SARS-CoV-2-Specific Antibody (Ab) Levels and the Kinetic of Ab Decline Determine Ab Persistence Over 1 Year
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
In a SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence study conducted with 1,655 working adults in spring of 2020, 12 of the subjects presented with positive neutralization test (NT) titers (>1:10). They were here followed up for 1 year to assess their Ab persistence. We report that 7/12 individuals (58%) had NT_50 titers ≥1:50 and S1-specific IgG ≥50 BAU/ml 1 year after mild COVID-19 infection. S1-specific IgG were retained until a year when these levels were at least >60 BAU/ml at 3 months post-infection. For both the initial fast and subsequent slow decline phase of Abs, we observed a significant correlation between NT_50 titers and S1-specific IgG and thus propose S1-IgG of 60 BAU/ml 3 months post-infection as a potential threshold to predict neutralizing Ab persistence for 1 year. NT_50 titers and S1-specific IgG also correlated with circulating S1-specific memory B-cells. SARS-CoV-2-specific Ab levels after primary mRNA vaccination in healthy controls were higher (Geometric Mean Concentration [GMC] 3158 BAU/ml [CI 2592 to 3848]) than after mild COVID-19 infection (GMC 82 BAU/ml [CI 48 to 139]), but showed a stronger fold-decline within 5–6 months (0.20–fold, to GMC 619 BAU/ml [CI 479 to 801] vs. 0.56–fold, to GMC 46 BAU/ml [CI 26 to 82]). Of particular interest, the decline of both infection- and vaccine-induced Abs correlated with body mass index. Our data contribute to describe decline and persistence of SARS-CoV-2-specific Abs after infection and vaccination, yet the relevance of the maintained Ab levels for protection against infection and/or disease depends on the so far undefined correlate of protection.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.20.21263172: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
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:…
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.20.21263172: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
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.
-
