Comparison of Omicron breakthrough infection versus monovalent SARS-CoV-2 intramuscular booster reveals differences in mucosal and systemic humoral immunity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our understanding of the quality of cellular and humoral immunity conferred by COVID-19 vaccination alone versus vaccination plus SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough (BT) infection remains incomplete. While the current (2023) SARS-CoV-2 immune landscape of Canadians is complex, in late 2021 most Canadians had either just received a third dose of COVID-19 vaccine, or had received their two-dose primary series and then experienced an Omicron BT. Herein we took advantage of this coincident timing to contrast cellular and humoral immunity conferred by three doses of vaccine versus two doses plus BT. Our results show thatBT infection induces cell-mediated immune responses to variants comparable to an intramuscular vaccine booster dose. In contrast, BT subjects had higher salivary immunoglobulin (Ig)G and IgA levels against the Omicron spike and enhanced reactivity to the ancestral spike for the IgA isotype, which also reacted with SARS-CoV-1. Serumneutralizing antibody levels against the ancestral strain and the variants were also higher after BT infection. Our results support the need for the development of intranasal vaccines that could emulate the enhanced mucosal and humoral immunity induced by Omicron BT without exposing individuals to the risks associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".