4.6 Article

Previous SARS-CoV-2 Infection Increases B.1.1.7 Cross-Neutralization by Vaccinated Individuals

期刊

VIRUSES-BASEL
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v13061135

关键词

SARS-CoV-2; humoral response; pseudovirus; neutralization; B; 1; 1; 7 variant

类别

资金

  1. Grifols
  2. Departament de Salut of the Generalitat de Catalunya [SLD016, SLD015]
  3. Spanish Health Institute Carlos III [PI17/01518, PI20/00093, PI18/01332]
  4. CERCA Programme/Generalitat de Catalunya [2017 SGR 252]
  5. joemcorono
  6. BonPreu/Esclat
  7. Correos
  8. National Agency for Research and Development of Chile (ANID) [72180406]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that the time from natural infection and the nature of the infecting variant determined cross-neutralization; Uninfected vaccinees showed a small reduction in neutralization against the B.1.1.7 variant; Previously infected individuals developed more robust neutralizing responses against B.1.1.7 after vaccination, indicating that vaccines can enhance the neutralization breadth conferred by natural infection.
With the spread of new variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), there is a need to assess the protection conferred by both previous infections and current vaccination. Here we tested the neutralizing activity of infected and/or vaccinated individuals against pseudoviruses expressing the spike of the original SARS-CoV-2 isolate Wuhan-Hu-1 (WH1), the D614G mutant and the B.1.1.7 variant. Our data show that parameters of natural infection (time from infection and nature of the infecting variant) determined cross-neutralization. Uninfected vaccinees showed a small reduction in neutralization against the B.1.1.7 variant compared to both the WH1 strain and the D614G mutant. Interestingly, upon vaccination, previously infected individuals developed more robust neutralizing responses against B.1.1.7, suggesting that vaccines can boost the neutralization breadth conferred by natural infection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据