Mahsan Zali

Considering menstruation as a crucial factor in females’ health and fertility, any factor that could change its cycle is important. This study was conducted from April 2021 to October 2022 on females who got 3 doses of vaccines against SARS‐CoV‐2 through different platforms. The participants were requested to provide the trained experts with any changes regarding menstrual cycles after each dose of the vaccine up to 6 months after the booster shots. The disturbances related to the vaccines were identified by the adverse events committee to find possible associations with the applied vaccines. Of 308 women who participated until the end of the study, 22 (7.1%) complained about at least one abnormality in their menstrual patterns. The most common disturbance was metrorrhagia as 10 (48%) incidences followed by menorrhagia as 6 events (24.2%). Notably, the identified complaints were persistent in 59% of the patients. In addition, 14 studied cases developed COVID‐19 infection after menstrual disorders. In these cases, COVID‐19 could also play a role in the persistence of postvaccine menstrual disturbances. COVID‐19 vaccination could affect menstrual cycle in women with no remarkable previous medical history. More longitudinal studies are required regarding this issue.

Data on immunogenicity, immune response persistency, and safety of COVID-19 boosters in patients with comorbidities are limited. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate three different boosters’ immunogenicity and safety in individuals with at least one underlying disease (UD) (obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus) with healthy ones (HC) who were primed with two doses of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine and received a booster shot of the same priming vaccine or protein subunit vaccines, PastoCovac Plus or PastoCovac. One hundred and forty subjects including sixty-three ones with a comorbidity and seventy-seven healthy ones were enrolled. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was assessed before the booster injection and 28, 60, 90, and 180 days after it. Moreover, the adverse events (AEs) were recorded on days 7 and 21 postbooster shot for evaluating safety outcomes. Significantly increased titers of antispike, antiRBD, and neutralizing antibodies were observed in both UD and HC groups 28 days after the booster dose. Nevertheless, the titer of antispike IgG and anti-RBD IgG was lower in the UD group compared to the HC group. The long-term assessment regarding persistence of humoral immune responses showed that the induced antibodies were detectable up to 180 days postbooster shots though with a declined titer in both groups with no significant differences (p > 0.05). Furthermore, no significant difference in antibody levels was observed between each UD subgroup and the HC group, except for neutralizing antibodies in the hypertension subgroup. PastoCovac Plus and PastoCovac boosters induced a higher fold rise in antibodies in UD individuals than BBIBP-CorV booster recipients. No serious AEs after the booster injection were recorded. The overall incidence of AEs after the booster injection was higher in the UD group than the HC group among whom the highest systemic rate of AEs was seen in the BBIBP-CorV booster recipients. In conclusion, administration of COVID-19 boosters could similarly induce robust and persistent humoral immune responses in individuals with or without UD primarily vaccinated with two doses of the BBIBP-CorV. Protein-based boosters with higher a higher fold rise in antibodies and lower AEs in individuals with comorbidities might be considered a better choice for these individuals.

Data on immunogenicity, immune response persistency, and safety of COVID-19 boosters in patients with comorbidities are limited. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate and compare three different boosters in individuals who received two doses of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine including underlying diseases and healthy cases as control. One hundred forty subjects including 63 ones with at least one of three underlying diseases (UD) (including obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus) and 77 healthy ones (HC) who had received a booster dose (either PastoCovac Plus or PastoCovac or BBIBP-CorV) were enrolled. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was assessed before the booster injection and 28, 60, 90, and 180 days after it. Moreover, the adverse events (AEs) were recorded on days 7 and 21 post-booster shot for evaluating safety outcomes. Significantly increased titers of anti-spike, anti-RBD, and neutralizing antibodies were observed in both UD and HC groups 28 days after the booster dose, although the titer rise of anti-spike IgG and anti-RBD IgG was insignificantly inferior in the UD group compared to the HC group. All antibodies’ titers declined, with no significant differences between the two groups over time. Notably, all specific antibodies persisted up to 180 days; particularly the neutralizing antibody in both groups. Furthermore, no significant difference in antibody levels was observed between each UD subgroup and the HC group, except for neutralizing antibodies in the hypertension sub-group. PastoCovac Plus and PastoCovac boosters induced higher antibodies’ fold rise in UD individuals than BBIBP-CorV booster recipients. Safety outcomes did not show any serious AEs after the booster injection. The overall incidence of AEs post the booster injection was higher in the UD group than the HC group. Furthermore, the highest systemic AEs rate was reported in the UD group receiving the BBIBP-CorV booster. In conclusion, administration of COVID-19 boosters can equally induce robust and persistent humoral immune responses in individuals with or without UD primarily vaccinated with 2-doses of the BBIBP-CorV. Protein-based boosters with higher antibodies' fold rise and lower AEs in individuals with comorbidities might be considered a better choice for these individuals.