4.7 Article

Three Separate Spike Antigen Exposures by COVID-19 Vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 Infection Elicit Strong Humoral Immune Responses in Healthcare Workers

Journal

VACCINES
Volume 10, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10071086

Keywords

SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; healthcare workers; vaccination; mRNA vaccines; immunity; humoral immune response; infection rate

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study indicates that three exposures to the viral spike protein through either SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination are necessary to elicit particularly strong humoral immune responses.
Background: The immunogenicity of different COVID-19 vaccine regimens and combinations in naive and convalescent individuals has not been formally tested in controlled studies, and real-life observational studies are scarce. Methods: We assessed the SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination-induced immunity of 697 hospital workers at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf between 17 and 31 January 2022. Results: The overall prevalence of anti-NC-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies indicating prior infection was 9.8% (n = 68) and thus lower than the seroprevalence in the general population. All vaccinated individuals had detectable anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (median AU/mL [IQR]: 13,891 [8505-23,543]), indicating strong protection against severe COVID-19. Individuals who received three COVID-19 vaccine doses (median AU/mL [IQR]: 13,856 [8635-22,705]) and those who resolved a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and had received two COVID-19 vaccine doses (median AU/mL [IQR] 13,409 [6934-25,000]) exhibited the strongest humoral immune responses. Conclusions: The current study indicates that three exposures to the viral spike protein by either SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination are necessary to elicit particularly strong humoral immune responses, which supports current vaccination recommendations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available