The Immune Response To The J&J Injection Remains Steady And Modest

A highly detailed comparison of both the Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 immunizations revealed that the antibody response of the body spikes sharply and then drops off after having received the two mRNA vaccines, but that the antibody response of the body remains lower and more stable after receiving the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

The Immune Response To The J&J Injection Remains Steady And Modest

Earlier this month, Johnson & Johnson submitted a research letter, which was published in the Journal Of Medicine on Friday, as part of its application to the United States Food and Drug Admin for an emergency use permit for a booster dosage of its one-shot vaccine. The FDA’s vaccine advisory group is meeting this week to determine whether or not to suggest a booster dosage for Johnson & Johnson’s flu shot.

Researchers examined the blood of 61 participants who had received either the Pfizer, Moderna, or J&J vaccines, evaluating different immune responses 2 to 4 weeks after vaccination, six months after vaccination, and eight months after immunization to determine whether they were resistant to the vaccines. In addition to immune cells known as T cells, the researchers looked at a range of antibody reactions.

“It’s a modest research project.” Dr. Dan Barouch, an immunization research associate at Beth Israel Diocesan priest Medical Clinic and Medical School who did lead the research group, told the media that the findings need to be confirmed by additional studies. “It’s a detailed immune analysis with the number of different kinds of antibody testing,” Dr. Barouch said of the findings.

According to the study team, the Pfizer vaccine generated a peak immune reaction at two weeks that dropped significantly by six months and more by eight months after administration. When compared to Pfizer’s vaccination, Moderna’s vaccine evoked a much stronger neutralizing antibody response, which reached levels three times higher than Pfizer’s at their peak. However, this response declined substantially by eight months.

However, the J&J vaccination did not yield a very strong antibody response at the outset, and this response did not diminish with time. Nobody seems to be very particular about what exactly any of this implies in means of defending individuals from illness. According to the research findings, it has not yet been determined whether kinds of antibody responses are associated with real-world protection against infection and severe disease. However, research has shown that when neutralizing antibody levels decline, protection against mild infection declines as well, although individuals continue to be protected from severe illness and death.

Consequently, Barouch believes that the arguments for boosters for mRNA vaccines and J&J vaccinations are distinct from one another. “For the mRNA vaccinations, they began off with effectiveness rates of 94 to 95 percent, but we’ve seen that efficacy rate decline, at least for Pfizer.” As a result, the rationale for the booster for the mRNA vaccines is that antibody titers are fading rapidly. At the very least, according to Pfizer, there has been an erosion of protection, which has been seen clinically at least for moderate illness.”

Separately, Johnson & Johnson stated that increasing the dosage of their one-dose vaccination increases its effectiveness from approximately 70% to 94%. According to Barouch, “getting unvaccinated individuals vaccinated for the first time will make a significant difference in the course of the pandemic,” and this should be the top focus going forward.