Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Sep 18;16(9):1481.
doi: 10.3390/v16091481.

Immunogenicity of an Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccine in People Living with HIV in Guangxi, China: A Prospective Cohort Study

Affiliations

Immunogenicity of an Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccine in People Living with HIV in Guangxi, China: A Prospective Cohort Study

Yuting Wu et al. Viruses. .

Abstract

The inactivated COVID-19 vaccine has demonstrated high efficacy in the general population through extensive clinical and real-world studies. However, its effectiveness in immunocompromised individuals, particularly those living with HIV (PLWH), remains limited. In this study, 20 PLWH and 15 HIV-seronegative individuals were recruited to evaluate the immunogenicity of an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine in PLWH through a prospective cohort study. The median age of the 20 PLWH and 15 HIV-seronegative individuals was 42 years and 31 years, respectively. Of the PLWH, nine had been on ART for over five years. The median anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG antibody level on d224 was higher than that on d42 (8188.7 ng/mL vs. 3200.9 ng/mL, P < 0.05). Following COVID-19 infection, the antibody level increased to 29,872.5 ng/mL on dre+90, 12.19 times higher than that on d300. Compared with HIV-seronegative individuals, the antibody level in PLWH was lower on d210 (183.3 ng/mL vs. 509.3 ng/mL, P < 0.01), while there was no difference after d224. The symptoms of COVID-19 infection in PLWH were comparable to those in HIV-seronegative individuals. In this study, the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine demonstrated good immunogenicity in PLWH. The protective benefit of booster vaccinations for PLWH cannot be ignored. Implementing a booster vaccination policy for PLWH is an effective approach to providing better protection against the COVID-19 pandemic.

Keywords: PLWH; SARS-CoV-2; immunogenicity; inactivated COVID-19 vaccine.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Timeline of peripheral blood sample collection in the cohort of PLWH receiving the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Temporal dynamics of antibody levels in PLWH following inactivated COVID-19 vaccination. (A) Changes in median antibody concentration at different time points in PLWH after vaccination and COVID-19 infection. The dots represent median antibody concentrations. The value indicates the specific median antibody concentrations. (B) IgG antibody titers of individuals in PLWH are represented by dots. Antibody levels were compared at different time points after vaccination and recovery from the COVID-19 infection using Friedman’s test. The Bonferroni method was used to adjust the test size. P′ < 0.005 was considered statistically significant. ** P′ < 0.005, *** P′ < 0.001, and “ns” indicates no statistical difference.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Antibody levels in PLWH with different characteristics after the second dose of vaccination and the COVID-19 infection. (A,C) The violin plots show the differences in antibody levels by gender, age, ethnicity, occupation, BMI, CD4+ T-cell count, duration of treatment, and the ART regimen in PLWH on d42 (A) and dre+90 (C); (B,D) Correlation analysis between age, BMI, CD4+ T-cell count, duration of treatment, and antibody levels in PLWH on d42 (B) and dre+90 (D). (E) The line chart shows changes in antibody levels of the individual with the lowest CD4+ T-cell count and in the median antibody levels in PLWH. Comparison of antibody levels with different characteristics was conducted using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and the Kruskal–Wallis H test. Correlation analysis was performed using Spearman’s rank correlation. Only P-values indicating a significant difference were marked.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Antibody levels in PLWH with different characteristics after the second dose of vaccination and the COVID-19 infection. (A,C) The violin plots show the differences in antibody levels by gender, age, ethnicity, occupation, BMI, CD4+ T-cell count, duration of treatment, and the ART regimen in PLWH on d42 (A) and dre+90 (C); (B,D) Correlation analysis between age, BMI, CD4+ T-cell count, duration of treatment, and antibody levels in PLWH on d42 (B) and dre+90 (D). (E) The line chart shows changes in antibody levels of the individual with the lowest CD4+ T-cell count and in the median antibody levels in PLWH. Comparison of antibody levels with different characteristics was conducted using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and the Kruskal–Wallis H test. Correlation analysis was performed using Spearman’s rank correlation. Only P-values indicating a significant difference were marked.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Antibody levels in PLWH and controls following booster vaccination and COVID-19 infection. The violin plots illustrate the comparative analysis of antibody levels in PLWH and controls after administering the booster vaccine and COVID-19 infection, as assessed by the Wilcoxon rank sum test. ** P < 0.01, and “ns” indicates no statistical difference.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Symptoms of COVID-19 infection in PLWH and the controls. The differences in COVID-19 symptoms between PLWH and controls were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test. The size of the colored squares represents the proportion of various symptoms. Only P-values indicating a significant difference are marked. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001.

Similar articles

References

    1. Chen N., Zhou M., Dong X., Qu J., Gong F., Han Y., Qiu Y., Wang J., Liu Y., Wei Y., et al. Epidemiological and Clinical Characteristics of 99 Cases of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia in Wuhan, China: A Descriptive Study. Lancet. 2020;395:507–513. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. WHO WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dushboard. 2023. [(accessed on 12 April 2023)]. Available online: https://covid19.who.int/
    1. Polack F.P., Thomas S.J., Kitchin N., Absalon J., Gurtman A., Lockhart S., Perez J.L., Pérez Marc G., Moreira E.D., Zerbini C., et al. Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020;383:2603–2615. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2034577. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Voysey M., Clemens S.A.C., Madhi S.A., Weckx L.Y., Folegatti P.M., Aley P.K., Angus B., Baillie V.L., Barnabas S.L., Bhorat Q.E., et al. Safety and Efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: An Interim Analysis of Four Randomised Controlled Trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK. Lancet. 2021;397:99–111. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32661-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yin J., Zhao Y., Huang F., Yang Y., Huang Y., Zhuang Z., Wang Y., Wang Z., Lin X., Zheng Y., et al. Immune Response and Homeostasis Mechanism Following Administration of BBIBP-CorV SARS-CoV-2 Inactivated Vaccine. Innovation. 2023;4:100359. doi: 10.1016/j.xinn.2022.100359. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources