Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35430106›Full record

ArticleVaccine2022

Dynamic of anti-spike receptor binding domain (RBD) levels and short-term adverse events following a heterologous booster dose of BNT162b2 after two doses of CoronaVac in Thai health care workers.

Amonrphat Kitro, Wachiranun Sirikul, Weeraya Thongkum, Suthinee Soponpong, Umpa Yasamut, Wuttipat Kiratipaisarl, Apiradee Kosai, Watchara Kasinrerk, Chatchai Tayapiwatana, Kriengkrai Srithanaviboonchai

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amonrphat KitroDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
Wachiranun SirikulDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
Weeraya ThongkumCenter of Biomolecular Therapy and Diagnostic, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand; Center of Innovative Immunodiagnostic Development, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
Suthinee SoponpongCenter of Biomolecular Therapy and Diagnostic, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand; Center of Innovative Immunodiagnostic Development, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
Umpa YasamutCenter of Biomolecular Therapy and Diagnostic, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand; Center of Innovative Immunodiagnostic Development, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand; Division of Clinical Immunology, Department of Medical Technology, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
Wuttipat KiratipaisarlFaculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
Apiradee KosaiFaculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
Watchara KasinrerkCenter of Biomolecular Therapy and Diagnostic, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand; Center of Innovative Immunodiagnostic Development, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
Chatchai TayapiwatanaCenter of Biomolecular Therapy and Diagnostic, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand; Center of Innovative Immunodiagnostic Development, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand; Division of Clinical Immunology, Department of Medical Technology, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand. Electronic address: chatchai.t@cmu.ac.th.
Kriengkrai SrithanaviboonchaiDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand; Research Institute for Health Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Thailand. Electronic address: kriengkrai.s@cmu.ac.th.
Chiang Mai University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCoronaVac was administered as the primary COVID-19 vaccine for Thai health care workers (HCWs) in early 2021 in response to the epidemic of new variants. This study aimed to evaluate the dynamic of humoral immune response as well as the short-term side effects resulting from the booster dose of BNT162b2 following completion of a CoronaVac double-dose in Thai HCWs.

methodsThis study was conducted at a teaching hospital in Northern Thailand during August and September 2021. The participants were 50 HCWs who were vaccinated with 2 doses of CoronaVac and were scheduled to receive a booster dose of BNT162b2. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies levels and short-term side effects were assessed. The anti-RBD level was determined using Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant (Abbott).

resultOf the 50 participants, 37 were female. The median age was 33.0 years old. The average time between the second CoronaVac shot and the BNT162b2 booster shot was 81.7 days (SD = 25.0). The median anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody level on booster vaccination date, as well as day 14, and day 28 after the booster were 335.5 AU/ml, 31,613.5 AU/ml, and 20,311.9 AU/ml, respectively. Fourteen days after the booster, 94% of participants had anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels higher than 50.0 AU/ml. Being female, higher log anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies prior to booster vaccination, and longer interval between the second shot and the booster shot were found to be significantly associated with higher levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies at both day 14 and day 28 after the booster. There were no reports of serious adverse events.

conclusionA booster dose of BNT162B2 promoted a high level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies among HCWs who received 2 doses of CoronaVac. The time between the second CoronaVac shot and the booster shot should be at least three months. There were no severe adverse effects observed.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAdultAntibodies, ViralBNT162 VaccineFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansImmunoglobulin GMaleSARS-CoV-2ThailandAntibodies, ViralBNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 VaccinesImmunoglobulin GAdverse eventAnti-spike receptor binding domainBooster doseCOVID-19COVID mRNA vaccineImmunogenicity

Identifiers

PMID35430106
PMCPMC9007420
OpenAlexW4224043451

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.