Immunological findings in a group of individuals who were non-responders to standard two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccines
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was declared a pandemic. The virus has infected more than 505 million people and caused more than 6 million deaths. However, data on non-responders to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the general population are limited. The objective of the study is to comprehensively compare the immunological characteristics of non-responders to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the 18-59 years with that in the 60 years and older using internationally recognized cutoff values. Participants included 627 individuals who received physical examinations and volunteered to participate in COVID-19 vaccination from the general population. The main outcome was an effective seroconversion characterized by anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG level of at least 4-fold increase from baseline. Profiling of naive immune cells was analyzed prior to vaccination to demonstrate baseline immunity. Outcomes of effective seroconversion in the 18-59 years with that in the 60 years and older were compared. The quantitative level of the anti-spike IgG was significantly lower in the 60 years and older and in men among the 18-59 years. There were 7.5% of non-responders among the 18-59 years and 11.7% of non-responders in the 60 years and older using the 4-fold increase parameter. The effective seroconversion rate was significantly related to the level of certain immune cells before vaccination, such as CD4 cells, CD8 cells and B cells and the age. An individual with a titer of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG that is below 50 BAU/mL might be considered a non-responder between 14-90 days after the last vaccine dose. Booster vaccination or additional protective measures should be recommended for non-responders as soon as possible to reduce disease severity and mortality.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.05.490815: (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 10.1101/2022.05.05.490815: (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.
- No funding statement was detected.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-