Comparison of Antibody Levels in Response to SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination Type in a Midwestern Cohort
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
We present preliminary data in an ongoing observational study reporting SARS-CoV-2 spike protein reactive antibody levels from a convenience cohort of over 250 individuals in Kansas City. We observe stable antibody levels over one year in individuals who recovered from COVID19 infection caused by SARS-CoV-2. By comparison, our data reveals even higher antibody levels from naïve individuals vaccinated with Pfizer or Moderna vaccines and slightly lower levels from Johnson & Johnson (J&J) recipients. For all vaccines, inoculation after recovery resulted in higher antibody levels than vaccination alone. Responses to Pfizer and Moderna vaccines decreased over time from high initial levels but at the time of publication remain higher than those for recovered or J&J recipients. Within our limited cohort we only see slight demographic trends including higher antibody levels in recovered female vs. male individuals. Booster doses and breakthrough infections both result in rapid increases in antibody levels.
Article activity feed
-
-
-
-
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.08.16.21262036: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Field Sample Permit: Sample collection: Participants self-collected 100-150 µl fingertip blood specimens in capillary blood collection containers and serum samples were pre-processed as described in Conkright-Fincham et al (2021).
IRB: Ethical approval: The study was approved by the MRIGlobal Institutional Review Board (registration IRB00000067).
Consent: Written informed consent for study participation was obtained from all participants.Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Antibodies Sentences Resources The target of the ELISA test was a synthetic purified spike protein (original strain modified for … SciScore for 10.1101/2021.08.16.21262036: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Field Sample Permit: Sample collection: Participants self-collected 100-150 µl fingertip blood specimens in capillary blood collection containers and serum samples were pre-processed as described in Conkright-Fincham et al (2021).
IRB: Ethical approval: The study was approved by the MRIGlobal Institutional Review Board (registration IRB00000067).
Consent: Written informed consent for study participation was obtained from all participants.Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Antibodies Sentences Resources The target of the ELISA test was a synthetic purified spike protein (original strain modified for stability) (Amanat et al., 2020; Robbiani et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2020), which was detected using HRP labeled anti-human IgG secondary antibodies (Conkright-Fincham et al., 2021; Stadlbauer et al., 2020; Stadlbauer et al., 2021). anti-human IgGsuggested: NoneFor each sample, raw ELISA signals were plotted as a function of dilution, and results were reported as area under the curve (AUC) as calculated from a best fit to the data, normalized to the AUC obtained with the same set of dilutions performed on a sample of 20 ng/µL of a commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody (AM001414, Active Motif), such that a signal level of 20 represents equal area under the curve to the commercial antibody. anti-SARS-CoV-2suggested: (BioLegend Cat# 938701, RRID:AB_2876764)AM001414suggested: (Proteintech Cat# 91361-PTG, RRID:AB_2882954)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:Limitations: Perhaps the biggest limitation of our data set is the focus on IgG binding to a single spike isoform. Variations in the spike protein as well as variations in the epitopes presented to serum antibodies are known to cause significant changes in antibody binding. In addition, IgA and IgM antibodies represent a strong initial antibody response to vaccination and infection and are well known to decay following response. Those limitations likely explain our lack of decay after recovery as reported elsewhere. Our assay also does not measure immune cell populations or viral neutralization, which are well known components of the immune response. Therefore, our antibody measurement represents a biased indicator of immune response over time and should not be interpreted on its own. We also rely on self-reported vaccine data. Our data set suggests that that data is fairly accurate but when considering outliers reporting inaccuracies could have a significant impact. Another limitation is uncertainty in collection method and timing. Samples were self-collected during a 24-hour period prior to serum preparation and freezing. While check-in steps should eliminate poorly collected and preserved samples, there is a possibility of contamination, timing error, and unknown collection factors that should be considered when interpreting the data. Finally, it is important to note that our cohort, being volunteers from an academic research center, is a biased representation of our local...
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.
- Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-