首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

混合接种阿斯利康和辉瑞的疫苗,产生意外效应?

Jeremy Kahn
2021-07-01

研究表明,间隔同样时间接种一剂辉瑞疫苗和一剂阿斯利康疫苗,产生的对新冠病毒的抗体水平更高。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

一项重要研究发现,混合接种辉瑞(Pfizer)和阿斯利康(AstraZeneca)的新冠疫苗产生了强烈的免疫反应,这应该更有助于各国政府加快为更多的民众接种疫苗。该项研究的结果也可能会影响政府如何选择大范围推动疫苗接种,从而确保民众在未来几年内保持免疫力。

相比间隔四周接种两剂阿斯利康疫苗,间隔同样时间接种一剂辉瑞疫苗和一剂阿斯利康疫苗,产生的对新冠病毒的抗体水平更高。

但研究人员表示,先接种阿斯利康疫苗后接种辉瑞疫苗的效果最佳。这种混合接种方式产生的抗体水平,比接种两剂阿斯利康疫苗高出近九倍。

研究人员还发现,这种方式甚至能够产生比两剂辉瑞疫苗更好的T细胞反应。T细胞反应是一种重要的免疫反应,在这个过程中,专门的“杀手细胞”会学会识别和攻击病原体。

但接种两剂辉瑞疫苗的抗体反应水平高于任何混合接种方式。因此,研究人员指出,接种两剂辉瑞疫苗的效果,可能胜过混合接种辉瑞疫苗和阿斯利康疫苗。

接种疫苗时考虑的因素

牛津大学(University of Oxford)的儿科和疫苗学副教授、这项研究的负责人马修•斯内普表示,尽管该项研究得出了这样的结论,但他不建议调整接种两剂相同疫苗的安排,除非疫苗供应不足,或者接种者在接种第一种疫苗之后出现了过敏反应。

他认为,在这些情况下,这项研究充分证明了混合接种这两种疫苗的“弹性和灵活性”。

斯内普称,虽然研究结果可以帮助科学家思考未来接种加强剂量,但在决定什么时间接种哪种疫苗时,应该根据感染者首次接种疫苗之后的实际数据。他指出,本项研究中通过血液检测得到的抗体和T细胞数据极其有限,并且很难与不同年龄群体的具体免疫保护相互关联,所以不适合作为决定加强注射疫苗的依据。

同样在6月28日,牛津大学的另外一项研究发现,接种两剂阿斯利康疫苗至少六个月后再接种第三剂同类疫苗,能够将抗体水平提高六倍,并维持与第二剂相当的T细胞反应。第三剂疫苗还产生了更多可以中和现有变异毒株的抗体,包括英国目前的主要病毒株德尔塔(官方名称为B.1.617.2),它对在英国肯特郡发现的变异毒株和在南非发现的贝塔变异毒株同样有效。

斯内普主持的这项混合接种疫苗研究Com-COV,得到了英国政府的资助。研究结果在6月28日发表于著名医学期刊《柳叶刀》(The Lancet)的网站,但尚未通过同行评议。

有关T细胞的研究结果之所以重要,可能是因为对新冠病毒的抗体反应随着时间推移会逐渐消失,而科学家们相信T细胞能够更长时间保持对体内曾经出现过的病原体发生反应的能力。对于会引发重病的新变种病毒,T细胞也可以提供重要的保护,即使在新突变病毒导致抗体防止感染的效果下降的情况下,T细胞依旧能够发挥作用。

到目前为止,该项研究只分析了间隔四周混合接种这两种疫苗的效果,研究人员正在针对间隔12周混合接种的效果进行研究。这是因为英国在开始疫苗接种时,将两剂疫苗的建议间隔时间延长到8至12周,以缓解疫苗供应不足的问题,让更多人可以接种第一剂疫苗。

英国的副首席医疗官乔纳森•范-塔姆在一份声明中说:“即将发布的对两种疫苗间隔12周混合接种效果的研究结果,将对英国疫苗接种计划的未来决策具有指导意义。”

牛津大学对阿斯利康疫苗的一项单独研究发现,在接种第一剂疫苗后即使间隔45周接种第二剂,所产生的抗体反应比间隔12周接种第二剂高四倍。

范-塔姆还表示,目前英国疫苗供应充足,能够为所有成年人接种两剂同种疫苗,因此该项研究结果对英国的疫苗接种政策不会产生直接影响。

但在其他国家,该项研究或许可以帮助它们用有限的疫苗对更多人完成接种。斯内普称:“这些研究的确非常重要,能够指导人们充分利用现有的疫苗,尤其是在中低收入国家。”

“混合接种”

COM-CoV研究之前曾经报告称,混合接种疫苗可能是安全的,没有严重的副作用,但研究人员确实发现混合接种后更有可能出现发烧、肌肉酸痛和嗜睡等类似于流感的症状。研究人员称这些是“轻度至中度”的“短期”症状,最多持续几天时间。

“混合接种”研究最初在英格兰8个研究中心招募了830名年龄在50岁及以上的志愿者,并试验了阿斯利康和辉瑞疫苗的四种不同组合。4月扩大了范围,包含了Moderna和Novavax疫苗,在9个不同研究中心额外招募了1,070名受试者。

除了英国政府资助的混合接种研究以外,阿斯利康也在研究将其疫苗与俄罗斯生产的Sputnik V疫苗混合接种时的免疫反应。

辉瑞与德国公司BioNtech联合研发的辉瑞疫苗和阿斯利康与牛津大学的科学家联合研发的疫苗,有相同的作用原理,都是诱导人体细胞生成在新冠病毒表面发现的刺突蛋白。在没有真正感染新冠病毒的情况下,将人体暴露于这种刺突蛋白,使免疫系统可以识别真正的新冠病毒感染,并有抗击病毒的武器。

但阿斯利康疫苗和辉瑞疫苗使用不同的技术,向人体发出生成刺突蛋白的指令。辉瑞疫苗和Moderna疫苗都使用信使核糖核酸(mRNA)发出一系列生成蛋白的指令,蛋白将由人体细胞直接吸收。而阿斯利康疫苗使用一种被称为腺病毒的转基因黑猩猩病毒,将生成刺突蛋白的指令传递给人体细胞。

这两种技术所产生的免疫反应似乎略有不同,有研究显示,mRNA疫苗产生的抗体水平和免疫力更高。(财富中文网)

翻译:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

一项重要研究发现,混合接种辉瑞(Pfizer)和阿斯利康(AstraZeneca)的新冠疫苗产生了强烈的免疫反应,这应该更有助于各国政府加快为更多的民众接种疫苗。该项研究的结果也可能会影响政府如何选择大范围推动疫苗接种,从而确保民众在未来几年内保持免疫力。

相比间隔四周接种两剂阿斯利康疫苗,间隔同样时间接种一剂辉瑞疫苗和一剂阿斯利康疫苗,产生的对新冠病毒的抗体水平更高。

但研究人员表示,先接种阿斯利康疫苗后接种辉瑞疫苗的效果最佳。这种混合接种方式产生的抗体水平,比接种两剂阿斯利康疫苗高出近九倍。

研究人员还发现,这种方式甚至能够产生比两剂辉瑞疫苗更好的T细胞反应。T细胞反应是一种重要的免疫反应,在这个过程中,专门的“杀手细胞”会学会识别和攻击病原体。

但接种两剂辉瑞疫苗的抗体反应水平高于任何混合接种方式。因此,研究人员指出,接种两剂辉瑞疫苗的效果,可能胜过混合接种辉瑞疫苗和阿斯利康疫苗。

接种疫苗时考虑的因素

牛津大学(University of Oxford)的儿科和疫苗学副教授、这项研究的负责人马修•斯内普表示,尽管该项研究得出了这样的结论,但他不建议调整接种两剂相同疫苗的安排,除非疫苗供应不足,或者接种者在接种第一种疫苗之后出现了过敏反应。

他认为,在这些情况下,这项研究充分证明了混合接种这两种疫苗的“弹性和灵活性”。

斯内普称,虽然研究结果可以帮助科学家思考未来接种加强剂量,但在决定什么时间接种哪种疫苗时,应该根据感染者首次接种疫苗之后的实际数据。他指出,本项研究中通过血液检测得到的抗体和T细胞数据极其有限,并且很难与不同年龄群体的具体免疫保护相互关联,所以不适合作为决定加强注射疫苗的依据。

同样在6月28日,牛津大学的另外一项研究发现,接种两剂阿斯利康疫苗至少六个月后再接种第三剂同类疫苗,能够将抗体水平提高六倍,并维持与第二剂相当的T细胞反应。第三剂疫苗还产生了更多可以中和现有变异毒株的抗体,包括英国目前的主要病毒株德尔塔(官方名称为B.1.617.2),它对在英国肯特郡发现的变异毒株和在南非发现的贝塔变异毒株同样有效。

斯内普主持的这项混合接种疫苗研究Com-COV,得到了英国政府的资助。研究结果在6月28日发表于著名医学期刊《柳叶刀》(The Lancet)的网站,但尚未通过同行评议。

有关T细胞的研究结果之所以重要,可能是因为对新冠病毒的抗体反应随着时间推移会逐渐消失,而科学家们相信T细胞能够更长时间保持对体内曾经出现过的病原体发生反应的能力。对于会引发重病的新变种病毒,T细胞也可以提供重要的保护,即使在新突变病毒导致抗体防止感染的效果下降的情况下,T细胞依旧能够发挥作用。

到目前为止,该项研究只分析了间隔四周混合接种这两种疫苗的效果,研究人员正在针对间隔12周混合接种的效果进行研究。这是因为英国在开始疫苗接种时,将两剂疫苗的建议间隔时间延长到8至12周,以缓解疫苗供应不足的问题,让更多人可以接种第一剂疫苗。

英国的副首席医疗官乔纳森•范-塔姆在一份声明中说:“即将发布的对两种疫苗间隔12周混合接种效果的研究结果,将对英国疫苗接种计划的未来决策具有指导意义。”

牛津大学对阿斯利康疫苗的一项单独研究发现,在接种第一剂疫苗后即使间隔45周接种第二剂,所产生的抗体反应比间隔12周接种第二剂高四倍。

范-塔姆还表示,目前英国疫苗供应充足,能够为所有成年人接种两剂同种疫苗,因此该项研究结果对英国的疫苗接种政策不会产生直接影响。

但在其他国家,该项研究或许可以帮助它们用有限的疫苗对更多人完成接种。斯内普称:“这些研究的确非常重要,能够指导人们充分利用现有的疫苗,尤其是在中低收入国家。”

“混合接种”

COM-CoV研究之前曾经报告称,混合接种疫苗可能是安全的,没有严重的副作用,但研究人员确实发现混合接种后更有可能出现发烧、肌肉酸痛和嗜睡等类似于流感的症状。研究人员称这些是“轻度至中度”的“短期”症状,最多持续几天时间。

“混合接种”研究最初在英格兰8个研究中心招募了830名年龄在50岁及以上的志愿者,并试验了阿斯利康和辉瑞疫苗的四种不同组合。4月扩大了范围,包含了Moderna和Novavax疫苗,在9个不同研究中心额外招募了1,070名受试者。

除了英国政府资助的混合接种研究以外,阿斯利康也在研究将其疫苗与俄罗斯生产的Sputnik V疫苗混合接种时的免疫反应。

辉瑞与德国公司BioNtech联合研发的辉瑞疫苗和阿斯利康与牛津大学的科学家联合研发的疫苗,有相同的作用原理,都是诱导人体细胞生成在新冠病毒表面发现的刺突蛋白。在没有真正感染新冠病毒的情况下,将人体暴露于这种刺突蛋白,使免疫系统可以识别真正的新冠病毒感染,并有抗击病毒的武器。

但阿斯利康疫苗和辉瑞疫苗使用不同的技术,向人体发出生成刺突蛋白的指令。辉瑞疫苗和Moderna疫苗都使用信使核糖核酸(mRNA)发出一系列生成蛋白的指令,蛋白将由人体细胞直接吸收。而阿斯利康疫苗使用一种被称为腺病毒的转基因黑猩猩病毒,将生成刺突蛋白的指令传递给人体细胞。

这两种技术所产生的免疫反应似乎略有不同,有研究显示,mRNA疫苗产生的抗体水平和免疫力更高。(财富中文网)

翻译:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

Mixing doses of the Pfizer and AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines produces a strong immune response, a major study has found, in a finding that should make it easier for governments to vaccinate more people faster. The results may also have some implications for how governments choose to roll out booster jabs to ensure people maintain immunity in years to come.

Receiving an initial dose of the Pfizer vaccine followed four weeks later by a dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, or vice-versa, produced a higher level of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, the virus the causes COVID-19, than simply administering two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine with the same four-week time gap.

But the mixed dosing results were best, the researchers said, when the AstraZeneca vaccine was given first followed by the Pfizer vaccine. In that case, the antibody levels were about nine times higher than with two AstraZeneca doses.

Alternating the doses in that way, the scientists also found, produced an even better T-cell response—a key part of immunity in which specialized “killer cells” learn to recognize and attack pathogens—than giving two doses of the Pfizer vaccine.

Two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, however, produced a higher antibody response than with any of the mixed dosing schedules. As a result, the researchers said that two doses of the Pfizer vaccine were probably superior to mixing it with the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Booster considerations

Despite the findings, Matthew Snape, an associate professor of pediatrics and vaccinology at the University of Oxford, who headed the study, said he wouldn't recommend altering the approved dosing regimens, in which two doses of the same vaccine are given, unless adequate supplies of those vaccines were not available or a particular person had an allergic reaction to the first vaccine type they'd been given.

In such cases, he said, the study was critical for showing that "resilience and flexibility" could be achieved by mixing vaccine types between doses.

Snape said that, while the results could help scientists think about future booster doses, any decisions about which vaccines to use and when should be guided by real-world data on patients becoming infected and ill following initial vaccinations. He said the antibody and T-cell data from blood tests, such as those conducted in this research, was too limited—and too difficult to correlate with specific immune protection for different age groups—to use it as a basis for making decisions about booster shots.

Also, on June 28, a separate University of Oxford study found that a third dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, given at least six months after the second dose, increased antibody levels six fold and maintained the same T-cell response compared to the second dose. The third dose also resulted in more antibodies able to neutralize the prevalent variant strains of the virus, including the Delta variant, officially known as B.1.617.2, which is now the predominant strain in the U.K. It was also effective against the Alpha, also called the Kent or U.K. variant, and the Beta, or South African, variant.

The mixed dosing study Snape lead, called Com-COV, was funded by the U.K. government. The results were published June 28 on a website run by the prestigious medical journal The Lancet, but are not yet peer-reviewed.

The T-cell finding may be important because it is known that the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 fades over time, while scientists believe that T-cells retain the ability to respond to pathogens the body has encountered before for much longer periods. They may also offer critical protection against new variants of the virus causing severe disease, even in cases where new mutations render the antibodies less effective at preventing infection.

While the study results so far only looked at this mixed dosing with a four-week interval between jabs, the scientists are doing further research examining a 12-week interval. That’s because, when it first began immunizing people, the U.K. extended the recommended period between doses to between eight and 12 weeks, to stretch its limited vaccine supply so as to provide more people with first jabs.

“The results for the 12-week interval, which are yet to come, will have an instrumental role to play in decisions on the future of the UK’s vaccination program,” Jonathan Van-Tam, England’s deputy chief medical officer, said in a statement.

The separate Oxford study of the AstraZeneca vaccine found that delaying the second dose even up to 45 weeks after the first dose produced an antibody response that was four times greater than with the 12-week interval.

Van-Tam also said the U.K. currently had enough vaccine supplies to provide two doses of the same vaccine to all adults, so the results of the trial would not have an immediate impact on the country’s vaccination policy.

But this is not the case in other parts of the world, where the findings may help them cover more of their population with limited vaccine doses. "These types of studies are really important to inform the best use of the vaccines that we have available, especially in low and middle income countries," Snape said.

“Heterologous dosing”

The COM-CoV study had previously reported that mixing vaccine doses appeared to be safe, with no serious side effects, although the researchers did find that people were more likely to experience uncomfortable flu-like symptoms, such as fever, muscle aches and lethargy, when mixing vaccines. The scientists described these symptoms as “mild to moderate” and “short-lived,” lasting at most a few days.

The “heterologous dosing” study initially recruited 830 volunteers, all aged 50 and above, at eight different sites throughout England, and trialed four different combinations of the AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines. In April, the study was expanded to include the Moderna and Novavax vaccines as well, across nine different sites, with an additional 1,070 people recruited to take part.

In addition to the British government-funded study on heterologous dosing, AstraZeneca has been conducting its own study looking at the immune response when one dose of its vaccine is used in combination with a dose of the Russian-made Sputnik V vaccine.

The Pfizer vaccine, which the company jointly developed with the German firm BioNtech, and the AstraZeneca vaccine, which that company co-developed with scientists from the University of Oxford, both work by inducing the body's cells to produce the spike protein found on the surface of the coronavirus. Exposing the body to this spike protein, without the coronavirus itself being present, allows parts of the immune system to recognize a real coronavirus infection and have tools ready to fight it off.

But the AstraZeneca vaccine and the Pfizer vaccine use different technologies to deliver the instructions to the body to make the spike protein. Pfizer's vaccine, as well as Moderna's, use messenger RNA (mRNA), a set of instructions to make the protein that is directly absorbed into the body's cells. The AstraZeneca vaccine, meanwhile, uses a genetically-modified chimpanzee virus, called an adenovirus, to carry the instructions for the spike protein into the body's cells.

These two different technologies seem to produce slightly different immune responses, with studies showing higher antibody levels and immunity produced by the mRNA-based vaccines.

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开