COVID-19 mRNA vaccines drive differential antibody Fc-functional profiles in pregnant, lactating, and nonpregnant women

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

Pregnant and lactating women develop distinct antibody Fc profiles in response to the mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 vaccines compared to nonpregnant women.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.04.438404: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: Eligible women were: (n=84 pregnant; n=31 lactating; or n=16 non-pregnant and of reproductive age (18-45); greater than or equal to 18 years old, able to provide informed consent, and receiving the COVID-19 vaccine.
    IRB: The study was approved by the MGH Institutional Review Board.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableEligible women were: (n=84 pregnant; n=31 lactating; or n=16 non-pregnant and of reproductive age (18-45); greater than or equal to 18 years old, able to provide informed consent, and receiving the COVID-19 vaccine.
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Antibody-dependent neutrophil phagocytosis: Antibody-dependent neutrophil phagocytosis was measured by a flow cytometry-based assay (48).
    Antibody-dependent neutrophil phagocytosis
    suggested: None
    Antibody-dependent
    suggested: None
    PE-coupled mouse anti-human detection antibodies (Southern Biotech) were used to detect antigen-specific antibody binding.
    anti-human detection antibodies (Southern Biotech)
    suggested: None
    antigen-specific
    suggested: None
    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    Cell lines: THP-1 cells used in phagocytic assays were grown in RPMI media supplemented with 10% FBS, 5% penn/strep, 5% L-glutamine, 5% HEPES buffer (pH 7.2) and 0.5% 2-Mercaptoethanol, and maintained at 2.5×105 cells/ml.
    THP-1
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Univariate statistical analysis: For univariate data analysis, statistics were run using GraphPad Prism version 8.0.
    GraphPad Prism
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)
    Multivariate analysis: Multivariate analyses were performed in R (version 4.0.0) and Python (version 3.9.1).
    Python
    suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)

    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.

    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.