Abstract
Background:
SARS-CoV-2 vaccination has proven the most effective measure to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Booster doses are being administered with limited knowledge on their need and effect on immunity.
Objective:
To determine the duration of specific T cells, antibodies and neutralization after 2-dose vaccination, to assess the effect of a third dose on adaptive immunity and to explore correlates of protection against breakthrough infection.
Methods:
12-month longitudinal assessment of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells, IgG and neutralizing antibodies triggered by 2 BNT162b2 doses followed by a third mRNA-1273 dose in a cohort of 77 healthcare workers: 17 with SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to vaccination (recovered) and 60 naïve.
Results:
Peak levels of cellular and humoral response were achieved 2 weeks after the second dose. Antibodies declined thereafter while T cells reached a plateau 3 months after vaccination. The decline in neutralization was specially marked in naïve individuals and it was this group who benefited most from the third dose, which resulted in a 20.9-fold increase in neutralization. Overall, recovered individuals maintained higher levels of T cells, antibodies and neutralization 1 to 6 months post-vaccination than naïve. Seventeen asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections were reported during follow-up, only in naïve individuals. This viral exposure boosted adaptive immunity. High peak levels of T cells and neutralizing antibodies 15 days post-vaccination associated with protection from breakthrough infections.
Conclusion:
Booster vaccination in naïve individuals and the inclusion of viral antigens other than spike in future vaccine formulations could be useful strategies to prevent SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections.
Introduction
Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has been revealed as the most effective measure to control the COVID-19 pandemic preventing infection and especially severe disease (). The 2-dose mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) encoding a stabilized version of the full-length spike protein have been broadly administered after showing safety and a 95% efficacy in preventing symptomatic disease in clinical trials (, ). These mRNA vaccines elicit an early and potent humoral immune response (–), that begins to decline after 1 month post-vaccination (, ). However, circulating antibodies persist for at least 6 months (–) and their neutralizing activity has been detected up to 8 months after vaccination (). Moreover, the efficacy of the vaccine in preventing hospital admissions and deaths is maintained beyond six months post-vaccination (, ). Yet, some studies report that decreased antibody levels may be associated with an increased rate of infections (, ).
Immunological studies of SARS-CoV-2 infection highlight the role of specific T cells in disease control (–) and support that only measuring specific IgG may underestimate protection against COVID-19 (, ). mRNA vaccination has also been shown to develop spike-specific T cells (, , , ) that can contribute to protection upon exposure to the virus. Nevertheless, the durability and magnitude of memory T cells after vaccination remains poorly understood since only a handful of studies have studied the maintenance of T cell response up to six months post-vaccination (, –).
The emergence of several SARS-CoV-2 variants and the increased transmission have promoted the application of third vaccine booster dose strategies in different countries. However, information on how preexisting SARS-CoV-2 humoral and cellular immunity are boosted by a third mRNA vaccination remains limited. Recent studies have shown improved effectiveness of a third dose in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe illness (–) and an increase in antibodies levels (, ) and neutralization efficiency (). Yet, data on the real-world T cell immunity dynamic after third doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine are still very scarce (–34).
Here we show the first longitudinal analysis including the cellular, IgG and neutralizing antibody responses elicited by the 2-dose BNT162b2 vaccination plus a third mRNA-1273 boost dose in 77 healthcare workers, 17 of whom had suffered SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to the first vaccine dose. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells remained stable 3 to 6 months after 2-dose mRNA vaccination, whereas antibodies and their neutralizing activity gradually declined. We also describe that SARS-CoV-2 recovered individuals maintained higher levels of specific T cells and total and neutralizing antibodies than naïve individuals. In addition, administration of the third vaccine dose boosted cell- and antibody-mediated immunity, especially T cells in recovered subjects and neutralizing antibodies in naïve subjects. Finally, we describe the association between high peak levels of T cells and neutralizing antibodies post-vaccination and protection from breakthrough infections. These analyses provide insights into mRNA vaccine-induced immunogenicity and may be relevant for future vaccine strategies, including recommendations and target populations for booster doses.
Materials and methods
Study design and sample collection
Seventy-seven healthcare workers undergoing COVID-19 vaccination were recruited at Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre (Madrid, Spain). Participants received the two 30 µg dose, 21 days apart, BNT162b2 vaccination schedule in early 2021, and after 10 months they received the 50-µg mRNA-1273 boost, in December 2021. Samples were longitudinally collected at 7 time points: pre-vaccine baseline, 21 days after the first BNT162b2-dose, 15 days, 1, 3 and 6 months after the second BNT162b2-dose and 30 days after mRNA-1273 third boost dose. The subjects were further stratified on the basis of SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to vaccination confirmed by either positive RT-PCR or S1 domain of the Spike glycoprotein (S1), Nucleocapsid (N) and/or Membrane (M) SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells above the positivity threshold by fluorospot (60 SARS-CoV-2-naïve; 17 SARS-CoV-2-recovered) (Figure 1A). Vaccination side effects after the three vaccine doses were collected using a standardized questionnaire. The Institutional Review Board approved the study (21/039 and 21/056).
Figure 1
FluoroSpot assay
Freshly isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were seeded in duplicate at 300,000 cells/well in IFN-γ IL-2 FluoroSpot™ plates (MabTech). Cells were supplemented with 15-mer overlapping peptides covering the S1 domain of the Spike glycoprotein (SARS-CoV-2 S1 scanning pool, MabTech), the Nucleocapsid protein (Epitope Mapping Peptide Set [EMPS] SARS-CoV-2 NCAP-1, JPT), and the Membrane protein (EMPS SARS-CoV-2 VME1, JPT) at a final concentration of 1 µg/mL. Assays were incubated for 16-18 hours at 37°C. Spots were counted using automated IRIS™ FluoroSpot Reader System (MabTech). Results were expressed as IFN-γ- or IL-2-producing spot forming units (sfu) per 106 PBMCs. Reponses were considered positive if the results were at least three times higher than the mean of the negative control and >25 IFN-γ sfu/106 PBMCs for S1, >14 IFN-γ sfu/106 PBMCs for N, and >21 IFN-γ sfu/106 PBMCs for M proteins, as previously published (, 35). Apart from the sfu, which correspond to the frequency of antigen-specific T cell clones, the relative spot volume (RSV), which represented the amount of secreted IFN-γ per spot, was also obtained.
Anti-S1 IgG detection by ELISA
Serum SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies targeting the S1 protein were detected with the Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA (Euroimmun AG, Lübeck, Germany) according to manufacturer’s instructions. Results were evaluated semi-quantitatively by calculating the ratio of the OD value of the sample over the OD value of the calibrator (relative OD), with the following cut-off values: OD ratio <1.1: negative; and OD_ratio ≥1.1: positive.
SARS-CoV-2 neutralization assay
SARS-CoV-2-pseudotyped rVSV-luc were produced as previously published (, 36, 37). Serum samples were tested at dilutions 1:80, 240, 720, 2160, 6480. SARS-CoV-2-pseudotyped rVSV-luc was normalized for infectivity to a MOI of 0.5 and incubated with the serum samples at 37° C for 1 h. Next, Vero E6 cells were seeded onto the virus-serum mixture and incubated at 37°C for 24h. Cells were then lysed and assayed for luciferase expression. Neutralizing titer 50 (NT50) was calculated using a nonlinear regression model fit with settings for log agonist versus normalized response curve. Neutralization potency of serum samples were calibrated using the WHO International Standard 20/136, which was assigned 813 International Units per ml [IU/ml]. Calibrated NT50 in IU/ml for each serum sample was calculated as the observed NT50 titers multiplied by the calibration factor (assigned as 0.756), which is estimated as 813 IU/ml divided by NT50 (tested as 1:1075) of the 20/136 standard (, 36). The cut-off titer for neutralization positivity was 45 IU/ml (38).
Statistical analysis
Quantitative data were shown as the median with IQR, and qualitative variables were expressed as absolute and relative frequencies. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney U or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were applied for comparison within two groups, when necessary. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare three or more unmatched groups. Correlations between continuous variables were evaluated using Spearman’s rank test. Grouping of individuals was done according to mean SFU and neutralization titer. Differences were considered statistically significant when p<0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism version 8.0 software (GraphPad Software Inc, LaJolla, CA) and R software v4.1.1.
Results
Cohort design and participants
Cellular and humoral SARS-CoV-2-specific immune responses were prospectively analysed in 77 healthcare workers undergoing vaccination, comprising a total of 539 longitudinal samples studied (Figure 1A). The median age of the cohort was 39 years old (interquartile range [IQR] 22-64 years) and 57/77 (74%) participants were females, with no relevant comorbidities. Based on SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to vaccination, the cohort included 60 SARS-CoV-2 naïve and 17 recovered individuals. All recovered subjects had been infected by the ancestral Wuhan SARS-CoV-2 strain during the first pandemic wave in Spain. They had been either asymptomatic or suffered mild COVID-19 (WHO ordinal scale of 0-2). The median time from symptom onset to administration of the first BNT162b2-dose was 285 days ([IQR] 272-298 days). There were no differences in sex or age between naïve and recovered individuals. Vaccination side effects were more frequent among subjects with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to naïve subjects (Figure S1), and increased their frequency with subsequent vaccine doses (median [IQR] number of side effects after the first, second and third doses were 2 [2-3], 4 [2-6] and 5 [3-7], respectively).
Vaccine-triggered adaptive immune response dynamics
We studied the development and maintenance of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells, IgG, and neutralizing antibodies after vaccination in SARS-CoV-2 naïve and recovered individuals. Among naïve subjects, the peak S1-specific cellular response was achieved 15 days after the second vaccine dose, then it decreased steadily and finally reached a plateau at month 3, remaining stable up to month 6 post-vaccination (Figure 1B). All vaccinees except one remained above the positivity threshold for cellular response during this period. The administration of the third booster dose significantly increased the number of S1-specific T cells compared to 6 months post-vaccination (Figure 1B), although, the magnitude of this response did not reach peak levels. Regarding the humoral response, peak levels of S1-specific IgG antibodies were also detected 15 days after the second dose, and then they gradually declined over the next 6 months although remained detectable in all subjects (Figure 1C). The third vaccine dose boosted anti-S1 IgG to levels comparable to the peak response (Figure 1C). Similarly, the maximum neutralizing response against SARS-CoV-2 elicited by 2 vaccine doses was observed 15 days after the second dose and it experienced a remarkable reduction over the course of the next 6 months (Figure 1D). All vaccinees except one remained positive for neutralization, although the levels of neutralization 6 months after the second dose were only slightly above the 45 IU/ml positivity threshold. Among naïve individuals the third vaccine dose elicited the highest levels of neutralizing antibodies, with a 20.9-fold increase compared to the previous measurement (Figure 1D). Anti-S1 IgG positively correlated with the neutralizing activity of serum samples at all time points (Figure S2). The development of IL-2-producing and IFN-γ+IL-2 double positive S1-specific T cells followed a dynamic similar to that of IFN-γ-producing T cells (Figures S3A, B), although 3 and 6 months after the second dose the number of IL-2-producing clones significantly exceeded that of IFN-γ (Figure S3C).
Similar to naïve individuals, in SARS-CoV-2 recovered subjects the maximum cellular response to vaccination was reached 2 weeks after the second dose, it declined up to month 3 and then remained stable up to month 6 (Figures 1E, S3D, E). During this period, there were more IFN-γ-producing T cells than IL-2 (Figure S3F). The third vaccine dose significantly enhanced the S1-specific T cell response which reached peak levels (Figure 1E). Similarly, anti-S1 IgG levels reached their peak 2 weeks after the second dose and then experienced a progressive decline up to month 6, although all subjects remained S1-IgG-positive (Figure 1F). After the third dose the anti-S1 IgG antibodies were the highest. The neutralizing activity followed a similar profile to that of total antibodies, and despite the decline over time, neutralizing antibodies remained well above the positivity threshold 6 months after vaccination (Figure 1G). The third vaccine administration boosted the neutralizing activity with a 2.3-fold increase, which nevertheless did not reach the maximal level observed 15 days post-second dose. As in naïve individuals, anti-S1 IgG positively correlated with the neutralizing activity of serum samples at all time points (Figure S2).
Distinct patterns and maintenance of response in SARS-CoV-2 naïve and recovered individuals
mRNA vaccines induced robust circulating cellular and antibody responses specific to the S1 SARS-CoV-2 protein. However, these responses showed different dynamics depending on whether or not individuals had COVID-19 prior to vaccination. Although the peak T cell response elicited 2 weeks after the second dose was similar in both groups (Figures 1H, S3G, H), the maintenance of IFN-γ-producing T cell responses thereafter was significantly higher in SARS-CoV-2 recovered than in naïve individuals, both the number of specific T cells and the amount of IFN-γ released by each T cell clone (Figures 1H, S3I). After the third dose, the T cell response developed in subjects with prior COVID-19 was significantly higher both in the number of S1-specific clones (Figure 1H) and in the amount of IFN-γ secreted per clone (Figure S3I) compared to naïve individuals.
Humoral response paralleled T cell behaviour, since anti-S1 IgG peak levels were similar at 2 weeks post-second vaccine dose but the decline in antibody levels was significantly lower in SARS-CoV-2 recovered compared to naïve individuals over the course of the next 6 months (Figure 1I). The administration of the third vaccine dose elicited similar anti-S1 IgG levels in both groups (Figure 1I). Two-dose vaccination in SARS-CoV-2 recovered individuals induced a much higher level of neutralizing antibodies as compared with naïve individuals up to 6 months post-vaccination (Figure 1J). Three vaccine doses were required to develop a similar neutralizing activity in both cohorts (Figure 1J). The boost in neutralizing capacity triggered by the third dose was much higher in naïve than in recovered individuals (20.9- versus 2.3-fold increase).
We found no association between age and strength of the cellular or humoral immune response as measured at month 6 after 2-dose vaccination, either in SARS-CoV-2 naïve or recovered individuals (Figures S4A–C). Finally, significant positive correlations between the number of side effects and the magnitude of both T cell and antibody responses were exclusively found in SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals after the second vaccine dose (Figures S4D–I).
Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections after mRNA vaccination
Five naïve individuals had a SARS-CoV-2 infection 3 to 6 months after completing the standard 2-dose vaccination and another 12 naïve subjects suffered a breakthrough infection approximately 1 month after the boost, coinciding with the Omicron pandemic wave (Figure 2A). All breakthrough infections in naïve individuals ranged from asymptomatic to mild COVID-19 (WHO ordinal scale of 0-2). In contrast, no breakthrough infection was recorded in the COVID-19 recovered individuals, neither after the second or the third dose (Figure 2B). As expected, none of the individuals who remained naïve developed M- or N-specific T cells during follow-up (Figure 2C), while the absence of breakthrough infections in recovered individuals could be confirmed by the lack of any boost in the specific T cell response against M or N proteins (Figure 2D). Of note, all SARS-CoV-2 recovered individuals maintained cellular response against M and/or N above the positivity threshold during follow-up (Figure 2D), which meant recovered subjects exhibited detectable virus-specific memory T cells up to 22 months after infection, coinciding with the post-boost sample. Recovered subjects were protected against breakthrough infection compared to naïve (0/17 versus 17/60, Fisher’s test, p=0.017). Demographic and immunological characteristics of subjects infected after vaccination are shown in Table 1. None of the analysed immune parameters were consistently low in infected compared to uninfected individuals. Interestingly, a cluster analysis in naïve individuals based on the mean peak cellular and neutralizing response after vaccination showed that subjects who developed both high T cell (>700 S1 IFN-γ sfu/106 PBMCs) and neutralizing (>1/1206 IU/ml) response, were protected against breakthrough infection (Figure 2E). These analyses suggest that individuals with a lower-than-average cellular or neutralizing response may benefit from the administration of a third booster dose.
Figure 2
Table 1
| Subject | Sexa | Age(years) | Time from last dose to infection | Peak T cellb (sfu/106PBMCs) | T cell prior to infectionc(sfu/106PBMCs) | Peak IgGb (OD ratio) | IgG prior to infectionc(OD ratio) | Peak Nabsb (IU/ml) | Nabs prior to infectionc (IU/ml) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | F | 39 | 96 days | 158 | NA | 10.1 | NA | 470 | NA |
| 2 | F | 25 | 154 days | 1598 | 237 | 25.6 | 11.0 | 1543 | 338 |
| 3 | M | 22 | 163 days | 1987 | 730 | 19.8 | 8.7 | 1111 | 297 |
| 4 | F | 51 | 170 days | 577 | 60 | 9.4 | 6.2 | 612 | 109 |
| 5 | F | 41 | 178 days | 308 | 280 | 12.6 | 9.7 | 1075 | 340 |
| 6 | F | 52 | 17 days | 387 | 225 | 18.0 | 7.8 | 2580 | 244 |
| 7 | F | 33 | 18 days | 663 | 88 | 28.2 | 8.2 | 2120 | 178 |
| 8 | F | 37 | 18 days | 610 | 223 | 21.9 | 3.25 | NA | NA |
| 9 | F | 61 | 19 days | 847 | 413 | 18.9 | 7.1 | 924 | 269 |
| 10 | F | 37 | 20 days | 605 | 170 | 22.1 | 8.2 | 1111 | 222 |
| 11 | M | 30 | 21 days | 119 | 108 | 27.9 | 10.3 | 2835 | 297 |
| 12 | F | 56 | 26 days | 548 | 153 | 12.2 | 6.83 | NA | NA |
| 13 | F | 45 | 28 days | 313 | 203 | 10.7 | 5.3 | 358 | 169 |
| 14 | F | 34 | 29 days | 658 | 197 | 22.6 | 4.6 | 2611 | 178 |
| 15 | M | 44 | 31 days | 915 | 297 | 23.9 | 8.9 | 1659 | 271 |
| 16 | F | 25 | 32 days | 1672 | 1017 | 24.1 | 8.1 | 1622 | 362 |
| 17 | F | 43 | 34 days | 213 | 43 | 20.8 | 8.4 | 1467 | 410 |
| Mean Breakthrough Infection | 716 | 277 | 19.3 | 7.7 | 1473 | 263 | |||
| Mean Naïve During Follow-up | 711 | 258 | 17.0 | 7.1 | 1206 | 206 | |||
| Mean Naïve Cohort | 700 | 256 | 18.0 | 7.0 | 1206 | 206 | |||
Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals after mRNA vaccination.
F, Female; M, Male.
Peak response was achieved 15 days after the second BNT162b2 dose.
Subjects 1-5 were infected after the 2nd dose, their timepoint prior to infection was 3 months.
Subjects 6-17 were infected after the 3rd dose, their timepoint prior to infection was 6 months.
Finally, regarding the effect of breakthrough infections on immunity, SARS-CoV-2 infections after the second or the third vaccine dose increased the S1-specific T cell response compared to individuals who remained naïve throughout the study (Figures 3A–C, S5A–D), and, as expected, also induced the development of IFN-γ T cells against SARS-CoV-2 M and N proteins (Figures S5E, F). Both total (Figures 3D–F) and neutralizing (Figures 3G–I) antibodies were also boosted after exposure to the virus.
Figure 3
Discussion
There is currently the need to better understand the longevity of specific immune responses after SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination and to characterize the effect of booster doses on immunity in order to take informed decisions on the adequacy, and optimal interval, of successive vaccine doses. Our longitudinal analysis of cellular and humoral SARS-CoV-2-specific immunity elicited by mRNA vaccination showed the different dynamic and maintenance of virus-specific memory depending on whether or not a SARS-CoV-2 infection has been passed prior to vaccination. In addition, we describe in real-world conditions how a third mRNA vaccine dose not only boosted pre-existing SARS-CoV-2 humoral but also cellular immunity.
Similarly to previous reports we found robust antigen-specific cellular and humoral responses after 2-dose BNT162b2 vaccination schedule (, , 39), which relates with a high effectiveness in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection in the real world (, 40, 41). However, a decrease in immunity was observed 1 month post-vaccination, and while T cells reached a plateau, antibodies continued to decline steadily. This waning immunity could cause, together with the emergence of viral variants, the observed decrease in vaccine effectiveness (, , 41, 42). In our cohort there was a patient with a particularly poor cellular and humoral response to vaccination who was a 60-year-old man with a past history of alcohol abuse and currently in a good general condition under treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, beta-blocker, disulfiram and gabapentin. This medical history could possibly explain his weak immune response; however, he remained naïve during follow-up.
So far, most studies have focused on the magnitude of the spike-specific antibody response or neutralizing titer following COVID-19 vaccination (, , , 43–45). Our results showed that the number of S1-specific T cell clones remains stable from 3 to 6 months after the second BNT162b2 dose administration, confirming recent observations (, ). SARS-CoV-2 infection studies have demonstrated that T cell response is essential for viral clearance, may prevent infection without seroconversion, provides robust memory, and mediates recognition of viral variants (46). In our cohort, all individuals who had COVID-19 prior to vaccination maintained a cellular response against M and N above the positivity threshold 22 months post-symptom onset. This characterization of virus-specific T cell memory up to 22 months goes beyond previous studies that limited SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells determination up to 12 (47) and 15 months post-infection (48). In addition, to date, vaccine-elicited T cell responses remain capable of recognizing all known SARS-CoV-2 variants (, 49). Altogether these data suggest that SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells could provide long-term protection against severe COVID-19 and death.
The strength and maintenance of IFN-γ-producing T cells and total and neutralizing antibodies from 1 to 6 months post-vaccination were significantly higher in SARS-CoV-2 recovered compared to naïve individuals. Recovered subjects present what is called “hybrid immunity”, which is developed by the combination of vaccination and natural infection, and results in more potent and long-lived immune response (50), partly due to a wider breadth for T cells and antibodies (51, 52). In fact, in our cohort none of the recovered subjects had a breakthrough infection during the 12-month follow up period. The protection shown by recovered subjects suggests that the design of vaccines that include antigens from viral proteins other than spike may complement and boost the immunity in already vaccinated population.
Administration of the third vaccine dose boosted humoral and cell-mediated immunity, which likely explains the findings that COVID-19 booster vaccination restores relative effectiveness to 90-95% against severe disease or death (, , 53). The boost in T cells was more marked in recovered individuals, while the increase in humoral response, especially neutralizing antibodies, was remarkable in naïve subjects. The third dose produced a 20-fold increase in neutralization in naïve individuals and only then neutralizing antibodies titers were similar to those of recovered subjects. On the contrary, recovered individuals only had a modest antibody boost which suggests that pre-existing high levels of circulating antibodies may limit the effect of vaccine boosting (54). SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals clearly benefited from the booster dose because it greatly enhanced their neutralizing capacity, while the benefit of booster vaccination in recovered individuals is questionable, as already indicated (55). These results may help to better identify target populations that could benefit most from booster doses and to design new fit vaccine strategies.
In our cohort, none of the analysed immune parameters, namely specific T cells, antibodies or neutralizing titers, associated individually with protection from breakthrough infection. It was the combination of a high cellular and neutralizing response after vaccination that protected against breakthrough infection in naïve individuals. Our previous work showed that the development of early and coordinated cellular and humoral responses upon SARS-CoV-2 infection led to a mild course of the disease (). Patients who initially responded to infection by producing a large amount of antibodies tended to develop severe COVID-19. Similarly, the increased production of antibodies after vaccination observed in some naïve subjects did not associate with protection. These findings highlight the relevance of monitoring SARS-CoV-2-specific cellular immune responses, and not only antibody levels, as a correlate for protection after infection and/or vaccination.
A limitation in the search for protection immune correlates is the lack of standardized assays, especially for the measuring of specific cellular responses and neutralizing activity. Mangia et al. recently suggested that simultaneous neutralizing antibody titers <1/20, binding antibody levels <200 BAU/ml and IFN-γ <1,000 mIU/ml could identify subjects at risk of breakthrough infections (56). However, the definition of specific thresholds for risk or protection will not be useful until standardized assays to analyse specific T cell memory and neutralization are developed. In addition, the percentage of women is higher than that of men, which may be a limitation of the study. However, we found no association between sex and strength of the cellular or humoral immune response.
In summary, our work highlights that both specific T cells and neutralizing antibodies are important to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and to reduce severity in breakthrough infections. The third dose significantly increased cellular and humoral immunity against SARS-CoV-2, by enhancing neutralizing capacity especially in naïve individuals and specific T cells mainly in recovered subjects. In order to prevent future infections and severe cases of COVID-19, it would be advisable the administration of booster doses to all naïve individuals and the inclusion of viral antigens other than spike in new mRNA vaccine designs.
Funding
This study was supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (COVID-19 research call COV20/00181) — co‐financed by the European Development Regional Fund “A way to achieve Europe”, Operative Program Intelligent Growth 2014-2020, and by Comunidad de Madrid (INMUNOVACTER REACT-UE) to EP-A. Instituto de Investigación Carlos III grant FIS PI2100989 and the European Commission Horizon Europe (project EPIC-CROWN-2 ref 101046084) to RD. RL-G holds a research contract “Rio Hortega” (CM19/00120) from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation. MC-L holds a predoctoral fellowship (FPU19/06393) from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank all participants, nurses and medical colleagues who contributed to the study.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Statements
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The Institutional Review Board approved the study (21/039 and 21/056). The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
PA-V, RL-G, RD, and EP-A conceived and designed the study. PA-V, MC-L, CG-C, MM-B, LS-P, and RL-G recruited participants and collected clinical data. PA-V, MC-L, AU-R, CG-C, MM-B, LS-P, JL, and NL performed the experimental work. PA-V, MC-L, AU-R, JL, and MF performed the statistical analysis. PA-V, RL-G, and EP-A wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to interpretation of the data. All authors revised the manuscript and approved the final version before submission.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2022.981350/full#supplementary-material
Abbreviations
COVID-19, Coronavirus disease 2019; EMPS, Epitope Mapping Peptide Set; IFN-γ Interferon-γ; IL-2, Interleukin-2; IU/ml, International Units per ml; IQR, Interquartile range; M, Membrane; NT50, Neutralizing titer 50; N, Nucleocapsid; NA, Not assessed; PBMCs, Peripheral blood mononuclear cells; RSV, Relative spot volume; SARS-CoV-2, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; Sfu, Spot forming units.
References
1
ThompsonMGBurgessJLNalewayALTynerHYoonSKMeeceJet al. Prevention and attenuation of covid-19 with the Bnt162b2 and mrna-1273 vaccines. N Engl J Med (2021) 385(4):320–9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2107058
2
BadenLREl SahlyHMEssinkBKotloffKFreySNovakRet al. Efficacy and safety of the mrna-1273 sars-Cov-2 vaccine. N Engl J Med (2021) 384(5):403–16. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2035389
3
PolackFPThomasSJKitchinNAbsalonJGurtmanALockhartSet al. Safety and efficacy of the Bnt162b2 mrna covid-19 vaccine. N Engl J Med (2020) 383(27):2603–15. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
4
GoelRRApostolidisSAPainterMMMathewDPattekarAKuthuruOet al. Distinct antibody and memory b cell responses in sars-Cov-2 naive and recovered individuals following mrna vaccination. Sci Immunol (2021) 6(58). doi: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abi6950
5
KalimuddinSThamCYLQuiMde AlwisRSimJXYLimJMEet al. Early T cell and binding antibody responses are associated with covid-19 rna vaccine efficacy onset. Med (N Y) (2021) 2(6):682–8 e4. doi: 10.1016/j.medj.2021.04.003
6
WangZSchmidtFWeisblumYMueckschFBarnesCOFinkinSet al. Mrna vaccine-elicited antibodies to sars-Cov-2 and circulating variants. Nature (2021) 592(7855):616–22. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03324-6
7
GoelRRPainterMMApostolidisSAMathewDMengWRosenfeldAMet al. Mrna vaccines induce durable immune memory to sars-Cov-2 and variants of concern. Science (2021) 374(6572):abm0829. doi: 10.1126/science.abm0829
8
LevinEGLustigYCohenCFlussRIndenbaumVAmitSet al. Waning immune humoral response to Bnt162b2 covid-19 vaccine over 6 months. N Engl J Med (2021) 385(24):e84. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2114583
9
CiabattiniAPastoreGFiorinoFPolvereJLucchesiSPettiniEet al. Evidence of sars-Cov-2-Specific memory b cells six months after vaccination with the Bnt162b2 mrna vaccine. Front Immunol (2021) 12:740708. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.740708
10
Doria-RoseNSutharMSMakowskiMO'ConnellSMcDermottABFlachBet al. Antibody persistence through 6 months after the second dose of mrna-1273 vaccine for covid-19. N Engl J Med (2021) 384(23):2259–61. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2103916
11
LuczkowiakJLabiodNRivasGRoloMLasalaFLora-TamayoJet al. Neutralizing response against sars-Cov-2 variants 8 months after Bnt162b2 vaccination in naive and covid-19-Convalescent individuals. J Infect Dis (2022) 225(11):1905–8. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiab634
12
GriffinJBHaddixMDanzaPFisherRKooTHTraubEet al. Sars-Cov-2 infections and hospitalizations among persons aged >/=16 years, by vaccination status - Los Angeles county, California, may 1-July 25, 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep (2021) 70(34):1170–6. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7034e5
13
TartofSYSlezakJMFischerHHongVAckersonBKRanasingheONet al. Effectiveness of mrna Bnt162b2 covid-19 vaccine up to 6 months in a Large integrated health system in the USA: A retrospective cohort study. Lancet (2021) 398(10309):1407–16. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02183-8
14
FeikinDRHigdonMMAbu-RaddadLJAndrewsNAraosRGoldbergYet al. Duration of effectiveness of vaccines against sars-Cov-2 infection and covid-19 disease: Results of a systematic review and meta-regression. Lancet (2022) 399(10328):924–44. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00152-0
15
IsraelAMerzonESchafferAAShenharYGreenIGolan-CohenAet al. Elapsed time since Bnt162b2 vaccine and risk of sars-Cov-2 infection: Test negative design study. BMJ (2021) 375:e067873. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-067873
16
Rydyznski ModerbacherCRamirezSIDanJMGrifoniAHastieKMWeiskopfDet al. Antigen-specific adaptive immunity to sars-Cov-2 in acute covid-19 and associations with age and disease severity. Cell (2020) 183(4):996–1012 e19. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.038
17
TanATLinsterMTanCWLe BertNChiaWNKunasegaranKet al. Early induction of functional sars-Cov-2-Specific T cells associates with rapid viral clearance and mild disease in covid-19 patients. Cell Rep (2021) 34(6):108728. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2021.108728
18
ZhouRToKKWongYCLiuLZhouBLiXet al. Acute sars-Cov-2 infection impairs dendritic cell and T cell responses. Immunity (2020) 53(4):864–77 e5. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2020.07.026
19
Almendro-VazquezPLaguna-GoyaRRuiz-RuigomezMUtrero-RicoALaluezaAMaestro de la CalleGet al. Longitudinal dynamics of sars-Cov-2-Specific cellular and humoral immunity after natural infection or Bnt162b2 vaccination. PloS Pathog (2021) 17(12):e1010211. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1010211
20
SekineTPerez-PottiARivera-BallesterosOStralinKGorinJBOlssonAet al. Robust T cell immunity in convalescent individuals with asymptomatic or mild covid-19. Cell (2020) 183(1):158–68 e14. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.08.017
21
SahinUMuikAVoglerIDerhovanessianEKranzLMVormehrMet al. Bnt162b2 vaccine induces neutralizing antibodies and poly-specific T cells in humans. Nature (2021) 595(7868):572–7. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03653-6
22
TanATLimJMLe BertNKunasegaranKChiaAQuiMDet al. Rapid measurement of sars-Cov-2 spike T cells in whole blood from vaccinated and naturally infected individuals. J Clin Invest (2021) 131(17). doi: 10.1172/JCI152379
23
BonnetBChabrollesHArchimbaudCBrebionACosmeJDutheilFet al. Decline of humoral and cellular immune responses against sars-Cov-2 6 months after full Bnt162b2 vaccination in hospital healthcare workers. Front Immunol (2022) 13:842912. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.842912
24
MuddPAMinervinaAAPogorelyyMVTurnerJSKimWKalaidinaEet al. Sars-Cov-2 mrna vaccination elicits a robust and persistent T follicular helper cell response in humans. Cell (2022) 185(4):603–13 e15. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.12.026
25
TarkeACoelhoCHZhangZDanJMYuEDMethotNet al. Sars-Cov-2 vaccination induces immunological T cell memory able to cross-recognize variants from alpha to omicron. Cell (2022) 185(5):847–59 e11. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.01.015
26
AccorsiEKBrittonAFleming-DutraKESmithZRShangNDeradoGet al. Association between 3 doses of mrna covid-19 vaccine and symptomatic infection caused by the sars-Cov-2 omicron and delta variants. JAMA (2022) 327(7):639–51. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.0470
27
BardaNDaganNCohenCHernanMALipsitchMKohaneISet al. Effectiveness of a third dose of the Bnt162b2 mrna covid-19 vaccine for preventing severe outcomes in Israel: An observational study. Lancet (2021) 398(10316):2093–100. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02249-2
28
SpitzerAAngelYMarudiOZeltserDSaiagEGoldshmidtHet al. Association of a third dose of Bnt162b2 vaccine with incidence of sars-Cov-2 infection among health care workers in Israel. JAMA (2022) 327(4):341–9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.23641
29
Eliakim-RazNLeibovici-WeismanYStemmerANessAAwwadMGhantousNet al. Antibody titers before and after a third dose of the sars-Cov-2 Bnt162b2 vaccine in adults aged >/=60 years. JAMA (2021) 326(21):2203–4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.19885
30
MunroAPSJananiLCorneliusVAleyPKBabbageGBaxterDet al. Safety and immunogenicity of seven covid-19 vaccines as a third dose (Booster) following two doses of Chadox1 ncov-19 or Bnt162b2 in the uk (Cov-boost): A blinded, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet (2021) 398(10318):2258–76. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02717-3
31
NemetIKlikerLLustigYZuckermanNErsterOCohenCet al. Third Bnt162b2 vaccination neutralization of sars-Cov-2 omicron infection. N Engl J Med (2022) 386(5):492–4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2119358
32
BusaRSorrentinoMCRusselliGAmicoGMiceliVMieleMet al. Specific anti-Sars-Cov-2 humoral and cellular immune responses after booster dose of Bnt162b2 pfizer-biontech mrna-based vaccine: Integrated study of adaptive immune system components. Front Immunol (2022) 13:856657. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.856657
33
LiYWangXJinJMaZLiuYZhangXet al. T-Cell responses to sars-Cov-2 omicron spike epitopes with mutations after the third booster dose of an inactivated vaccine. J Med Virol (2022) 94(8):3998–4004. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27814
34
MatulaZGoncziMBekoGKadarBAjznerEUherFet al. Antibody and T cell responses against sars-Cov-2 elicited by the third dose of bbibp-corv (Sinopharm) and Bnt162b2 (Pfizer-biontech) vaccines using a homologous or heterologous booster vaccination strategy. Vaccines (Basel) (2022) 10(4). doi: 10.3390/vaccines10040539
35
Fernandez-RuizMOleaBAlmendro-VazquezPGimenezEMarcacuzcoASan JuanRet al. T Cell-mediated response to sars-Cov-2 in liver transplant recipients with prior covid-19. Am J Transplant (2021) 21(8):2785–94. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16708
36
LuczkowiakJLabiodNRivasGRoloMLasalaFLora-TamayoJet al. Prime-boost vaccination with Bnt162b2 induces high neutralizing activity against sars-Cov-2 variants in naive and covid-19-Convalescent individuals. Open Forum Infect Dis (2021) 8(10):ofab468. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofab468
37
WhittMA. Generation of vsv pseudotypes using recombinant deltag-vsv for studies on virus entry, identification of entry inhibitors, and immune responses to vaccines. J Virol Methods (2010) 169(2):365–74. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2010.08.006
38
LuczkowiakJRivasGLabiodNLasalaFRoloMLora-TamayoJet al. Potency and breadth of neutralization after 3 doses of mrna vaccines in covid-19 convalescent and naïve individuals. medRxiv (2022). doi: 10.1101/2022.03.17.22272557
39
WangZMueckschFSchaefer-BabajewDFinkinSViantCGaeblerCet al. Naturally enhanced neutralizing breadth against sars-Cov-2 one year after infection. Nature (2021) 595(7867):426–31. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03696-9
40
BenensonSOsterYCohenMJNir-PazR. Bnt162b2 mrna covid-19 vaccine effectiveness among health care workers. N Engl J Med (2021) 384(18):1775–7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2101951
41
ThompsonMGBurgessJLNalewayALTynerHLYoonSKMeeceJet al. Interim estimates of vaccine effectiveness of Bnt162b2 and mrna-1273 covid-19 vaccines in preventing sars-Cov-2 infection among health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers - eight U.S. locations, December 2020-march 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep (2021) 70(13):495–500. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7013e3
42
WallECWuMHarveyRKellyGWarchalSSawyerCet al. Neutralising antibody activity against sars-Cov-2 vocs B.1.617.2 and B.1.351 by Bnt162b2 vaccination. Lancet (2021) 397(10292):2331–3. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01290-3
43
BarinBKasapUSelcukFVolkanEUluckanO. Comparison of sars-Cov-2 anti-spike receptor binding domain igg antibody responses after coronavac, Bnt162b2, Chadox1 covid-19 vaccines, and a single booster dose: A prospective, longitudinal population-based study. Lancet Microbe (2022) 3(4):e274–e83. doi: 10.1016/S2666-5247(21)00305-0
44
EarleKAAmbrosinoDMFiore-GartlandAGoldblattDGilbertPBSiberGRet al. Evidence for antibody as a protective correlate for covid-19 vaccines. Vaccine (2021) 39(32):4423–8. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.05.063
45
XiaHZouJKurhadeCCaiHYangQCutlerMet al. Neutralization and durability of 2 or 3 doses of the Bnt162b2 vaccine against omicron sars-Cov-2. Cell Host Microbe (2022) 30(4):485–8 e3. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2022.02.015
46
MossP. The T cell immune response against sars-Cov-2. Nat Immunol (2022) 23(2):186–93. doi: 10.1038/s41590-021-01122-w
47
LuZLaingEDPena DaMataJPohidaKTsoMSSamuelsECet al. Durability of sars-Cov-2-Specific T-cell responses at 12 months postinfection. J Infect Dis (2021) 224(12):2010–9. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiab543
48
MarcotteHPirallaAZuoFDuLCassanitiIWanHet al. Immunity to sars-Cov-2 up to 15 months after infection. iScience (2022) 25(2):103743. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.103743
49
KeetonRTinchoMBNgomtiABagumaRBenedeNSuzukiAet al. T Cell responses to sars-Cov-2 spike cross-recognize omicron. Nature (2022) 603(7901):488–92. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04460-3
50
GoldbergYMandelMBar-OnYMBodenheimerOFreedmanLSAshNet al. Protection and waning of natural and hybrid immunity to sars-Cov-2. N Engl J Med (2022) 386(23):2201–12. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2118946
51
NguyenTHOCohenCARowntreeLCBullMBHachimAKedzierskaKet al. T Cells targeting sars-Cov-2: By infection, vaccination, and against future variants. Front Med (Lausanne) (2021) 8:793102. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.793102
52
ReynoldsCJPadeCGibbonsJMOtterADLinKMMunoz SandovalDet al. Immune boosting by B.1.1.529 (Omicron) depends on previous sars-Cov-2 exposure. Science (2022) eabq1841. doi: 10.1126/science.abq1841
53
Bar-OnYMGoldbergYMandelMBodenheimerOFreedmanLKalksteinNet al. Protection of Bnt162b2 vaccine booster against covid-19 in Israel. N Engl J Med (2021) 385(15):1393–400. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2114255
54
GoelRRPainterMMLundgreenKAApostolidisSABaxterAEGilesJRet al. Efficient recall of omicron-reactive b cell memory after a third dose of sars-Cov-2 mrna vaccine. Cell (2022) 185(11):1875–87 e8. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.04.009
55
Lozano-OjalvoDCamaraCLopez-GranadosENozalPDel Pino-MolinaLBravo-GallegoLYet al. Differential effects of the second sars-Cov-2 mrna vaccine dose on T cell immunity in naive and covid-19 recovered individuals. Cell Rep (2021) 36(8):109570. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109570
56
MangiaASerraNCocomazziGGiambraVAntinucciSMaioranaAet al. Cellular and humoral immune responses and breakthrough infections after two doses of Bnt162b vaccine in healthcare workers (Hw) 180 days after the second vaccine dose. Front Public Health (2022) 10:847384. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.847384
Summary
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, vaccination, third dose, immune response, breakthrough infection, hybrid immunity
Citation
Almendro-Vázquez P, Chivite-Lacaba M, Utrero-Rico A, González-Cuadrado C, Laguna-Goya R, Moreno-Batanero M, Sánchez-Paz L, Luczkowiak J, Labiod N, Folgueira MD, Delgado R and Paz-Artal E (2022) Cellular and humoral immune responses and breakthrough infections after three SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine doses. Front. Immunol. 13:981350. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.981350
Received
29 June 2022
Accepted
29 July 2022
Published
17 August 2022
Volume
13 - 2022
Edited by
Venkatesh Kumaresan, University of Texas at San Antonio, United States
Reviewed by
Namdev Shivaji Togre, The University of Texas at El Paso, United States; Fulvia Vascotto, Translationale Onkologie an der Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Germany
Updates
Copyright
© 2022 Almendro-Vázquez, Chivite-Lacaba, Utrero-Rico, González-Cuadrado, Laguna-Goya, Moreno-Batanero, Sánchez-Paz, Luczkowiak, Labiod, Folgueira, Delgado and Paz-Artal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Patricia Almendro-Vázquez, patricia.almendro.vazquez@gmail.com
†ORCID: Patricia Almendro-Vázquez, orcid.org/0000-0002-4362-1996; Marta Chivite-Lacaba, orcid.org/0000-0001-9357-5556; Alberto Utrero-Rico, orcid.org/0000-0001-8814-8410; Cecilia González-Cuadrado, orcid.org/0000-0001-9854-0870; Rocio Laguna-Goya, orcid.org/0000-0003-4265-8567; Joanna Luczkowiak, orcid.org/0000-0001-6950-9372; Nuria Labiod, orcid.org/0000-0001-7297-1162; María Dolores Folgueira, orcid.org/0000-0002-3730-015X; Rafael Delgado, orcid.org/0000-0002-6912-4736; Estela Paz-Artal, orcid.org/0000-0002-0646-2375
This article was submitted to Vaccines and Molecular Therapeutics, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.