Evaluation of antibody kinetics and durability in health individuals vaccinated with inactivated COVID-19 vaccine (CoronaVac): a cross-sectional and cohort study in Zhejiang, China

  1. Hangjie Zhang
  2. Qianhui Hua
  3. Nani Nani Xu
  4. Xinpei Zhang
  5. Bo Chen
  6. Xijun Ma
  7. Jie Hu
  8. Zhongbing Chen
  9. Pengfei Yu
  10. Huijun Lei
  11. Shenyu Wang
  12. Linling Ding
  13. Jian Fu
  14. Yuting Liao
  15. Juan Yang
  16. Jianmin Jiang  Is a corresponding author
  17. Huakun Lv  Is a corresponding author
  1. Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, China
  2. Ningbo University, China
  3. Xihu District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, China
  4. Shangyu District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, China
  5. Kaihua District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, China
  6. Yuecheng District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, China
  7. Jiaxing Center for Disease Control and Prevention, China
  8. Longyou District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, China
  9. Xiamen University, China

Abstract

Background: Although inactivated COVID-19 vaccines are proven to be safe and effective in the general population, the dynamic response and duration of antibodies after vaccination in the real world should be further assessed.

Methods: We enrolled 1067 volunteers who had been vaccinated with one or two doses of CoronaVac in Zhejiang Province, China. Another 90 healthy adults without previous vaccinations were recruited and vaccinated with three doses of CoronaVac, 28 days and 6 months apart. Serum samples were collected from multiple timepoints and analyzed for specific IgM/IgG and neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) for immunogenicity evaluation. Antibody responses to the Delta and Omicron variants were measured by pseudovirus-based neutralization tests.

Results: Our results revealed that binding antibody IgM peaked 14-28 days after one dose of CoronaVac, while IgG and NAbs peaked approximately 1 month after the second dose then declined slightly over time. Antibody responses had waned by month 6 after vaccination and became undetectable in the majority of individuals at 12 months. Levels of NAbs to live SARS-CoV-2 were correlated with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and NAbs to pseudovirus, but not IgM. Homologous booster around 6 months after primary vaccination activated anamnestic immunity and raised NAbs 25.5-fold. The neutralized fraction subsequently rose to 36.0% for Delta (p=0.03) and 4.3% for Omicron (p=0.004), and the response rate for Omicron rose from 7.9% (7/89) to 17.8% (16/90).

Conclusions: Two doses of CoronaVac vaccine resulted in limited protection over a short duration. The inactivated vaccine booster can reverse the decrease of antibody levels to prime strain, but it does not elicit potent neutralization against Omicron; therefore, the optimization of booster procedures is vital.

Funding: Key Research and Development Program of Zhejiang Province; Key Program of Health Commission of Zhejiang Province/ Science Foundation of National Health Commission; Major Program of Zhejiang Municipal Natural Science Foundation; Explorer Program of Zhejiang Municipal Natural Science Foundation.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files, or are available in database Dryad (https://datadryad.org/).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hangjie Zhang

    Department of Immunization Program, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7334-2536
  2. Qianhui Hua

    School of Medicine, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Nani Nani Xu

    Xihu District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Xinpei Zhang

    Shangyu District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shaoxing, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Bo Chen

    Kaihua District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Quzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Xijun Ma

    Yuecheng District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shaoxing, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jie Hu

    Department of Immunization Program, Jiaxing Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Jiaxing, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Zhongbing Chen

    Longyou District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Quzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Pengfei Yu

    Department of Immunization Program, Jiaxing Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Jiaxing, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Huijun Lei

    Longyou District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Quzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Shenyu Wang

    Department of Immunization Program, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Linling Ding

    Department of Immunization Program, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Jian Fu

    Department of Immunization Program, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Yuting Liao

    School of Public Health, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Juan Yang

    School of Public Health, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Jianmin Jiang

    Department of Immunization Program, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hangzhou, China
    For correspondence
    jmjiang@cdc.zj.cn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Huakun Lv

    Department of Immunization Program, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Hangzhou, China
    For correspondence
    hklv@cdc.zj.cn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3420-6942

Funding

Key Research and Development Program of Zhejiang Province, 2021C03200

  • Hangjie Zhang
  • Nani Nani Xu
  • Bo Chen
  • Yuting Liao
  • Juan Yang
  • Jianmin Jiang
  • Huakun Lv

Key Program of Health Commission of Zhejiang Province/ Science Foundation of National Health Commission, WKJ-ZJ-2221

  • Jianmin Jiang
  • Huakun Lv

Major program of Zhejiang Municipal Natural Science Foundation, LD22H190001

  • Hangjie Zhang

Explorer Program of Zhejiang Municipal Natural Science Foundation, LQ23H00001

  • Hangjie Zhang

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Alex Sigal, Africa Health Research Institute, South Africa

Ethics

Human subjects: We state that we conformed with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (as revised in 2008) concerning Human and Animal Rights, and that we followed out the policy concerning Informed Consent as shown on Springer.com. The study protocol and informed consent form were approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of The Zhejiang Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2021-044-01). Written informed consent was obtained from all study participants.

Version history

  1. Received: October 9, 2022
  2. Preprint posted: November 4, 2022 (view preprint)
  3. Accepted: February 20, 2023
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: March 16, 2023 (version 1)
  5. Version of Record published: April 17, 2023 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2023, Zhang et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 649
    Page views
  • 111
    Downloads
  • 3
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Hangjie Zhang
  2. Qianhui Hua
  3. Nani Nani Xu
  4. Xinpei Zhang
  5. Bo Chen
  6. Xijun Ma
  7. Jie Hu
  8. Zhongbing Chen
  9. Pengfei Yu
  10. Huijun Lei
  11. Shenyu Wang
  12. Linling Ding
  13. Jian Fu
  14. Yuting Liao
  15. Juan Yang
  16. Jianmin Jiang
  17. Huakun Lv
(2023)
Evaluation of antibody kinetics and durability in health individuals vaccinated with inactivated COVID-19 vaccine (CoronaVac): a cross-sectional and cohort study in Zhejiang, China
eLife 12:e84056.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84056

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84056

Further reading

    1. Epidemiology and Global Health
    2. Medicine
    3. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Edited by Diane M Harper et al.
    Collection

    eLife has published the following articles on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19.

    1. Ecology
    2. Epidemiology and Global Health
    Aleksandra Kovacevic, David RM Smith ... Lulla Opatowski
    Research Article

    Non-pharmaceutical interventions implemented to block SARS-CoV-2 transmission in early 2020 led to global reductions in the incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD). By contrast, most European countries reported an increase in antibiotic resistance among invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates from 2019 to 2020, while an increasing number of studies reported stable pneumococcal carriage prevalence over the same period. To disentangle the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on pneumococcal epidemiology in the community setting, we propose a mathematical model formalizing simultaneous transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and antibiotic-sensitive and -resistant strains of S. pneumoniae. To test hypotheses underlying these trends five mechanisms were built into the model and examined: (1) a population-wide reduction of antibiotic prescriptions in the community, (2) lockdown effect on pneumococcal transmission, (3) a reduced risk of developing an IPD due to the absence of common respiratory viruses, (4) community azithromycin use in COVID-19 infected individuals, (5) and a longer carriage duration of antibiotic-resistant pneumococcal strains. Among 31 possible pandemic scenarios involving mechanisms individually or in combination, model simulations surprisingly identified only two scenarios that reproduced the reported trends in the general population. They included factors (1), (3), and (4). These scenarios replicated a nearly 50% reduction in annual IPD, and an increase in antibiotic resistance from 20% to 22%, all while maintaining a relatively stable pneumococcal carriage. Exploring further, higher SARS-CoV-2 R0 values and synergistic within-host virus-bacteria interaction mechanisms could have additionally contributed to the observed antibiotic resistance increase. Our work demonstrates the utility of the mathematical modeling approach in unraveling the complex effects of the COVID-19 pandemic responses on AMR dynamics.