ArticleViruses2021
Dynamics of Neutralizing Antibody Responses Following Natural SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Correlation with Commercial Serologic Tests. A Reappraisal and Indirect Comparison with Vaccinated Subjects.
Article in Viruses, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vaccination, infection, and hybrid immunity: determinants of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels and protection in Quzhou, China.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Neutralizing Capacity of Tixagevimab plus Cilgavimab (AZD7442) against Different SARS-CoV-2 Variants: A Case Report Study with Comparison to a Vaccinated Population.Case reports in infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Article
- SARS-CoV-2-Neutralizing Antibody Response and Correlation of Two Serological Assays with Microneutralization.Vaccines · 2023Article
- A longitudinal study of humoral immune responses induced by a 3-dose inactivated COVID-19 vaccine in an observational, prospective cohort.BMC immunology · 2022Observational
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgA and IgG in human milk and breastfeeding infant stool 6 months after maternal COVID-19 vaccination.Research square · 2022Article
- Lung Transplant Recipients Immunogenicity after Heterologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19-BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination.Viruses · 2022Article
- Evaluation of commercial Anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody assays in seropositive subjects.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2022Article
- Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and Neutralizing Antibody Levels in Patients with Past COVID-19 Infection: A Longitudinal StudyBalkan medical journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neutralising antibodies (NAbs) represent the real source of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infections by preventing the virus from entering target cells. The gold standard in the detection of these antibodies is the plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT). As these experiments must be done in a very secure environment, other techniques based on pseudoviruses: pseudovirus neutralization test (pVNT) or surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) have been developed. Binding assays, on the other hand, measure total antibodies or IgG, IgM, and IgA directed against one epitope of the SARS-CoV-2, independently of their neutralizing capacity. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of six commercial binding assays to the pVNT and sVNT. In this study, we used blood samples from a cohort of 62 RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients. Based on the results of the neutralizing assays, adapted cut-offs for the binding assays were calculated. The use of these adapted cut-offs does not permit to improve the accuracy of the serological assays and we did not find an adapted cut-off able to improve the capacity of these tests to detect NAbs. For a part of the population, a longitudinal follow-up with at least two samples for the same patient was performed. From day 14 to day 291, more than 75% of the samples were positive for NAbs (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.