PREreview of Comparative immunogenicity of heterologous versus homologous 3rd SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses in kidney transplant recipients

Main Claim & Relevance:

Patients that were primed with BNT162b2 for the first two vaccines and received the BNT162b2 booster had higher anti-S concentrations compared to the patients that were primed with ChAdOx1 for the first two vaccines and BNT162b2 booster vaccine. In addition, it was suggested that it might be helpful to consider measuring T-cell response in transplant patients as a possible marker for protection against severe diseases. In the results, it was stated that there was no difference in response between ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2

Are the findings strong, reliable, potentially informative, not informative, or misleading?

These findings are potentially informative. Although some questions in the methods. Such as, how were the participants picked? or a comparative for mRNA efficacy? More details would be informative.

How might these ideas presented by the main claims further knowledge of the COVID-19 Pandemic?

With the constant reports of new variants appearing and with that vaccine boosters need to be administered. As such those that are immune vulnerable, like transplant patients, being protected against severe diseases is important.