Read on Twitter
"The need to assess the potential of vaccine candidates to inadvertently worsen future coronavirus infections through a process called antibody-dependent enhancement was a major topic of discussion" https://www.biocentury.com/article/304521/how-covid-19-response-is-stimulating-global-scientific-collaboration Yes, and anecdotally CFR seems higher in 2ndary infection
"If it turns out that no SARS-CoV-2 antigens fully avoid ADE, then vaccine development efforts should aim at eliciting a T cell response against non-surface proteins, perhaps by borrowing approaches from neoantigen vaccines" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-020-0577-1 Cf. BioNTech buyout of Neon Tx
"BNT162b2, encodes an optimized version of the whole spike protein, which should lead to “more consistent responses across diverse populations and in older adults”" https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/27/pfizer-biontech-pick-covid19-vaccine-begin-pivotal-study/ @pfizer knows BNTX has been all about the T-cell epitopes for years and trusts their calls
Maybe some of the anecdotal reports from China in February about secondary infection were in fact accurate? https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3681489 And beyond the Ab findings (IgG/IgM SARS-CoV-2 positive) the chest xray comparison to the 1st infection seemed to imply worse interstitial opacities
This thread contains context and sensible advice with regard to the preprint linked above: https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1299479311129300994
