Post hoc analysis: 6 Months immunogenicity after third dose of BNT162b2 vs JNJ-78436735 After Two Doses of BNT162b2 vaccine in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.
Yoichiro Natori, Eric Martin, Adela Mattiazzi, Leopoldo Arosemena, George William Burke, Mrudula R Munagala, Suresh Manickavel, Katherine Sota, Suresh Pallikkuth, Jessie Chen, Julia Bini, Jacques Simkins, Shweta Anjan, Rodrigo M Vianna, Giselle Guerra
{"title":"Post hoc analysis: 6 Months immunogenicity after third dose of BNT162b2 vs JNJ-78436735 After Two Doses of BNT162b2 vaccine in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.","authors":"Yoichiro Natori, Eric Martin, Adela Mattiazzi, Leopoldo Arosemena, George William Burke, Mrudula R Munagala, Suresh Manickavel, Katherine Sota, Suresh Pallikkuth, Jessie Chen, Julia Bini, Jacques Simkins, Shweta Anjan, Rodrigo M Vianna, Giselle Guerra","doi":"10.1016/j.imlet.2024.106968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In Solid Organ Transplant (SOT) recipients, due to immunosuppression, the immunogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination is suboptimal and its durability is unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a post-hoc analysis of a patient-blinded, single center, randomized controlled trial comparing BNT162b2 vs JNJ-78436735 as the third dose after two doses of BNT162b2 in adult SOT recipients with active graft to compare long-term immunogenicity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-one recipients were analyzed. Median IgG levels against SARS-CoV-2 at 6 months were 53,747 (range 949 - 657,558) and 7,632 (range 642 - 672,000) AU/ml for BNT162b2 vs JNJ-78436735, respectively (p=0.017). The median geometric mean fold increase ratio at 6 months was 37.2 (0.12-618.5) and 4.30 (0.1-204.2) for BNT162b2 vs JNJ-78436735, respectively (p<0.05). After two doses of BNT162b2, homologous approach with BNT162b2 achieved a superior immunogenicity compared to heterologous approach with JNJ-78436735.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this post hoc analysis, we report durability of specific IgG between two vaccine strategies and found no statistically significant difference between two groups. (Clinical Trial Registry: NCT05047640).</p>","PeriodicalId":13413,"journal":{"name":"Immunology letters","volume":" ","pages":"106968"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Immunology letters","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imlet.2024.106968","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: In Solid Organ Transplant (SOT) recipients, due to immunosuppression, the immunogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination is suboptimal and its durability is unknown.
Methods: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of a patient-blinded, single center, randomized controlled trial comparing BNT162b2 vs JNJ-78436735 as the third dose after two doses of BNT162b2 in adult SOT recipients with active graft to compare long-term immunogenicity.
Results: Forty-one recipients were analyzed. Median IgG levels against SARS-CoV-2 at 6 months were 53,747 (range 949 - 657,558) and 7,632 (range 642 - 672,000) AU/ml for BNT162b2 vs JNJ-78436735, respectively (p=0.017). The median geometric mean fold increase ratio at 6 months was 37.2 (0.12-618.5) and 4.30 (0.1-204.2) for BNT162b2 vs JNJ-78436735, respectively (p<0.05). After two doses of BNT162b2, homologous approach with BNT162b2 achieved a superior immunogenicity compared to heterologous approach with JNJ-78436735.
Conclusion: In this post hoc analysis, we report durability of specific IgG between two vaccine strategies and found no statistically significant difference between two groups. (Clinical Trial Registry: NCT05047640).
期刊介绍:
Immunology Letters provides a vehicle for the speedy publication of experimental papers, (mini)Reviews and Letters to the Editor addressing all aspects of molecular and cellular immunology. The essential criteria for publication will be clarity, experimental soundness and novelty. Results contradictory to current accepted thinking or ideas divergent from actual dogmas will be considered for publication provided that they are based on solid experimental findings.
Preference will be given to papers of immediate importance to other investigators, either by their experimental data, new ideas or new methodology. Scientific correspondence to the Editor-in-Chief related to the published papers may also be accepted provided that they are short and scientifically relevant to the papers mentioned, in order to provide a continuing forum for discussion.