Third and Fourth Vaccine Doses Broaden and Prolong Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in Adult Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have reported impaired humoral responses after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), particularly those treated with anti-TNF biologics. We previously reported that IMID patients diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, or rheumatoid arthritis exhibited greater waning of Ab and T cell responses than healthy control subjects after SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose 2. Fewer data are available on the effects of third and fourth doses. This observational cohort study collected plasma and PBMCs from healthy control subjects and untreated or treated patients with IMIDs prevaccination and after one to four doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273). SARS-CoV-2-specific Ab levels, neutralization, and T cell cytokine release were measured against wild-type and Omicron BA.1 and BA.5 variants of concern. Third vaccine doses substantially restored and prolonged Ab and T cell responses in patients with IMIDs and broadened responses against variants of concern. Fourth-dose effects were subtle but also prolonged Ab responses. However, patients with IMIDs treated with anti-TNF, especially patients with inflammatory bowel disease, exhibited lower Ab responses even after the fourth dose. Although T cell IFN-γ responses were maximal after one dose, IL-2 and IL-4 production increased with successive doses, and early production of these cytokines was predictive of neutralization responses at 3-4 mo postvaccination. Our study demonstrates that third and fourth doses of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines sustain and broaden immune responses to SARS-CoV-2, supporting the recommendation for three- and four-dose vaccination regimens in patients with IMIDs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".