Persisting Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 in a Local Austrian Population

  1. Dennis Ladage
  2. Delia Rösgen
  3. Clemens Schreiner
  4. Dorothee Ladage
  5. Christoph Adler
  6. Oliver Harzer
  7. Ralf J. Braun

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a global pandemic recently. The prevalence and persistence of antibodies following a peak SARS-CoV-2 infection provides insights into the potential for some level of population immunity. In June 2020, we succeeded in testing almost half of the population of an Austrian town with a higher incidence of COVID-19 infection. We performed a follow-up study to reassess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgA and IgG antibodies with 68 participants of the previous study. We found that the prevalence of IgG or IgA antibodies remained remarkably stable, with 84% of our cohort prevailing SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies (only a slight decrease from 93% 4 months before). In most patients with confirmed COVID-19 seroconversion potentially provides immunity to reinfection. Our results suggest a stable antibody response observed for at least 6 months post-infection with implications for developing strategies for testing and protecting the population.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.3389/fmed.2021.653630
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.20.20232140: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot 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.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.11.20.20232140v1 on medRxiv