical trial and contract funding for research support from the CDC and the NIH, all through institution. LAJ also reports unpaid participation on Data Safety Monitoring Boards for NIH funded clinical trials.SJL has received NIH grants through institution.AFL has received grants from Merck, Gilead and, Viiv through institution as well as consulting fees from Vir Biotechnology. AFL has also received travel support from Merck to attend a required investigator meeting, testing kits and supplies to support research study from Hologic, and medication donated by Mayne Pharma to support research study.MM has received funding from Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases for contract # 75N93021C00012.DCM has received funding from NIH/75N93019C00050-21A: CIVICS A- Option 21A-DMID Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines.JM has received funding from Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, contract # 75N93021C00012.AN has received support from NIH-NIAID, CEIRR (Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and Response) and Gates Cambridge Trust as well as grants from NIH-NIAID R01.RMN has received grants from Moderna and Janssen and travel/meeting support from Moderna.CMP has received funding from NIAID UM1AI148684.RMP has received funding from NIH DMID COVAIL as well as grants from Janssen, Moderna and NIH through institution.NGR has received research grants from Pfizer, Merck, Sanofi, Quidel and Lilly through institution, consulting fees from Krog, honoraria as speaker for Virology education, and travel support from Sanofi. NGR serves on safety committees for ICON and EMMES and is a member of the Moderna Advisory board.DJS has received support from NIH-NIAID CEIRR , grants from NIH-NIAID R01, and travel support from NIH-NIAID CEIRR for NIH-related meetings.KT has received funding from Division of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases contract # 75N93021C00012.EBW has received funding from Leidos Biomedical Research AGREEMENT NO. 22CTA-DM0009 as well as grants from Pfizer, Moderna, Sequiris, Clinetic, and Najit Technologies, with payments made to institution. EBW has also received honoraria as a speaker from College of Diplomates of the American Board of Pediatric Dentistry, consulting fees from Iliad Biotechnologies, and travel/meeting support from the American Academy of Pediatrics. EBW serves as member of Vaxcyte Scientific Advisory board.PLW has received subcontract funding from NIH for this study as well as NIH grant funding and contract funding from Pfizer through University of Iowa. PLW has also received consulting fees from Pfizer and serves on safety/advisory board for Emmes Corporation.The following group has no conflicts to declare: RLA, TMB, SMM, MB, MKM, JHB , SC, ACK, CL, PCR, RR, JAW.

Background: Protection from SARS-CoV-2 vaccines wanes over time and is compounded by emerging variants including Omicron subvariants. This study evaluated safety and immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccines., Methods: This phase 2 open-label, randomized trial enrolled healthy adults previously vaccinated with a SARS-CoV-2 primary series and a single boost. Eligible participants were randomized to one of six Moderna COVID19 mRNA vaccine arms (50µg dose): Prototype (mRNA-1273), Omicron BA.1+Beta (1 or 2 doses), Omicron BA.1+Delta, Omicron BA.1 monovalent, and Omicron BA.1+Prototype. Neutralization antibody titers (ID 50 ) were assessed for D614G, Delta, Beta and Omicron BA.1 variants and Omicron BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 subvariants 15 days after vaccination., Results: From March 30 to May 6, 2022, 597 participants were randomized and vaccinated. Median age was 53 years, and 20% had a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. All vaccines were safe and well-tolerated. Day 15 geometric mean titers (GMT) against D614G were similar across arms and ages, and higher with prior infection. For uninfected participants, Day 15 Omicron BA.1 GMTs were similar across Omicron-containing vaccine arms (3724-4561) and higher than Prototype (1,997 [95%CI:1,482-2,692]). The Omicron BA.1 monovalent and Omicron BA.1+Prototype vaccines induced a geometric mean ratio (GMR) to Prototype for Omicron BA.1 of 2.03 (97.5%CI:1.37-3.00) and 1.56 (97.5%CI:1.06-2.31), respectively. A subset of samples from uninfected participants in four arms were also tested in a different laboratory at Day 15 for neutralizing antibody titers to D614G and Omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2.12.2 and BA.4/BA.5. Omicron BA.4/BA.5 GMTs were approximately one third BA.1 GMTs (Prototype 517 [95%CI:324-826] vs. 1503 [95%CI:949-2381]; Omicron BA.1+Beta 628 [95%CI:367-1,074] vs. 2125 [95%CI:1139-3965]; Omicron BA.1+Delta 765 [95%CI:443-1,322] vs. 2242 [95%CI:1218-4128] and Omicron BA.1+Prototype 635 [95%CI:447-903] vs. 1972 [95%CI:1337-2907)., Conclusions: Higher Omicron BA.1 titers were observed with Omicron-containing vaccines compared to Prototype vaccine and titers against Omicron BA.4/BA.5 were lower than against BA.1 for all candidate vaccines., Clinicaltrialsgov: NCT05289037.