Home Early kinetics of cellular immunity in recipients of bivalent BNT162b2 vaccine: a proof-of-concept study
Article Publicly Available

Early kinetics of cellular immunity in recipients of bivalent BNT162b2 vaccine: a proof-of-concept study

  • Gian Luca Salvagno , Laura Pighi , Brandon M. Henry , Simone De Nitto , Mario Plebani ORCID logo and Giuseppe Lippi ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: March 13, 2023

To the Editor,

There is now incontrovertible evidence that the accurate characterization of immunity against various pathogens such as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus disease 2 (SARS-CoV-2) should encompass the assessment of both humoral and cellular immunity, whereby T cell response plays a vital, irreplaceable role in preventing the risk of developing severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) [1]. This is mostly attributable to the many essential actions that T cells (both CD4+ and CD8+) exert against acute viral infections, namely cytotoxic activity, cytokines secretion, recruitment and/or priming of other immune cells [2].

Reliable evidence is accumulating that a blunted response or a faster decline of cellular immunity may significantly predict COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections, as well as the risk of developing more severe SARS-CoV-2 related illness in recipients of COVID-19 vaccines. For example, a recent study published by Garofalo et al. showed that the response of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific interferon (IFN)-γ releasing cells was significantly lower in patients with severe COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infection compared to those who developed mild or moderate illness (i.e., 8 vs. 135 s.f.c. × 106; p<0.001), whilst the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies did not differ significantly between these groups [3]. This implicitly confirms that cellular immunity, probably more than humoral immunity, plays a crucial role in arresting or slowing the progression of COVID-19 toward severe and/or critical forms.

In a previous study published in this journal [4], we evaluated both the humoral and cellular response of a cohort of ostensibly healthcare workers assayed 14 days after administration of the new bivalent BNT162b2 vaccine. In this subsequent proof-of-concept study, we extend our investigation to address the very early T cell response in BNT162b2 bivalent vaccine recipients, by monitoring the progressive variation of IFN-γ release, together with total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, from day 1 through day 14 after vaccination, thus providing information that may be used to increase our understanding of this essential arm of the immune response against SARS-CoV-2.

The specific protocol used in this study has been described previously [4]. In this further investigation, we studied three ostensibly healthy healthcare workers who received a single booster of the novel Pfizer/Biontech mRNA BNT162b2 bivalent vaccine (Comirnaty, Pfizer Inc, NY, USA) in February 2023. Blood was drawn immediately before vaccine injection (i.e., D0) and at fixed times afterward (after 1 [D1], 4 [D4], 5 [D5], 7 [D7] and 14 [D14] days), within a serum blood tube (Greiner Bio-One, Kremsmünster, Austria) and the three Roche Cobas IGRA SARS-CoV-2 blood Tubes (PC, NC and AG; Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland). The level of total anti-SARS-CoV-2 serum antibodies was assayed with Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA; Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland), whilst cellular immunity was quantified using the Elecsys IGRA SARS-CoV-2 test (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland), as earlier described [4]. Individual test results were reported as variation from the baseline (i.e., [Time point value]/[Baseline value]) and were finally plotted as mean and standard deviation (SD) of individual values. All subjects provided a written informed consent for participating to this study, whose protocol was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and cleared by the Ethics Committee of Verona and Rovigo Provinces (59COVIDCESC; November 8, 2021).

The results of this study are shown in Figure 1. The value of IGRA SARS-CoV-2 started to increase already at day 1 after COVID-19 bivalent vaccination, peaked at day 4 (5.1 ± 3.4 folds increase), but then sharply declined already at day 5, then stabilizing at values around 2.6–2.9 folds higher than the baseline in the following period. The value of total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies started to increase at day 5 after vaccination, and then continued to gradually increase up to the end of the observational period (i.e., plateauing at 3.6 ± 1.6 folds increase at day 14).

Figure 1: 
Early variation of humoral (i.e., total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies) and cellular (i.e., IGRA SARS-CoV-2) response after administration of the new bivalent BNT162b2 vaccine in three ostensibly healthy healthcare workers. Results are shown as mean and standard deviation of individual ratios of increase from baseline. SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; IGRA, interferon gamma release assay.
Figure 1:

Early variation of humoral (i.e., total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies) and cellular (i.e., IGRA SARS-CoV-2) response after administration of the new bivalent BNT162b2 vaccine in three ostensibly healthy healthcare workers. Results are shown as mean and standard deviation of individual ratios of increase from baseline. SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; IGRA, interferon gamma release assay.

Monitoring both the early and later immune response to COVID-19 vaccination is essential for at least two primary reasons. First, early quantification of both cellular and humoral immunity would enable to identify individuals with lower or even blunted immune response (i.e., “non-responders”), who may benefit from receiving additional boosters, or may be informed about their higher vulnerability to developing infection (due to blunted humoral response) or severe illness (due to suboptimal cellular response) [5]. Then, longitudinal monitoring of humoral and cellular immunity over time would permit to timely detect faster or shaper decline in “normal responders”, who may also be targeted with specific vaccination strategies encompassing higher doses and/or shorter boosters [6]. As specifically concerns the former aspect, despite the very low number of subjects included in this pilot study, we showed that the SARS-CoV-2 IFN-γ response is characterized by a very short lag time of around 1–2 days, and gradually increases up to 4–5 days after administration, after which period begins to decline and stabilizes at around 2–3 folds higher values compared to baseline. These results are basically aligned with those preliminarily presented by Painter et al. [7], who showed that spike-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells could be robustly activated by SARS-CoV-2 infection early during the first week, with activation seen between 3 and 5 days from symptom onset in most individuals, then peaking at around day 7. Moreover, our findings also provide preliminary biologic evidence to support the clinical observation that COVID-19 vaccines administered within a few days after SARS-CoV-2 exposure may be effective in halving the risk of developing severe COVID-19 illness [8], whereby we showed that vaccine efficacy in boosting T cell response begins to manifest very early (i.e., within few days) after administration.

In conclusion, although this case series comprised only three subjects and our findings will need to be validated in larger studies, we found that the T cell response after COVID-19 bivalent vaccination undergoes a rapid “acute” boost (i.e., within 4–5 days from vaccine administration), then exhibiting a progressive decline to stabilize at values 2–3 folds higher than the baseline in the following 10 days.


Corresponding author: Prof. Giuseppe Lippi, Section of Clinical Biochemistry, University Hospital of Verona, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134 Verona, Italy, Phone: 0039-045-8122970, Fax. 0039-045-8124308, E-mail:

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the staff of the Service of Laboratory Medicine and the Medical Direction of the Pederzoli Hospital (Peschiera del Garda, Italy) for support and technical assistance.

  1. Research funding: None declared.

  2. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  3. Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study.

  5. Ethical approval: All subjects recruited in this prospective observational study provided written informed consents for undergoing COVID-19 vaccination and for being included in the immunological prospective survey. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and its protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the Provinces of Verona and Rovigo (59COVIDCESC; November 8, 2021).

References

1. Hermens, JM, Kesmir, C. Role of T cells in severe COVID-19 disease, protection, and long term immunity. Immunogenetics 2023 Feb 8:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00251-023-01294-9 [Epub ahead of print].Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

2. Sette, A, Sidney, J, Crotty, S. T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2. Annu Rev Immunol 2022 Feb 7. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-immunol-101721-061120 [Epub ahead of print].Search in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Garofalo, E, Biamonte, F, Palmieri, C, Battaglia, AM, Sacco, A, Biamonte, E, et al.. Severe and mild-moderate SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated patients show different frequencies of IFNγ-releasing cells: an exploratory study. PLoS One 2023;18:e0281444. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281444.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

4. Salvagno, GL, Pighi, L, Henry, BM, Valentini, M, Tonin, B, Bragantini, D, et al.. Assessment of humoral and cellular immunity after bivalent BNT162b2 vaccination and potential association with reactogenicity. Clin Chem Lab Med 2023;61:1343–8. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2023-0055.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Lippi, G, Mattiuzzi, C, Henry, BM. Is cellular immunity the future key for deciphering and monitoring COVID-19 vaccines efficacy? J Lab Precis Med 2022;7:1. https://doi.org/10.21037/jlpm-22-37.Search in Google Scholar

6. Lippi, G, Henry, BM, Plebani, M. Optimizing effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination: will laboratory stewardship play a role? Clin Chem Lab Med 2021;59:1885–8. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2021-0972.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Painter, MM, Johnston, TS, Lundgreen, KA, Santos, JJS, Qin, JS, Goel, RR, et al.. Prior vaccination enhances immune responses during SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection with early activation of memory T cells followed by production of potent neutralizing antibodies. BioRxiv [Preprint] 2023. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.05.527215.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

8. Shmuelian, Z, Warszawer, Y, Or, O, Arbel-Alon, S, Giladi, H, Avgil Tsadok, M, et al.. Postexposure-vaccine-prophylaxis against COVID-19. J Med Virol 2023;95:e28274. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.28274.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Received: 2023-03-02
Accepted: 2023-03-04
Published Online: 2023-03-13
Published in Print: 2023-08-28

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Developments in reference measurement systems for C-reactive protein and the importance of maintaining currently used clinical decision-making criteria
  4. Review
  5. Why C-reactive protein is one of the most requested tests in clinical laboratories?
  6. Mini Reviews
  7. C-reactive protein and clinical outcome in COVID-19 patients: the importance of harmonized measurements
  8. Current performance of C-reactive protein determination and derivation of quality specifications for its measurement uncertainty
  9. Opinion Papers
  10. Implementing metrological traceability of C-reactive protein measurements: consensus summary from the Joint Committee for Traceability in Laboratory Medicine Workshop
  11. Analytical performance specifications for the measurement uncertainty of 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D examinations
  12. A new door to a different world: opportunities from the metaverse and the raise of meta-medical laboratories
  13. Guidelines and Recommendations
  14. Point-of-care testing performed by healthcare professionals outside the hospital setting: consensus based recommendations from the IFCC Committee on Point-of-Care Testing (IFCC C-POCT)
  15. General Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
  16. Effects of storage conditions on the stability of blood-based markers for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease
  17. Long-term stability of thyroid peroxidase antibody (anti-TPO) in serum in the Danish General Suburban Population Study
  18. Exploration of suitable external quality assessment materials for serum C-peptide measurement
  19. Description and validation of an equilibrium dialysis ID-LC-MS/MS candidate reference measurement procedure for free thyroxine in human serum
  20. Evaluation of testosterone, estradiol and progesterone immunoassay calibrators by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry
  21. Lack of comparability of immunoassays for rheumatoid factor isotypes
  22. Validation of ELISA assays for the calculation of FLC indices for the diagnosis of intrathecal immunoglobulin synthesis
  23. First-trimester screening for Down syndrome using quadruple maternal biochemical markers
  24. Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) in fecal samples: validation of the extraction methodology and stability in short-term storage conditions
  25. Cardiovascular Diseases
  26. Interlaboratory variation for NT-proBNP among Swedish laboratories in an external quality program 2011–2021
  27. Infectious Diseases
  28. SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cell humoral response assessment after COVID-19 vaccination using a rapid direct real-time PCR amplification
  29. Efficiency evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic strategy combining high throughput quantitative antigen immunoassay and real time PCR
  30. Peri-infection titers of neutralizing and binding antibodies as a predictor of COVID-19 breakthrough infections in vaccinated healthcare professionals: importance of the timing
  31. Letters to the Editor
  32. Pooled analysis of laboratory-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen immunoassays
  33. Cost-effectiveness analysis of different COVID-19 screening strategies based on rapid or laboratory-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing
  34. Early kinetics of cellular immunity in recipients of bivalent BNT162b2 vaccine: a proof-of-concept study
  35. Impact of switching total bilirubin assays on the classification of neonates at high risk for hyperbilirubinemia
  36. Discrepancies in PSA values among laboratories: the case of a traveling patient
  37. Measurement of amyloid-β 1–42 in cerebrospinal fluid: a comparison of the second generation Elecsys and INNOTEST
Downloaded on 13.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2023-0226/html
Scroll to top button