By vaccinating SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals who have already received two doses of COVID-19 vaccines, we aimed to investigate whether a heterologous prime-boost strategy, using vaccines of different platforms as the booster dose, can enhance the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 virus variants. Participants were assigned into four groups, each receiving different combination of vaccinations: two doses of BNT162b2 followed by one dose of BNT162b2 booster (B-B-B); Combination of BNT162b2 (first dose) and CoronaVac (second dose) followed by one dose of BNT162b2 booster (B-C-B); two doses of CoronaVac followed by one dose of CoronaVac booster (C-C-C); two doses of CoronaVac followed by one dose of BNT162b2 booster (C-C-B). The neutralizing antibody in sera against the virus was determined with live virus microneutralization assay (vMN). The B-B-B group and C-C-B group demonstrated significantly higher immunogenicity against SARS-CoV-2 Wild type (WT), Beta variant (BV) and Delta variant (DV). In addition, the B-B-B group and C-C-B group showed reduced but existing protection against Omicron variant (OV). Moreover, A persistent rise in vMN titre against OV was observed 3 days after booster dose. Regarding safety, a heterologous prime-boost vaccine strategy is well tolerated. In this study, it was demonstrated that using vaccines of different platforms as booster dose can enhance protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants, offering potent neutralizing activity against wild-type virus (WT), Beta variant (BV), Delta variant (DV) and some protection against the Omicron variant (OV). In addition, a booster mRNA vaccine results in a more potent immune response than inactivated vaccine regardless of which platform was used for prime doses.

Background: Gut microbiota can be associated with COVID-19 vaccine immunogenicity. We investigated whether recent antibiotic use influences BNT162b2 vaccine immunogenicity. Methods: BNT162b2 recipients from three centers were prospectively recruited. Outcomes of interest were seroconversion of neutralising antibody (NAb) at day 21, 56 and 180 after first dose. We calculated the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of seroconversion with antibiotic usage (defined as ever use of any antibiotics within six months before first dose of vaccine) by adjusting for covariates including age, sex, smoking, alcohol, and comorbidities. Results: Of 316 BNT162b2 recipients (100 [31.6%] male; median age: 50.1 [IQR: 40.0–57.0] years) recruited, 29 (9.2%) were antibiotic users. There was a trend of lower seroconversion rates in antibiotic users than non-users at day 21 (82.8% vs. 91.3%; p = 0.14) and day 56 (96.6% vs. 99.3%; p = 0.15), but not at day 180 (93.3% vs. 94.1%). A multivariate analysis showed that recent antibiotic usage was associated with a lower seroconversion rate at day 21 (aOR 0.26;95% CI: 0.08–0.96). Other factors associated with a lower seroconversion rate after first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine included age ≥ 60 years (aOR: 0.34;95% CI: 0.13–0.95) and male sex (aOR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.05–0.34). There were no significant factors associated with seroconversion after two doses of BNT16b2, including antibiotic use (aOR: 0.03;95% CI: 0.001–1.15). Conclusions: Recent antibiotic use may be associated with a lower seroconversion rate at day 21 (but not day 56 or 180) among BNT162b2 recipients. Further long-term follow-up data with a larger sample size is needed to reach a definite conclusion on how antibiotics influence immunogenicity and the durability of the vaccine response.

Vaccinating recovered patients previously infected by COVID-19 with mRNA vaccines to boost their immune response against wild-type viruses (WT), we aimed to investigate whether vaccine platform and time of vaccination affect immunogenicity against the SARS-CoV-2 WT and Delta variant (DV). Convalescent patients infected by COVID-19 were recruited and received one booster dose of the BNT162b2 (PC-B) or CoronaVac (PC-C) vaccines, while SARS-CoV-2 naïve subjects received two doses of the BNT162b2 (CN-B) or CoronaVac (CN-C) vaccines. The neutralizing antibody in sera against the WT and DV was determined with live virus neutralization assay (vMN). The vMN geometric mean titre (GMT) against WT in recovered individuals previously infected by COVID-19 reduced significantly from 60.0 (95% confidence interval (CI), 46.5–77.4) to 33.9 (95% CI, 26.3–43.7) at 6 months post recovery. In the PC-B group, the BNT162b2 vaccine enhanced antibody response against WT and DV, with 22.3-fold and 20.4-fold increases, respectively. The PC-C group also showed 1.8-fold and 2.2-fold increases for WT and DV, respectively, after receiving the CoronaVac vaccine. There was a 10.6-fold increase in GMT in the CN-B group and a 1.3-fold increase in the CN-C group against DV after full vaccination. In both the PC-B and PC-C groups, there was no difference between GMT against WT and DV after vaccination. Subjects in the CN-B and CN-C groups showed inferior GMT against DV compared with GMT against WT after vaccination. In this study, one booster shot effectively enhanced the pre-existing neutralizing activity against WT and DV in recovered subjects.

This study evaluated a new multiplex kit, Luminex NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel, for respiratory pathogens and compared it with xTAG RVP Fast v2 and FilmArray Respiratory Panel using nasopharyngeal aspirate specimens and culture isolates of different swine/avian-origin influenza A subtypes (H2N2, H5N1, H7N9, H5N6, and H9N2). NxTAG RPP gave sensitivity of 95.2%, specificity of 99.6%, PPV of 93.5%, and NPV of 99.7%. NxTAG RPP, xTAG RVP, and FilmArray RP had highly concordant performance among each other for the detection of respiratory pathogens. The mean analytic sensitivity (TCID50/ml) of NxTAG RPP, xTAG RVP, and FilmArray RP for detection of swine/avian-origin influenza A subtype isolates was 0.7, 41.8, and 0.8, respectively. All three multiplex assays correctly typed and genotyped the influenza viruses, except for NxTAG RRP that could not distinguish H3N2 from H3N2v. Further investigation should be performed if H3N2v is suspected to be the cause of disease. Sensitive and specific laboratory diagnosis of all influenza A viruses subtypes is especially essential in certain epidemic regions, such as Southeast Asia. The results of this study should help clinical laboratory professionals to be aware of the different performances of commercially available molecular multiplex RT-PCR assays that are commonly adopted in many clinical diagnostic laboratories.

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants may impact the effectiveness of vaccines, while heterologous vaccine strategy is considered to provide better protection. The immunogenicity of an mRNA-inactivated virus vaccine against the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type (WT) and variants was evaluated in the study. SARS-CoV-2 naïve adults (n = 123) were recruited and placed in the following groups: BNT162b2, CoronaVac or BNT162b2-CoronaVac (Combo) Group. Blood samples were collected to measure neutralization antibodies (NAb) by a live virus microneutralization assay (vMN) and surrogate NAb test. The day 56 vMN geometric mean titre (GMT) was 26.2 [95% confident interval (CI), [22.3–30.9] for Combo, 136.9 (95% CI, 104.2–179.7) for BNT162b2, and 14.7 (95% CI, 11.6–18.6) for CoronaVac groups. At 6 months post-first dose, the GMT declined to 8.0, 28.8 and 7.1 in the Combo, BNT162b2 and CoronaVac groups, respectively. Three groups showed reduced neutralizing activity against D614G, beta, theta and delta variants. At day 56 GMT (74.6) and month 6 GMT (22.7), the delta variant in the BNT162b2 group was higher than that in the Combo (day 56, 7.4; month 6, 5.5) and CoronaVac groups (day 56, 8.0; month 6, 5) (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, the mean surrogate NAb value on day 56 in the BNT162b2 group was 594.7 AU/mL and higher than 40.5 AU/mL in Combo and 38.8 AU/mL in CoronaVac groups (p < 0.0001). None of the participants developed severe adverse events, and all other adverse events were self-limiting. The Combo vaccination strategy was safe. The overall vaccine immunogenicity at day 56 and 6 months were comparable to the homologous CoronaVac group but inferior to the homologous BNT162b2 group, against both the WT and all variants. Furthermore, the antibody response of vaccines waned at 6 months and thereby, a third dose of the vaccine is needed for these vaccines.

With the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, vaccine breakthrough is a major public health concern. With evidence of reduced neutralizing antibody activity against Omicron variants and fading antibody level after the third-dose booster vaccine, there are suggestions of a fourth-dose booster vaccine. In this review, the benefits of a fourth-dose booster is evaluated from four perspectives, including the effectiveness of the booster dose against virus variants (Why), susceptible groups of individuals who may benefit from additional booster dose (Who), selection of vaccine platforms to better enhance immunity (What) and appropriate intervals between the third and fourth booster dose (When). In summary, a fourth dose can temporarily boost the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 variants and can be considered for specific groups of individuals. A heterologous vaccine strategy using mRNA vaccine in individuals primed with inactivated vaccine may boost immunity against variants. The timing of the fourth dose should be individualized but an interval of 4 months after the third-dose booster is appropriate. A universal fourth booster dose is not necessary.