Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37140889›Full record

ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2023

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of heterologous prime-boost vaccination with inactivated COVID-19 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccines, a quasi-experimental study.

Kriangkrai Tawinprai, Pawornrath Jungsomsri, Onnicha Pinijnai, Fahsiri Tavonvunchai, Anchisa Lievjaroen, Paphada Suwannaroj, Taweegrit Siripongboonsitti, Thachanun Porntharukchareon, Gaidganok Sornsamdang, Teerapat Ungtrakul

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Kriangkrai TawinpraiDepartment of Medicine, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-2862-948X
Pawornrath JungsomsriDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Onnicha PinijnaiDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Fahsiri TavonvunchaiDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Anchisa LievjaroenDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Paphada SuwannarojDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Taweegrit SiripongboonsittiDepartment of Medicine, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thachanun PorntharukchareonDepartment of Medicine, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Gaidganok SornsamdangCentral Laboratory Center, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Teerapat UngtrakulPrincess Srisavangavadhana College of Medicine, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The global supply of COVID-19 vaccines has been limited, and concerns have arisen about vaccine supply chain disruptions in developing countries. Heterologous prime-boost vaccination, which involves using different vaccines for the first and second doses, has been proposed to enhance the immune response. We aimed to compare the immunogenicity and safety of a heterologous prime-boost vaccination using an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine and AZD1222 vaccine with that of a homologous vaccination using AZD1222. This pilot involved 164 healthy volunteers without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection aged 18 years or older assigned to receive either the heterologous or homologous vaccination. The results showed that the heterologous approach was safe and well-tolerated, although the reactogenicity of the heterologous approach was higher. At 4 weeks after receiving the booster dose, the heterologous approach elicited a non-inferior immune response compared to the homologous approach in neutralizing antibody and cell-mediated immune response. The percentage of inhibition was 83.88 (79.72-88.03) in the heterologous and 79.88 (75.50-84.25) in the homologous group, a mean difference of 4.60 (-1.67-10.88). The geometric mean of interferon-gamma was 1072.53 mIU/mL (799.29-1439.18) in the heterologous group and 867.67 mIU/mL (671.94-1120.40) in the homologous group, a GMR of 1.24 (0.82-1.85). However, the binding antibody test of the heterologous group was inferior to the homologous group. Our findings suggest that the use of heterologous prime-boost vaccination with different types of COVID-19 vaccines is a viable strategy, especially in settings where vaccine supply is limited or where vaccine distribution is challenging.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesAntibodies, ViralChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansImmunogenicity, VaccineSARS-CoV-2VaccinationAntibodies, ViralChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesAZD1222BBIBP-CorVChAdOx1 nCoV-19CoronaVacCOVID-19heterologous prime-boostvaccine combination

Identifiers

PMID37140889
PMCPMC10294770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.