ArticleHealth science reports2024
Monitoring of adaptive immune responses in healthcare workers who received a Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine booster dose.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Monitoring of adaptive immune responses in healthcare workers who received a Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine booster dose.Health science reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic and led to increased mortality and morbidity. Vaccines against the etiologic agent; severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) were approved for emergency use on different platforms. In the early phase of the pandemic, Thai healthcare workers (HCWs) received CoronaVac, an inactivated vaccine, as the first vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, followed by ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, a viral vector-based vaccine, or BNT162b2, an mRNA vaccine, as a booster dose. This preliminary study evaluated the immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 as a booster dose in HCWs who previously received two doses of CoronaVac. Methods: Ten HCW participants received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and another 10 HCWs received BNT162b2 as a booster dose after two doses of CoronaVac. Anti-RBD IgG, neutralizing antibodies (NAb), and cellular immunity, including interferon-gamma (IFN-γ)-releasing CD4, CD8, double negative T cells, and NK cells, were measured at 3 and 5 months after the booster dose. Results: There was no significant difference in anti-RBD IgG levels at 3 and 5 months between the two different types of booster vaccine. The levels of anti-RBD IgG and NAb were significantly decreased at 5 months. HCWs receiving BNT162b2 had significantly higher NAb levels than those receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 at 5 months after the booster dose. IFN-γ release from CD4 T cells was detected at 3 months with no significant difference between the two types of booster vaccines. However, IFN-γ-releasing CD4 T cells were present at 5 months in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group only. Conclusion: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 can be used as a booster dose after completion of the primary series primed by inactivated vaccine. Although the levels of immunity decline at 5 months, they may be adequate during the first 3 months after the booster dose.
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.