Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup

Review of "Distinct age-specific SARS-CoV-2 IgG decay kinetics following natural infection"

Reviewer: Daniel Grupel (Soroka Hospital) | 📗📗📗📗◻️

Published onMar 16, 2022
Review of "Distinct age-specific SARS-CoV-2 IgG decay kinetics following natural infection"
key-enterThis Pub is a Review of
Distinct age-specific SARS-CoV-2 IgG decay kinetics following natural infection
Description

AbstractBackgroundAntibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 can be observed as early as 14 days post-infection, but little is known about the stability of antibody levels over time. Here we evaluate the long-term stability of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies following infection with SARS-CoV-2 in 402 adult donors.MethodsWe performed a multi-center study carried out at Plasma Donor Centers in the city of Heidelberg (Plasmazentrum Heidelberg, Germany) and Munich (Plasmazentrum München, Germany). We present anti-S/N and anti-N IgG antibody levels in prospective serum samples collected up to 403 days post recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals.ResultsThe cohort includes 402 adult donors (185 female, 217 male; 17 - 68 years of age) where anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels were measured in plasma samples collected between 18- and 403-days post SARS-CoV-2 infection. A linear mixed effects model demonstrated IgG decay rates that decrease over time (χ2=176.8, p<0.00001) and an interaction of time*age χ (χ2=10.0, p<0.005)), with those over 60+ years showing the highest baseline IgG levels and the fastest rate of IgG decay. Baseline viral neutralization assays demonstrated that serum IgG levels correlated with in vitro neutralization capacity in 91% of our cohort.ConclusionLong-term antibody levels and age-specific antibody decay rates suggest the potential need for age-specific vaccine booster guidelines to ensure long term vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

To read the original manuscript, click the link above.

Reviewer 1 (Daniel Grupel) | 📗📗📗📗◻️

RR:C19 Strength of Evidence Scale Key

📕 ◻️◻️◻️◻️ = Misleading

📙📙 ◻️◻️◻️ = Not Informative

📒📒📒 ◻️◻️ = Potentially Informative

📗📗📗📗◻️ = Reliable

📘📘📘📘📘 = Strong

To read the review, click the link below.


Connections
1 of 1
A Supplement to this Pub
Comments
0
comment

No comments here

Why not start the discussion?