Neutralizing Antibody Responses to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Inpatients and Convalescent Patients
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic with no specific antiviral treatments or vaccines. There is an urgent need for exploring the neutralizing antibodies from patients with different clinical characteristics.
Methods
A total of 117 blood samples were collected from 70 COVID-19 inpatients and convalescent patients. Antibodies were determined with a modified cytopathogenic neutralization assay (NA) based on live severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The dynamics of neutralizing antibody levels at different time points with different clinical characteristics were analyzed.
Results
The seropositivity rate reached up to 100.0% within 20 days since onset, and remained 100.0% till days 41–53. The total geometric mean titer was 1:163.7 (95% confidence interval [CI], 128.5–208.6) by NA and 1:12 441.7 (95% CI, 9754.5–15 869.2) by ELISA. The antibody level by NA and ELISA peaked on days 31–40 since onset, and then decreased slightly. In multivariate generalized estimating equation analysis, patients aged 31–45, 46–60, and 61–84 years had a higher neutralizing antibody level than those aged 16–30 years (β = 1.0470, P = .0125; β = 1.0613, P = .0307; β = 1.3713, P = .0020). Patients with a worse clinical classification had a higher neutralizing antibody titer (β = 0.4639, P = .0227).
Conclusions
The neutralizing antibodies were detected even at the early stage of disease, and a significant response was shown in convalescent patients.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.15.20065623: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: The protocol of the study was reviewed and approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of Beijing Youan Hospital, Capital Medical University (approval number LL-2020-041-K).
Consent: Before enrollment, written informed consent was obtained from each enrolled patient.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Cell Line Authentication not detected. Table 2: Resources
Experimental Models: Cell Lines Sentences Resources The diluted serums were mixed with a virus suspension of 100 CCID50 in 96-well plates at a ratio of 1:1, followed by 2 hours incubation at 36.5°C in a 5% CO2 incubator. 1-2 X104 … SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.15.20065623: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: The protocol of the study was reviewed and approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of Beijing Youan Hospital, Capital Medical University (approval number LL-2020-041-K).
Consent: Before enrollment, written informed consent was obtained from each enrolled patient.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Cell Line Authentication not detected. Table 2: Resources
Experimental Models: Cell Lines Sentences Resources The diluted serums were mixed with a virus suspension of 100 CCID50 in 96-well plates at a ratio of 1:1, followed by 2 hours incubation at 36.5°C in a 5% CO2 incubator. 1-2 X104 Vero cells were then added to the serum-virus mixture, and the plates were incubated for 5 days at 36.5°C in a 5% CO2 incubator. Verosuggested: NoneSoftware and Algorithms Sentences Resources Analyses were conducted by SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). SAS Institutesuggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Several limitations of this study should be noted. First, the involved patients were selected by convenient sampling instead of random sampling. So the representativeness is relatively insufficient, and the samples could only represent the general situation to a certain extent. Second, among 70 patients, only 12 of them were followed up more than twice, and the average follow-up period was relatively short, about only 14.3 days (range 3.0-36.0). Therefore, it is of value to follow up patients for a longer time. Third, the subjects were mainly mild or moderate by illness severity, and only 1 asymptomatic patient and 4 severe patients, whether a different antibody levels would have been observed with different severity patients cannot be determined. Hence, it’s important to evaluate antibody levels in asymptomatic infected and critical patients in future study. In conclusion, this study showed that all COVID-19 patients were seropositivity to SARS-CoV-2 even at the early stage of illness, and a significant neutralizing antibody response was observed in convalescent patients. Neutralizing antibody levels increased with days since onset of symptoms, elder age and the worsening of clinical classification. Changes on antibody levels ware individual specific.
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.
-
-
-
-