Single-cell sequencing reveals distinct immunity profiles in individuals with varied antibody responses, suggesting new ways to evaluate vaccine efficacy.
Background Vaccination is critical for controlling infectious diseases, however, assessing efficacy solely through neutralizing antibody titers oversimplifies immune protection. The cellular and molecular mechanisms driving variable vaccine-induced immune responses remain underexplored, limiting comprehensive vaccine evaluation. Methods Using single-cell sequencing, we profiled and compared cellular dynamic, transcriptomic profiles, immune repertoire and cellular communication in vaccine recipients with high and low antibody titers following Ad5-nCoV booster using PBMC samples collected from a cohort of 144 participants. Results Cellular profiling revealed no significant changes in most immune cell subsets. However, high response groups exhibited increased cytotoxic CD8+ lymphocytes (CD8+ CTL) and natural killer T cells (NKT), with reduced CD8+ mucosal-associated invariant T cells (CD8+ MAIT). These groups showed upregulated immune and effector genes, downregulated pro-inflammatory genes, and elevated inhibitory gene expression in clonal NK cells, accompanied by enhanced CD8+ T cell clonal expansion. Additionally, the VJ gene usage of B and T cells in high response groups showed biased patterns, with preferential expression of IGLJ3, IGKJ3, IGHV3-33 and IGHJ4 in B cells, and TRAV27, TRAJ33, TRBV9 and TRBJ2-7 in T cells. Cell communication also indicated balanced pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokine expression in high response groups. Conclusions These findings elucidate the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying robust immune responses to the Ad5-nCoV booster, highlighting the critical role of cellular immunity. By integrating humoral and cellular insights, this study offers a new perspective of comprehensive framework for evaluating vaccine efficacy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: