ABSTRACT
Background Booster vaccinations are recommended to improve protection against severe disease from SARS-CoV-2 infection. With primary vaccinations involving various adenoviral vector and mRNA-based formulations, it remains unclear if these differentially affect the immune response to booster doses. We here examined the effects of homologous (mRNA/mRNA) and heterologous (adenoviral vector/mRNA) vaccination on antibody and memory B cell (Bmem) responses against ancestral and Omicron subvariants.
Methods Healthy adults who received primary BNT162b2 (mRNA) (n=18) or ChAdOx1 (vector) (n=25) vaccination were sampled 1-month and 6-months after their 2nd and 3rd dose (homologous or heterologous) vaccination. Recombinant spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) proteins from ancestral, Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 variants were produced for ELISA-based serology, and tetramerized for immunophenotyping of RBD-specific Bmem.
Results Dose 3 boosters significantly increased ancestral RBD-specific plasma IgG and Bmem in both cohorts. Up to 80% of ancestral RBD-specific Bmem expressed IgG1+. IgG4+ Bmem were detectable after primary mRNA vaccination, and expanded significantly to 5-20% after dose 3, whereas heterologous boosting did not elicit IgG4+ Bmem. Recognition of Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 by ancestral RBD-specific plasma IgG increased from 20% to 60% after the 3rd dose in both cohorts. Reactivity of ancestral RBD-specific Bmem to Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 increased following a homologous booster from 40% to 60%, but not after a heterologous booster.
Conclusion A 3rd mRNA dose generates similarly robust serological and Bmem responses in homologous and heterologous vaccination groups. The expansion of IgG4+ Bmem after mRNA priming might result from the unique vaccine formulation or dosing schedule affecting the Bmem response duration and antibody maturation.
Competing Interest Statement
MCvZ, REOH and PMH are inventors on a patent application related to this work. SJB is an employee of and owns stock in BD. All the other authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
The title contained an extra word, 'with', that was out of context and a remnant from draft version editing. This word has been removed from the online title field and the manuscript files. Nothing else has been changed.