Persistent immune imprinting after XBB.1.5 COVID vac; XBB.1.5 booster elicits nAbs responses against current variants that dominate by recall of pre-existing mBcells previously induced by Wuhan-Hu-1 spike. biorxiv.org/content/10.110…
immune imprinting persists even after multiple exposures to Omicron spikes through vaccination and infection, including post XBB.1.5 spike booster mRNA vacci
2 updated vaccine boosters. A bivalent Wuhan-Hu-1/BA.5 (or BA.1 for few countries) spike (S) mRNA booster vac was approved in August 2022, & monovalent XBB.1.5 S mRNA booster vac in September 2023; NAbs are correlate of protection against COVID19 & most plasma Neutrz activity is
directed to the S (RBD); Abs responses to Omicron variants dominated by pre-existing immunity resulting from prior exposure to Wuhan-Hu-1 spike, due to immune imprinting; inactivated Wuhan-Hu-1 viral vac,repeated Omicron infections overcome immune imprinting,
leading to elicitation Abs responses specific for these variants; similar outcome thro repeated admin of updated vac boosters in previously imprinted via multiple Wuhan-Hu-1 S exposure.
humoral immunity elicited upon receipt of XBB.1.5 S mRNA vac booster,
plasma from previously received multiple vac doses with or without known infection. Wuhan-Hu-1/D614G S, BQ.1.1 S, XBB.1.5 S or BA.2.86 S to potency & breadth of plasma nAbs vs plasma receipt of bivalent Wuhan-Hu-1/BA.5 vac booster.
Neutrz activity highest against Wuhan-Hu-1/G614 S with (GMTs) of 1,700 & 3,000 after recd XBB.1.5 S & Wuhan-Hu-1/BA.5 S bivalent vac boosters. GMTs against BQ.1.1, XBB.1.5, BA.2.86 S were 510, 540, 480 (XBB.1.5 S vac) or 420, 240, 320 (bivalent vac). updated vac booster gv nAb
Plasma neutralizing antibody titers after vaccination with the XBB.1.5 S mRNA booster (A) and after the bivalent Wuhan-Hu-1/BA.5 S mRNA booster (B).
Immune imprinting dominates immune response elicited upon XBB.1.5 S mRNA booster vac.
Panels A & B: plasma nAbs titers with Wuhan-Hu-1 S harboring D614G mutation, BQ.1.1 mutations, XBB.1.5 mutations, BA.2.86 mutations using plasma at 7 to 13d (mean: 9.7d)
after vac with XBB.1.5 S mRNA booster (A) or 22 to 51d (mean: 33d) after vac with bivalent Wuhan-Hu-1/BA.5 S mRNA booster. (GMTs) against each pseudovirus. Panels C and D show Ab binding titers (mean effective dilution 50%, ED50) against Wuhan-Hu-1 S (C) XBB.1.5 S
D) before/ after depletion of Abs recogn Wuhan-Hu-1 S, using XBB.1.5 S vac plasma. Panels E, F show nAb against, XBB.1.5 S (E) Wuhan-Hu-1 S (F) depleted & after depletion of Abs recogn Wuhan-Hu-1 S. Panel G: XBB.1.5 & Wuhan-Hu-1 RBD binding mBcells from XBB.1.5 S mRNA booster
XBB.1.5 S booster gv⬆️plasma neutrz activity against Wuhan-Hu-1/D614G S (vac-mismatch) relative to XBB.1.5 S (Vac-matched)-serological immune imprinting. depleted polyclonal plasma Abs recogn Wuhan-Hu-1 S trimer & binding titers against Wuhan-Hu-1 S & XBB.1.5 S ectodomain trimers
no Ab binding to Wuhan-Hu-1 S detected after depletion, depletion Abs targeting Wuhan-Hu-1 S entirely abrogated binding to XBB.1.5 S except for(binding titers⬇️10x); not detect nAbs against Wuhan-Hu-1/D614G S & XBB.1.5 S following depletion: absence of XBB.1.5 S-specif Abs
in plasma (were not cross-reactive with Wuhan-Hu-1 S). XBB.1.5 S vac⬆️ cross-reactive plasma Ab titers prev elicited by Wuhan-Hu-1 S exposure, which also binding to and Neutrz XBB.1.5 and other variants, instead of inducing Ab responses against XBB.1.5 S.
vast majority of XBB.1.5 RBD-binding mBcells also bound to the Wuhan-Hu-1 RBD, elicitation of mBcells is possible thro variant-specific mRNA booster, as is case for XBB.1.5, but difficult to induce due to preferential recall of pre-existing Wuhan-Hu-1 mBcells.
lack of detectable plasma Abs specific for XBB.1.5 S & scarcity of mBcells binding to XBB.1.5 RBD, but not Wuhan-Hu-1 RBD, that humoral immune responses elicited by XBB.1.5 S vac are dominated by recall of pre-existing mBcells previously induced by Wuhan-Hu-1 S vac
instead of inducing responses against this new variant. after Omicron BA.1, BA.2, BA.5 BTI & bivalent Wuhan-Hu-1/BA.5 & Wuhan-Hu-1/BA.1 S vac boosters. As SARS-CoV-2 S-specific mBcells continue to evolve &⬆️frequency several months post infection or vac.
long-term immunological impact of imprinting, updated XBB.1.5 S vaccine elicit nAbs against circulating variants & persistence of immune imprinting which to guide design of future vac boosters.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Analysis of SARSCoV2 transmission in airports based on real human close contact behaviors; data, > 44 h of close contact behaviors, interpersonal distance, relative facial orientation, relative position of individuals, analyzed; close contact transmission, sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
average close contact ratio in 9 airport's areas is 25.4 % (range 6.1 % to 55.0 %), with passengers having highest frequency of close contact in manual check-in areas. During close contacts, average interpersonal distance in airports is 1.2 m
ranging from 1.1 to 1.4 m), being shortest in boarding areas. Face-to-face close contact is highest in charging areas, with % of 46.9 %. If people maintain a distance of over 1.0 m in all areas, total virus exposure⬇️ by 6.9 %–22.0 % compared to actual situation.
COVID19 results in acute⬆️of serum markers of brain injury, more in abnormal (GCS) score
sera from 1–11d post adm with COVID19 of varying severity; proxy for neurological dysfunction; GFAP (glial fibrillary acidic protein, marker of astrocyte injury) nature.com/articles/s4146…
UCH-L1 (marker of neuronal cell body injury), NfL (neurofilament light); Tau (both markers of axonal & dendritic injury), serum levels of NfL, GFAP, total-Tau (tTau) were signif⬆️in COVID compared to uninfected healthy controls. abnormal GCS scores had⬆️levels of NfL & UCH-L1
than normal GCS scores. all 4 markers of brain injury⬆️in COVID19 (both GCS = 15 & GCS ≤ 14), axonal & neuronal body injury biomarkers discrimin btw with/ without reduced GCS.
Markers of brain injury remain⬆️in early & late CP in CNS complication of COVID19
Predicted risk of heart failure pandemic due to persistent SARSCoV2 infection;
Hypoxic stress to persistent infection model led to cardiac dysfunction;
ACE2 & SARSCoV2 S protein expression⬆️after hypoxic stress;
predict “heart failure pandemic” COVID19 era sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
cardiac microtissues (CMTs). Mild infections sustained viral presence without significant dysfunction for a month, indicating persistent infection, when exposed to hypoxic conditions mimicking ischemic heart diseases, cardiac function deteriorated wth intracellular SARSCoV2
reactivation in cardiomyocytes and disrupted vascular network formation. SARS-CoV-2 persistently infects heart opportunistically causing cardiac dysfunction triggered by detrimental stimuli as ischemia, potentially predicting a post COVID-19 era heart failure pandemic.
SARSCoV2 infection triggers pro-atherogenic inflammatory responses in h coronary vessels; CoV2 viral RNA is detectable, replicates in coronary lesions from severe COVID19. CoV2 targeted plaque macrophages, exhib stronger tropism for arterial lesions than nature.com/articles/s4416…
adjacent perivascular fat,~ with macrophage infiltration. CoV2 entry was⬆️in cholesterol-loaded primary macrophages; dependent,on neuropilin-1. SARSCoV2 induced robust inflam resp in macrophages & atherosclerotic vascular secretion of cytokines to trigger cardiovascular events.
SARS-CoV-2 vRNA in human coronary arteries from deceased individuals with COVID-19 is identified using AI-based spatial analysis.
Gut Microbiota and Mitochondria: Health and Pathophysiological Aspects of LC; complex interplay btw infection, intestinal dysbiosis, dysfunctional mitochondria, systemic inflammation generated in vicious circle, reflecting molecular-cellular processes mdpi.com/1422-0067/24/2…
from “leaky gut” to “leaky electron transport chain (ETC)” into quantum leap. heterogeneity of LC has hindered progress; effects of COVID-19 and LC on the gut microbiome and their relationship to infections with other viral agents or pathogens.
complex picture of the clinical manifestations of LC, classified into four syndromes, in correlation with the pathophysiological elements
High number of SARSCoV2 persistent infections uncovered thro genetic analysis of samples from large community-based surveillance study; identified 381 infections lasting at least 30d, of which 54 lasted at least 60d; persistently infected had > 50%⬆️odds medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
self-reporting LC compared to infected controls, estimate 0.09-0.5% of SARS-CoV-2 infections become persistent for > 60d. In 70% of persistent infections, long periods during which there were no consensus changes in virus sequences & prolonged presence of non-replicating virus.
suggest RI with same major lineage are rare; many persistent infections are characterised by relapsing VL dynamics, strong signal for positive selection in persistent infections,with multiple amino acid substitutions in Spike & ORF1ab genes emerging independ in diff individuals,