ArticleFrontiers in immunology2023
Relatively preserved functional immune capacity with standard COVID-19 vaccine regimen in people living with HIV.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Immunogenicity and safety of the booster COVID-19 vaccine among people with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Pooled it
- Dynamic SARS-CoV-2-specific B-cell and T-cell responses induced in people living with HIV after a full course of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- T-Cell Responses to COVID-19 Vaccines and Breakthrough Infection in People Living with HIV Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy.Viruses · 2024Article
- A Multivariant Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test Demonstrates Distinct SARS-CoV-2-Specific Antibody Responses in People Living with HIV after a Fourth Monovalent mRNA Vaccination or an Omicron Breakthrough Infection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: People living with HIV (PLWH) are at a higher risk of severe disease with SARS-CoV-2 virus infection. COVID-19 vaccines are effective in most PLWH. However, suboptimal immune responses to the standard two-shot regimen are a concern, especially for those with moderate to severe immunodeficiency. An additional dose is recommended as part of the extended primary series in Taiwan. Herein, we study the efficacy of this additional shot in PLWH with mild immunodeficiency compared to that in healthy non-HIV people. Methods: In total, 72 PLWH that were asymptomatic or with mild immunodeficiency (CD4 counts ≥200/mm Results: The standard two-shot regimen elicited lower responses in PLWH than the healthcare workers without HIV infection, although the difference was statistically insignificant. They had comparable levels of neutralizing and anti-Spike antibodies and comparable effector CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses. The third shot boosted the SARS-CoV-2 immunity significantly more with better antibody responses and higher IFN-γ and IL-2 responses of the CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in PLWH compared to those without HIV. Upon Conclusion: This subtle difference between PLWH and non-HIV people implied immune exhaustion with two shots in non-HIV people. Slightly compromised immunity in PLWH indeed preserved the functional capacity for further response to the third shot or natural infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.