Once again, this study looks exclusively at the neutralizing effects of the antibodies in sera, and is unable to account for t-cells:
>>>One important aspect of immunity not addressed by our work is cellular immunity contributed by cytotoxic lymphocytes, including T and NK cells. Even in the absence of neutralizing humoral immunity, previous studies have suggested that cellular immunity can mitigate severe or prolonged infection (Le Bert et al. 2020). In convalescent individuals, T-cell immunity would not be restricted to spike-derived epitopes, but also from other more abundant proteins such as nucleocapsid. As such, it would be reasonable to assume that T-cell-mediated immunity elicited by infection would remain largely intact for circulating variants including B.1.351. Indeed, although recent studies by Johnson & Johnson have demonstrated reduced overall efficacy in South Africa, there was substantially more protection against severe or fatal disease than for mild-to-moderate disease (Herper et al. 2021). However, with the exception of killed whole virus vaccines, all currently available vaccine designs only provide spike protein as the target immunogen, thus limiting T-cell immunity to spike epitopes. Notwithstanding, one recent study has demonstrated that mutations in spike epitopes do not impair T-cell responses despite escaping neutralizing antibodies (Skelly et al. 2021).
So... the jury is still out on if the vaccines generate a significant enough t-cell response to engender protection against a variant that may be able to elude the antibodies the vaccine confers, though it appears that the t-cell response is still durable from naturally infected individuals.
Isn't that being a little optimistic? After all if this was good news, it wouldn't be news :-)
Fully appreciating the point: antibody response is not the only response of the immune system.
The other story on HN right now is "AstraZeneca vaccine doesn't prevent B1351 Covid in early trial" – a finding consistent with the results of this study (yes, yes, AZ vaccine != Pfizer/Moderna).
So what becomes interesting is: does the AZ vaccine not produce the same T-cell response as Pfizer/Moderna, or are these vaccines in fact broadly similar (mutants don't affect T-cells but affect antibodies). The latter wouldn't be consistent with Skelly 2021.
Coronaviruses are a group of related RNA viruses that cause diseases in mammals and birds. In humans and birds, they cause respiratory tract infections that can range from mild to lethal. Mild illnesses in humans include some cases of the common cold (which is also caused by other viruses, predominantly rhinoviruses), while more lethal varieties can cause SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. In cows and pigs they cause diarrhea, while in mice they cause hepatitis and encephalomyelitis.
While the top comment was worded in not the best way, I think they meant to say it's not really surprising that SARS-CoV-2 is behaving like other corona viruses.
It seems intuitive to me that this whole thing will not magically end with a single vaccine. There will likely be enough variations that we will be dealing with future strains like we deal with influenza.
I think OP's phrasing is a bit odd and people's understanding of scientific vs colloquial language is creating some misunderstandings.
To clarify: What OP is referring to as "Coronavirus" is in the scientific sense aka a family of viruses of which SARS-CoV2 and common cold both fall under.
"Coronavirus" colloquially refers to only SARS-CoV2 hence the misunderstanding.
OP is saying that he's not surprised to hear that SARS-CoV2, a member of the same virus family as common cold, is following the same fate of common cold of which has an annual vaccine.
So this isn’t good news for the global vaccine rollout is it? It’s a bit hard to decode what the “so what” is, so appreciate if someone can simplify and synthesise.
13 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 31.8 ms ] threadhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009286742...
>>>One important aspect of immunity not addressed by our work is cellular immunity contributed by cytotoxic lymphocytes, including T and NK cells. Even in the absence of neutralizing humoral immunity, previous studies have suggested that cellular immunity can mitigate severe or prolonged infection (Le Bert et al. 2020). In convalescent individuals, T-cell immunity would not be restricted to spike-derived epitopes, but also from other more abundant proteins such as nucleocapsid. As such, it would be reasonable to assume that T-cell-mediated immunity elicited by infection would remain largely intact for circulating variants including B.1.351. Indeed, although recent studies by Johnson & Johnson have demonstrated reduced overall efficacy in South Africa, there was substantially more protection against severe or fatal disease than for mild-to-moderate disease (Herper et al. 2021). However, with the exception of killed whole virus vaccines, all currently available vaccine designs only provide spike protein as the target immunogen, thus limiting T-cell immunity to spike epitopes. Notwithstanding, one recent study has demonstrated that mutations in spike epitopes do not impair T-cell responses despite escaping neutralizing antibodies (Skelly et al. 2021).
So... the jury is still out on if the vaccines generate a significant enough t-cell response to engender protection against a variant that may be able to elude the antibodies the vaccine confers, though it appears that the t-cell response is still durable from naturally infected individuals.
Fully appreciating the point: antibody response is not the only response of the immune system.
The other story on HN right now is "AstraZeneca vaccine doesn't prevent B1351 Covid in early trial" – a finding consistent with the results of this study (yes, yes, AZ vaccine != Pfizer/Moderna).
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/03/astrazen...
So what becomes interesting is: does the AZ vaccine not produce the same T-cell response as Pfizer/Moderna, or are these vaccines in fact broadly similar (mutants don't affect T-cells but affect antibodies). The latter wouldn't be consistent with Skelly 2021.
Shocked to hear that a Coronavirus, one of the viruses we refer to as the common cold has the ability to evolve it's way around a vaccine! /S
We are going to need a new vaccine every year.
Sounds like a great business plan. Vaccines As a Service
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus
It seems intuitive to me that this whole thing will not magically end with a single vaccine. There will likely be enough variations that we will be dealing with future strains like we deal with influenza.
To clarify: What OP is referring to as "Coronavirus" is in the scientific sense aka a family of viruses of which SARS-CoV2 and common cold both fall under. "Coronavirus" colloquially refers to only SARS-CoV2 hence the misunderstanding.
OP is saying that he's not surprised to hear that SARS-CoV2, a member of the same virus family as common cold, is following the same fate of common cold of which has an annual vaccine.