Initial SARS-CoV-2 vaccination response can predict booster response for BNT162b2 but not for AZD1222

  1. Thomas Perkmann
  2. Nicole Perkmann-Nagele
  3. Patrick Mucher
  4. Astrid Radakovics
  5. Manuela Repl
  6. Thomas Koller
  7. Galateja Jordakieva
  8. Oswald F. Wagner
  9. Christoph J. Binder
  10. Helmuth Haslacher

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.07.063
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.06.21260059: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: All subjects were >18 years old and provided written informed consent to participate in the study.
    IRB: The protocol of this performance evaluation study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics committee of the Medical University of Vienna (EK 1066/2021).
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    A previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was ruled out or confirmed by the Roche Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 anti-Nucleocapsid total antibody ECLIA (electrochemiluminescence assay) and assumed in all participants with a PCR-proven SARS-CoV-2 infection
    anti-Nucleocapsid total
    suggested: None
    Vaccine-induced anti-spike antibodies were quantified using the Roche Elecsys® SARS-CoV-2
    anti-spike
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    All calculations were performed with MedCalc 19.7 (MedCalc, Ostend, Belgium), figures were drawn with Mindjet Manager 19 (Corel, Ottawa, Canada) and Prism 9 (GraphPad, La Jolla, USA).
    MedCalc
    suggested: (MedCalc, RRID:SCR_015044)
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.07.06.21260059v1 on medRxiv