Hispanic/Latino communities have suffered a disproportionate burden due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although Puerto Rico has one of the highest COVID-19 primary series vaccination rates nationwide, this estimate contrasts with the low uptake of booster doses (32.7%). This study aimed to assess health belief correlates of COVID-19 vaccine booster uptake. PR-CEAL recruited 787 participants via an online survey between December 2021 and January 2022. Sociodemographic characteristics and questions framed using the Health Belief Model were assessed. Analyses included adjusted Poisson regression models to estimate prevalence ratios (PR) of booster refusal. Overall, 22% of participants planned (10%) or refused (12%) the vaccine booster. Participants with lower income [PR=1.92; 95%CI=1.30, 2.84], in disagreement with vaccine benefits [PR=4.16; 95%CI=3.06, 5.64], and in agreement with booster concerns [PR=2.93; 95%CI=2.12, 4.04], efficacy [PR=2.76; 95%CI=2.00, 3.82], and safety [PR=2.97; 95%CI=2.15, 4.08] were significantly more likely to refuse the booster. Booster vaccination refusal was associated with lower perceived vaccine benefits and higher barriers among adults in Puerto Rico. Results informed CEAL team intervention strategies for public health campaigns to increase booster vaccine uptake.

Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the only widely used prophylactic tuberculosis (TB) vaccine that can prevent severe TB in infants. However, it provides poor protection in adults, and therefore, there in ongoing research on new TB vaccines and immunization strategies with more durable immune effects. The recombinant BCG and BCG prime-protein booster are two important vaccine strategies that have recently been developed based on BCG and could improve immune responses. In this study, three immune strategies based on four protective antigens, namely, ESAT-6, CFP-10, nPPE18, and nPstS1, were applied to construct recombinant rBCG-EPCP009, EPCP009 subunit protein, and BCG prime-EPCP009 booster vaccine candidates. The short- and long-term immune effects after vaccination in Balb/c mice were evaluated based on humoral immunity, cellular immunity, and the ability of spleen cells to inhibit in vitro mycobacterial growth. At 8 and 12 weeks after the initial immunization, splenocytes from mice inoculated with the BCG prime-EPCP009 protein booster secreted higher levels of PPD- and EPCP009-specific IFN-γ, IL-2, TNF-α, IL-17, GM-CSF, and IL-12 and had a higher IFN-γ⁺CD4⁺ TEM:IL-2⁺CD8⁺ TCM cell ratio than splenocytes from mice inoculated with the rBCG-EPCP009 and EPCP009 proteins. In addition, the EPCPE009-specific IgG2a/IgG1 ratio was slightly higher in the BCG prime-EPCP009 protein booster group than in the other two groups. The in vitro mycobacterial inhibition assay showed that the splenocytes of mice from the BCG prime-EPCP009 protein booster group exhibited stronger inhibition of Mycobacterium tuberculosis （M. tuberculosis）growth than the splenocytes of mice from the other two groups. These results indicate that the BCG prime-EPCP009 protein booster exhibited superior immunogenicity and M. tuberculosis growth inhibition to the parental BCG, rBCG-EPCP009, and EPCP009 proteins under in vitro conditions. Thus, the BCG prime-EPCP009 protein booster may be important for the development of a more effective adult TB vaccine.

Data on immunogenicity, immune response persistency, and safety of COVID-19 boosters in patients with comorbidities are limited. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate and compare three different boosters in individuals who received two doses of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine including underlying diseases and healthy cases as control. One hundred forty subjects including 63 ones with at least one of three underlying diseases (UD) (including obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus) and 77 healthy ones (HC) who had received a booster dose (either PastoCovac Plus or PastoCovac or BBIBP-CorV) were enrolled. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was assessed before the booster injection and 28, 60, 90, and 180 days after it. Moreover, the adverse events (AEs) were recorded on days 7 and 21 post-booster shot for evaluating safety outcomes. Significantly increased titers of anti-spike, anti-RBD, and neutralizing antibodies were observed in both UD and HC groups 28 days after the booster dose, although the titer rise of anti-spike IgG and anti-RBD IgG was insignificantly inferior in the UD group compared to the HC group. All antibodies’ titers declined, with no significant differences between the two groups over time. Notably, all specific antibodies persisted up to 180 days; particularly the neutralizing antibody in both groups. Furthermore, no significant difference in antibody levels was observed between each UD subgroup and the HC group, except for neutralizing antibodies in the hypertension sub-group. PastoCovac Plus and PastoCovac boosters induced higher antibodies’ fold rise in UD individuals than BBIBP-CorV booster recipients. Safety outcomes did not show any serious AEs after the booster injection. The overall incidence of AEs post the booster injection was higher in the UD group than the HC group. Furthermore, the highest systemic AEs rate was reported in the UD group receiving the BBIBP-CorV booster. In conclusion, administration of COVID-19 boosters can equally induce robust and persistent humoral immune responses in individuals with or without UD primarily vaccinated with 2-doses of the BBIBP-CorV. Protein-based boosters with higher antibodies' fold rise and lower AEs in individuals with comorbidities might be considered a better choice for these individuals.

The Omicron EG.5 lineage of SARS-CoV-2 is currently on a trajectory to become a dominant strain. This phase 2 study aims to evaluate the immunogenicity of SCTV01E-2, a tetravalent protein vaccine, with a specific emphasis on its effectiveness against Omicron EG.5, comparing it with its progenitor vaccine, SCTV01E (NCT05933512). As of September 12, 2023, 429 participants aged ≥18 years were randomized to SCTV01E (N=215) or SCTV01E-2 (N=214) groups. Both vaccines showed increases in neutralizing antibody (nAb) against Omicron EG.5, with a 5.7-fold increase and a 9.0-fold increase in SCTV01E and SCTV01E-2 groups 14 days post-vaccination, respectively. The predetermined statistical endpoints were achieved, showing that the geometric mean titer (GMT) of nAb and the seroresponse rate (SRR) against Omicron EG.5 were significantly higher in the SCTV01E-2 group compared to SCTV01E. Additionally, SCTV01E and SCTV01E-2 induced a 5.5-fold and a 5.9-fold increase of nAb against XBB.1, respectively. Reactogenicity was generally mild and transient. No vaccine related SAEs, AESIs or deaths were reported. In summary, SCTV01E-2 elicited robust neutralizing responses against Omicron EG.5 and XBB.1 without safety concerns, underlining its potential as a versatile COVID-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Vaccination has proven to be one of the most effective strategies against the COVID 19 pandemic. Several studies have evaluated and confirmed its effectiveness in different populations, particularly in reducing severe outcomes such as hospitalization and death. However, the potential of vaccination to protect against infection itself has been overlooked. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the booster dose in a sample of Colombian patients during the fourth wave of COVID-19 pandemic, which was associated with the emergence and predominance of the Omicron variant. A cross-sectional study was conducted on individuals who underwent RT-PCR testing for COVID-19 detection in a dedicated laboratory in Bogotá, Colombia, between December 30th 2021 and February 7th 2022. A total of 1,468 subjects were included in the study. The comparison between fully vaccinated individuals with a booster dose and those without the booster dose revealed a 28% reduction in the odds of infection (OR = 0.719 CI 0.531 - 0.971). Age (OR = 1,009 CI 1,001 - 1,018) and low economic status (OR= 1,812 CI 1,416- 2,319) were associated with an increased risk of infection.These findings suggest the need for booster vaccination in the general population to improve the prevention rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mitigate severe outcomes.

We determined the levels of neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strain, Delta and Omicron variants of concern (VOCs) in 125 healthcare workers, who received Coro-naVac as their primary vaccination and later received either a single ChAdOx1 or a combination of two consecutive boosters using either two ChAdOx1 doses or a ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2 as the primary and second boosters, respectively, or 2 doses of BNT162b2. The titers 12 weeks after primary vaccination were inadequate to neutralize the all strains. After a single ChAdOx1 boost-er, the levels of neutralization at Day 30 varied significantly, only a small proportion of partici-pants developing neutralizing titers against Omicron at Day 7 and 30. The two doses of ChA-dOx1 as the booster induced lowest activity. A combination ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 induced greater neutralization than by two doses of ChAdOx1. Two doses of BNT162b2 as the booster had the maximal activity against Omicron VOC.

Our aim was to evaluate the immune response of healthcare workers included in the RIPOVAC study, after receiving a booster dose (third dose), in terms of intensity and persistence of induced antibodies. In the second phase of RIPOVAC study, between December 2021 and January 2022, eight months after the second dose, 389 voluntary, immunocompetent, non-pregnant healthcare workers received a booster dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, and a serum sample was obtained. Two groups of patients were established: with and without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. In order to quantify anti-S1 IgG (AU/mL) we used CMIA (Abbott). All the health workers were anti-S IgG positive 8 months after receiving the booster dose of the vaccine, with a mean of 17040 AU/mL. In 53 patients without previous infection, antibody levels had increased by a mean of 10762 AU/mL. This figure is 7 times higher than the one produced after the second dose (1506 AU/mL). The booster dose produces a robust elevation of the antibody level, which persists at 8 months with levels up to values significantly higher than those reached after the second dose, that allow to predict a persistence of more than one year. The study demonstrates the efficacy of the booster dose of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

This study updates previous research showing that 22 all-cause mortality in 31 European countries increased over time the higher the 21 COVID-19 full vaccination uptake. The update illuminates that a one percentage point increase in 21 full vaccination uptake initially decreased all-cause mortality from Jan to Mar 22 by –0.423 percent (95% CI –0.577, –0.270), but the following 14 months, a one percentage point increase in 21 booster vaccination uptake oppositely increased mortality by 0.366 percent (95% CI 0.250, 0.482). The findings indicate that full vaccination initially prevented mortality, but subsequently, booster vaccination, in particular, detrimentally and consistently induced higher mortality. The effects remained robust when controlling for alternative explanations. Studies have argued that heat waves caused mortality in the 22 summer and energy prices caused mortality in the 22-23 winter. However, the update shows that booster vaccination consistently induced higher mortality when neither heat waves nor energy prices were likely explanations.

Background: The uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccines has been significantly low. Therefore, it is questionable whether combining the COVID-19 booster vaccines with Influenza vaccines can increase the population's interest in taking such vaccines and manage the health pandemic effectively. Methodology: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a synthesis of the findings and summary of a total of 30 research articles based on the topic, ‘combining influenza and COVID-19 booster vaccination strategy’ was undertaken. The research articles were identified from three databases, namely, PubMed, Cochran Library, and Google Scholar using specific keywords and inclusion criteria. However, research articles that were not peer-reviewed and not published in English were excluded from the systematic review and meta-analysis. The average risk ratio of the included articles was 0.78% based on a 95% CI. On the other hand, the heterogeneity between such studies was I² = 35%, while the statistical significance of their findings occurred at p < 0.05. The average p-value of the included research studies was p = 0.62, implying that the null hypothesis was not rejected in almost all the studies. Results: A synthesis of the chosen research articles revealed that when influenza and COVID-19 booster vaccines are combined, there is potential for an increase in the uptake of the latter, mainly because many populations have already been accustomed to taking influenza vaccines on an annual basis. Conclusions: In this way, through such findings, medical health experts can make informed decisions to increase the population's willingness to receive the COVID-19 booster vaccines.

Given the concerns of waning immunity from the primary COVID-19 vaccines and the first booster dose, we conducted an on-line cross-sectional study in May 2022 to investigate willingness to receive a second COVID-19 booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine and its associated factors. Overall, 22.7% of participants were willing to be vaccinated, 39.3% were unsure, but tend to be willing, 25.8% were unsure, 4.9% were unsure, but tend to be unwilling, and 7.4% were unwilling to be vaccinated. The main reasons against accepting a second COVID‐19 booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine COVID-19 dose included concerns about the side effects, the opinion that further vaccination is unnecessary, and effectiveness uncertainties. Males, younger individuals, participants without a previous COVID-19 diagnosis, and those with good/very good self-perceived physical health were significantly more frequently willing to receive a second COVID‐19 booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine. Also, increased fear of the COVID-19, increased trust in COVID-19 vaccination and decreased fear of a second booster dose or a new COVID-19 vaccine were associated with increased willingness. Our results show some hesitancy and unwillingness toward further COVID-19 vaccination and indicate that fear of COVID-19 and trust in COVID-19 vaccination affect public opinion

Vaccination remains an important mitigation tool against COVID-19. We report 1-month safety and preliminary immunogenicity data from a substudy of an ongoing, open-label, phase 2/3 study of monovalent Omicron XBB.1.5-adapted BNT162b2 (single 30-μg dose). Healthy, participants ≥12 years old (N=412 [12‒17 years, N=30; 18‒55 years, N=174; >55 years, N=208]) who previously received ≥3 doses of a US-authorized mRNA vaccine, the most recent being an Omicron BA.4/BA.5-adapted bivalent vaccine ≥150 days before study vaccination, were vaccinated. Serum 50% neutralizing titers against Omicron XBB.1.5, EG.5.1, and BA.2.86 were measured 7 days and 1 month after vaccination in a subset of ≥18-year-olds (N=40) who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline. Seven-day immunogenicity was also evaluated in a matched group who received bivalent BA.4/BA.5-adapted BNT162b2 in a previous study (NCT05472038). There were no new safety signals; local reactions and systemic events were mostly mild to moderate in severity, adverse events were infrequent, and none led to study withdrawal. The XBB.1.5-adapted BNT162b2 induced numerically higher titers against Omicron XBB.1.5, EG.5.1, and BA.2.86 than BA.4/BA.5-adapted BNT162b2 at 7 days and robust neutralizing responses to all 3 sublineages at 1 month. These data support a favorable benefit-risk profile of XBB.1.5-adapted BNT162b2 30 μg. NCT05997290

Vaccines are crucial for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic, and booster doses are becoming increasingly important. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine from AstraZeneca as a third dose in healthcare workers at different time intervals (one, three, and six months). Two methods to measure immune response—ELISA (EUROIMMUN Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG, Luebeck, Germany) and ELISpot (Mabtech AB, Macka Strand, Sweden)—were used. A total of 170 participants were included in the study. The results showed that while IgG levels decreased at six months compared to levels at one and three months, they were still significantly higher than the baseline. Furthermore, neutralizing levels at three and six months after the third dose were not significantly different. These findings suggest that the immune response induced by the vaccine is robust and effective for several months. These results have significant implications for public health policymakers, as they provide strong support for booster vaccinations. The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine appears to be a reliable option for preventing the spread of COVID-19, and this study provides valuable information for healthcare workers and policymakers in managing the pandemic.

Background: In March 2020, a COVID-19 outbreak associated with the Falles Festival in Borriana, Spain, led to significant infections. Methods: In June 2022, we conducted a cross-sectional follow-up study of 473 socially engaged adults aged 18 to 64, examining the cumulative experience after SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination responses. Data included demographic details, lifestyle habits, medical history, infection records, and vaccinations from a population-based vaccine registry. Blood samples were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and cellular immunity. We employed a doubly robust inverse weighted probability analysis to estimate the booster vaccine dose's impact on long COVID prevalence and symptom count. Results: 28.1% of participants met the WHO criteria for long COVID, with older individuals showing higher rates. Not complying with long COVID criteria associated with factors including O blood group, higher occupational status, physical activity, three vaccine doses, strong SARS-CoV-2-S-reactive IFNγ‐producing‐CD8+ response, and infection during the Omicron period. Conversely, increased age, high or low social activity, underlying health conditions, a severe initial COVID episode, and reinfection associated with higher long COVID likelihood. A booster dose, compared to one or two doses, reduced long COVID risk by 74% (95% CI: 56.4% to 91.7%) and symptom count by 55.2% (95% CI: 31.6% to 78.7%). Conclusion: Long COVID was prevalent in a significant portion of those who contracted COVID-19, underscoring the need for sustained follow-up and therapeutic strategies. Vaccinations, notably the booster dose, had a substantial beneficial effect on long-term infection outcomes, affirming the vaccination’s role in mitigating SARS-CoV-2 infection consequences.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant of concern has been the dominant cause of worldwide COVID-19 cases since 2022. All the Omicron sublineage viruses have demonstrated high transmissibility and an ability to escape vaccine-induced immunity. While first-generation vaccines, including monovalent vaccines, continue to provide protection against severe disease, hospitalization and mortality, their efficacy against Omicron sub variants remains sparse. These vaccines have also been associated with rapidly waning protection against primary COVID-19 and COVID-19 reinfections conferred by evolving Omicron sublineages.. This led to the development and deployment of updated vaccines and the introduction of the bivalent booster. Through this review, we highlight the brief journey of the variants of concern leading to the dominance of Omicron and the effectiveness of the key vaccines against these variants, including the updated (bivalent) boosters.

Little is known about the long-term durability of the induced immune response in subjects af-fected by obesity, particularly in those with an abdominal distribution of adipose tissue. We evaluated SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody response after BNT162b2 vaccine booster dose, com-paring individuals with abdominal obesity (AO) with those without, discerning between indi-viduals previously infected or not. IgG-TrimericS were measured in 511 subjects at baseline, 21 days after vaccine dose-1 and at one, three, six and nine months after dose-2 and at one and three months after booster dose. Nucleocapsid antibodies were assessed at baseline and at the end of the study to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection. To evaluate the three-months difference in absolute variation of IgG-TrmicericS levels from booster dose we used multivariable linear regression that showed interaction between AO and SARS-CoV-2 infection status (p=0.016). AO is associated with higher absolute IgG-TrimericS variation in prior infected individuals, regardless of possi-ble confounders and IgG-TrimericS levels at booster dose (p=0.0125). No interaction was evinced using BMI in the same regression model (p=0.418). The robust response in the development of antibodies after booster dose, observed in people with OA and previous infection, may support the recommendations to undergo the booster dose also in this population group.

This was a retrospective cohort study, which aimed to investigate the factors associated with hesitancy to receive the third dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. A paper-based questionnaire survey was administered to all participants. Accordingly, the study included participants who provided answer in the questionnaire whether they have an intent to receive the third dose of vaccine. Data on sex, age, area of residence, adverse reactions after the second vaccination, whether the third vaccination was desired, and reasons to accept or hesitate booster vaccination were retrieved. Among the 2439 participants with mean (±SD) age of 52.6±18.9 years, and median IgG-S antibody titer of 324.9 (AU/mL), 97.9% of participants indicated their intent to accept a third vaccination dose. The logistic regression revealed that younger age (OR=0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-1.00) and higher antibody level (OR=2.52; 95% CI: 1.27-4.99) are positively associated with the third vaccine hesitancy. The efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine and concerns about adverse reactions had significant impact on the third vaccination behavior. A rapid increase in the booster dose rate is needed to control the pandemic, and specific approaches should be taken in these groups that are likely to hesitate the third vaccine, subsequently increasing booster contact rate.

We report neutralization titer data against contemporary SARS-CoV-2 sublineages from an ongoing, open-label, phase 2/3 trial of a single 30-μg dose of monovalent Omicron XBB.1.5-adapted BNT162b2 vaccine. Healthy participants had previously received ≥3 doses of a US-authorized mRNA vaccine, with the most recent being a bivalent Omicron BA.4/BA.5-adapted vaccine administered ≥150 days before study vaccination. In this analysis, Omicron XBB.1.5, BA.2.86, and JN.1 serum neutralizing titers were assessed at baseline and 1 month after vaccination in a subset of ≥18-year-olds (N = 40) with evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Immunogenicity was also evaluated in a demographically matched group of participants who received bivalent BA.4/BA.5-adapted BNT162b2 in another study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05472038). The XBB.1.5-adapted BNT162b2 vaccine elicited higher XBB.1.5, BA.2.86, and JN.1 neutralizing titers than those elicited by bivalent BA.4/BA.5-adapted BNT162b2. Overall geometric mean fold rises in neutralizing titers from baseline to 1 month after vaccination were higher among participants who received XBB.1.5-adapted BNT162b2 than those who received bivalent BA.4/BA.5-adapted BNT162b2 for XBB.1.5 (7.6 vs 5.6), slightly higher for JN.1 (3.9 vs 3.5), and similar for BA.2.86 (4.8 vs 4.9). ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05997290.

The number of XLPE cables being used near or beyond their designed lifespan is increasing. The importance of timely cable replacement is increasing. Therefore, research is actively being conducted using VLF Tan δ diagnostic technology to assess the insulation condition of cables. There is a lack of studies measuring and analyzing VLF Tan δ of service aged XLPE cables. Additionally, there is a lack of research considering the operating environment. Therefore, research is needed to diagnose and analyze the insulation condition of the same serviced aged cable when it is operated in a different environment. This paper evaluates and analyzes the insulation condition of cables installed in the BFP, cooling tower, and deaerator booster pump of a combined heat and power plant. Each cable was analyzed by measuring VLF Tan δ, dielectric breakdown test of the cable, and tensile strength, elongation at break, crystallinity, and dielectric strength of XLPE specimens. Additionally, the correlation between VLF Tan δ and other characteristics was also analyzed. It was found that degradation progressed in the order of BFP, cooling tower, and deaerator booster pump. Therefore, it was confirmed that even for the same cable, deterioration varies depending on the installation location.

This study evaluates the incidence and characteristics of adverse events (AEs) following the second COVID-19 booster dose, leveraging Taiwan's distinctive approach of extending booster vaccinations to all citizens, unlike the targeted high-risk group strategies in other countries. Utilizing data from Taipei Veterans General Hospital's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from October 27, 2022, to January 19, 2023, the research examines AEs in 441 out of 1711 second booster recipients, considering factors like age, vaccine brands, and booster combinations. The findings reveal incidence rates (IR) of 25.6% (95% CI: 21.1-30.8) after the first booster and 24.9% (95% CI: 20.5-30.0) after the second, mostly non-serious, with those having AEs post-first booster 5 times more likely to report them again (Incidence rat rato, 5.02, P&lt;0.001). Significantly, switching from the mRNA1273 vaccine to another brand reduced AE risk by 18%. The study underscores that AEs are more repetitive than cumulative with additional booster doses, advocating for personalized vaccination strategies based on individual medical histories and previous vaccine reactions. These insights are valuable for healthcare providers in discussing potential AEs with patients, thereby improving vaccine compliance and public trust, and for policymakers in planning future booster vaccination strategies.

More than 600 Healthcare workers died due to COVID-19 infection until January 2022 in Ecuador. Even though the COVID-19 vaccines are safe, local, and systemic reactions were reported among physicians. This study aims to analyze the Adverse events (AEs) of COVID-19 vaccines with an emphasis on homologous and heterologous booster doses. An electronic survey was performed in Quito- Ecuador, directed to physicians who were vaccinated with the three doses of COVID-19 vaccines. 210 participants were analyzed after administering any doses of the vaccines. At least one AE was identified in 60.0% (126/210) of the sample after the first dose, 52.40% (110/210) after the second dose, and 75.2% (158/210) after the booster dose. The most frequent AEs were localized pain, myalgia, headache, and fever. At least one drug was used in 44.3% of the population after the first dose, 37.1% after the second dose, and 63.8% in the booster dose. Heterol-ogous booster produces more AEs compared with homologous booster (80.1% vs. 53.8%), and 77.3% of participants reported that interfered with daily activities. Similar studies agree that reactogenicity occurs mainly with heterologous vaccination compared to ho-mologous vaccination. This situation affected physicians’ performance in daily activities and led them to use medication for the symptoms

This study aimed to evaluate the mixed and homogeneous application of the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine CoronaVac (CV) and the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 (BNT). This prospective cohort study included 235 health care workers, who had received two prime shots with CoronaVac. They were divided into three cohorts after the third month: Cohort-I (CV/CV); Cohort-II (CV/CV/CV) and Cohort-III (CV/CV/BNT). Anti-S-RBD-IgG and total an-ti-spike/anti-nucleocapsid-IgG antibody concentrations were examined in vaccinated health workers at the 1st, 3rd and 6th months following the second dose of the vaccination. The mean age of 235 health care workers who participated in the project was 39.51±10.39 (min-max: 22-64). At the end of the 6th month, no antibodies were detected in 16.7% of Cohort-I participants, and anti-S-RDB IgG levels showed a decrease of 60% compared to the levels of the 3rd month. The antibody concentrations of the 6th month were found to have increased by an average of 5.13 times compared to the 3rd-month levels in the Cohort-II and 20.4 times in Cohort-III. The heterologous vaccination strategy “CoronaVac and BNT162b2 regimen” is able to induce a stronger immunity and it will help remove inequalities in the developing world where CoronaVac was the initial prime.

We study here what can be learned from our experience with COVID-19 vaccination for an initially naïve population, that can inform planning for vaccination against the next novel, highly transmissible pathogen. We focus on the first two pandemic years (wild strain through Delta), because after the Omicron wave in early 2022, few people were still SARS-CoV-2-naïve. Almost all were vaccinated, infected, or often both. We review the evidence on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE), waning effectiveness over time, and what we should expect about VE and waning from a future pathogen. As a basis for our analysis, we conducted a PRISMA-compliant review of all studies on PubMed through August 15, 2022 reporting VE against four endpoints: any infection, symptomatic infection, hospitalization, and death, for the four principal vaccines used in developed Western countries (BNT162b2, mRNA1273, Ad26.CoV2.S, and ChAdOx1-S). The mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA1273) had high initial VE against all endpoints but protection waned after approximately six months, with BNT162b2 declining faster than mRNA1273. Both mRNA vaccines initially outperformed the viral vector vaccines. A third “booster” dose, roughly six months after the primary doses, substantially reduced symptomatic infection, severe disease, and mortality, and in hindsight should be seen as part of the normal vaccination schedule.

This proposal was prepared in the very first weeks of 2020 because of the outbreak of COVID-19.There is good reason to suppose that rotavirus vaccine can be used as protection tool to effectively and safely fight and mitigate SARS-CoV-2 infection and the impact caused by COVID-19 in adult humans, due to the development of cross and trained immunity following rotavirus vaccination. Up-to-date, some rotavirus vaccines are available and approved, two of them have a large experience in results and safety. Little experience has been achieved in the use of rotavirus vaccine in adults. However, it can be expected that it would be safe and effective in adults and in the elderly as well. This proposal explains the background.

Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) is commonly used in national immunization programs. However, the immune response significantly declined within a few months. Our study assessed the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 after receiving booster shots of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 among health care workers who previously received CoronaVac as their primary immunization. Fifty-six participants received ChAdOx1 and forty-two participants received BNT162b2 were enrolled into this study which evaluated the immune responses including anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike total antibodies (Elecsys®), surrogated viral neutralization test (sVNT) to ancestral strain (cPass™; GenScript) and five variants of concern (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Omicron) (Luminex; multiplex sVNT) and the ELISpot with spike (S1 and S2) peptide pool against the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain. The samples were analyzed at baseline, 4, and 12 weeks after primary immunization as well as 4 and 12 weeks after receiving the booster. This study showed a significantly higher B-cell response among the BNT162b2 than the ChAdOx1 booster group, particularly against the Omicron variant, as well as a trend of good T-cell immune response in the BNT162b2 group. Moreover, the immune response rapidly declined at 12 weeks after the booster. A fourth dose or a second booster should be recommended, especially for reducing Omicron severity.

Like all RNA viruses, SARS-CoV-2 shows high mutation rate, which has led to the emergence of new variants. Among them, Gamma and Delta developed at the turn of 2020-2021 in Amazonas and India, two ecoregions characterized by hot-humid weather, very similar to that of the summer season due to climate change in Italy, the first Western country to have been hit hard by COVID-19 and to experience lockdown restrictions in a democratic framework of 58,85 million people. Methods: during the state of national health emergency and the Draghi government, the Civil Defense Department daily released the aggregate data coming from the Ministry of Health, the Higher Institute of Health, the Independent Provinces and the Italian Regions, in order to inform about the pandemic situation in Italy. Among these data there were the number of deaths, hospitalizations in intensive care units (ICU), non-ICU patients, contagions, and performed swabs. By means of a team effort, we have collected and elaborated all these data, comparing COVID-19 pandemic in Italy during the summers 2020 (following the nationwide lockdown), 2021 and 2022. Results: from summer 2020 (before mass vaccination) to summers 2021 (after primary mass vaccination) and 2022 (after booster mass vaccination) all pandemic trend indicators have showed a sharp worsening in Italy. COVID-19 deaths increased by ≈298% and ≈834%, ICU hospitalizations by ≈386% and ≈310%, non-ICU hospitalizations by ≈224% and ≈600%, contagions by ≈627% and ≈6.850% (i.e. ≈68,50 times), swabs by ≈354% and ≈370%, and the mean positivity rate passed from ≈1% to ≈2% and ≈20%, respectively. Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 can be transmitted in any climate, including areas with hot and humid weather, and the emergence of variants adapted to hot-humid climate may result in summer COVID-19 outbreaks, even in neither tropical nor subtropical countries. Although COVID-19 vaccines can confer cross-protection against newly emerging variants, this cross-immunity is obviously not absolute but limited, also taking into account that vaccine protection wanes considerably after 6 months. It follows that a subject vaccinated at the beginning of winter will not be completely covered in the height of summer, without forgetting the unvaccinated. As a final remark, the long nationwide lockdown made it possible to flatten SARS-CoV-2 circulation and, therefore, its negative impact on Italy during summer 2020.