Immunisation of the newborn represents a key global strategy in overcoming morbidity and mortality due to infection in early life. Potential limitations, however, include poor immunogenicity, safety concerns and the development of tolerogenicity or hypo-responsiveness to either the same antigen and/or concomitant antigens administered at birth or in the subsequent months. Furthermore, the neonatal immunological milieu is polarised towards Th2-type immunity with dampening of Th1-type responses and impaired humoral immunity, resulting in qualitatively and quantitatively poorer antibody responses compared to older infants. Innate immunity also shows functional deficiency in antigen-presenting cells: the expression and signalling of Toll-like receptors undergo maturational changes associated with distinct functional responses. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of BCG, hepatitis B and oral polio vaccines, the only immunisations currently in use in the neonatal period, is proof of concept that vaccines can be successfully administered to the newborn via different routes of delivery to induce a range of protective mechanisms for three different diseases. In this review paper, we discuss the rationale for and challenges to neonatal immunisation, summarising progress made in the field, including lessons learnt from newborn vaccines in the pipeline. Furthermore, we explore important maternal, infant and environmental co-factors that may impede the success of current and future neonatal immunisation strategies. A variety of approaches have been proposed to overcome the inherent regulatory constraints of the newborn innate and adaptive immune system, including alternative routes of delivery, novel vaccine configurations, improved innate receptor agonists and optimised antigen-adjuvant combinations. Crucially, a dual strategy may be employed whereby immunisation at birth is used to prime the immune system in order to improve immunogenicity to subsequent homologous or heterologous boosters in later infancy. Similarly, potent non-specific immunomodulatory effects may be elicited when challenged with unrelated antigens, with the potential to reduce the overall risk of infection and allergic disease in early life.

The COVID-19 pandemic response has caused disruption to healthcare services globally, including to routine immunizations. To understand immunization service interruptions specifically for maternal, neonatal and infant vaccines, we captured the local experiences of members of the Immunising Pregnant Women and Infants Network (IMPRINT) by conducting an online survey over 2-weeks in April 2020. IMPRINT is a global network of clinicians and scientists working in maternal and neonatal vaccinology. The survey included discrete questions to quantify the extent of disruption as well as free-text options to explore the reasons behind reported disruptions. Of the 48 responses received, the majority (75%) were from low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs). Of all respondents, 50% or more reported issues with vaccine delivery within their country. Thematic analysis identified three key themes behind immunization disruption: “access” issues, e.g., logistical barriers, “provider” issues, e.g., staff shortages and user “concern” about attending immunization appointments due to COVID-19 fear. Access and provider issues were more commonly reported by LMIC respondents. Overall, respondents reported uncertainty among parents and healthcare providers regarding routine immunization. We conclude that further quantification of routine vaccination disruption is needed, alongside health service prioritization, logistical support and targeted communication strategies to reinforce routine immunizations during the COVID-19 response.

Introduction: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) specific antibodies have been shown to neutralize the virus in-vitro. Understanding antibody dynamics following SARS-CoV-2 infection is therefore crucial. Sensitive measurement of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is also vital for large seroprevalence surveys which inform government policies and public health interventions. However, rapidly waning antibodies following SARS-CoV-2 infection could jeopardize the sensitivity of serological testing on which these surveys depend. Methods: This prospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 humoral dynamics in a central London hospital analyzed 137 serial samples collected from 67 participants seropositive to SARS-CoV-2 by the Meso-Scale Discovery assay. Antibody titers were quantified to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein (N), spike (S-)protein and the receptor-binding-domain (RBD) of the S-protein. Titers were log-transformed and a multivariate log-linear model with time-since-infection and clinical variables was fitted by Bayesian methods. Results: The mean estimated half-life of the N-antibody was 52 days (95% CI 42-65). The S- and RBD-antibody had significantly longer mean half-lives of 81 days (95% CI 61-111) and 83 days (95% CI 55-137) respectively. An ACE-2-receptor competition assay demonstrated significant correlation between the S and RBD-antibody titers and ACE2-receptor blocking in-vitro. The time-to-a-negative N-antibody test for 50% of the seropositive population was predicted to be 195 days (95% CI 163-236). Discussion: After SARS-CoV-2 infection, the predicted half-life of N-antibody was 52 days with 50% of seropositive participants becoming seronegative to this antibody at 195 days. Widely used serological tests that depend on the N-antibody will therefore significantly underestimate the prevalence of infection following the majority of infections.