ArticleVaccine2022
The effect of immunization with inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) and/or SARS-CoV-2 infection on antibody levels, plasmablasts, long-lived-plasma-cells, and IFN-γ release by natural killer cells.
Article in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing COVID-19 IgG levels among vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals in Mthatha - South africa: A case-control approach.Virusdisease · 2025Article
- Neurological Sequelae of COVID-19: A Biochemical Perspective.ACS omega · 2023Review
- Article
- COVID-19 Infection, Vaccination, and Antibody Levels: Investigating Correlations through a Cohort Study.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Utility of Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S in ascertaining post-vaccine neutralizing antibodies.Journal of clinical virology plus · 2023Article
- Evaluation of response to different COVID-19 vaccines in vaccinated healthcare workers in a single center in Iran.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- Natural Killer Cells in SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Implications.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe evaluated the antibody response, natural killer cell response and B cell phenotypes in healthcare workers (HCW) who are vaccinated with two doses of CoronaVac with or without documented SARS-CoV-2 infection and unvaccinated HCWs with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
methodsHCWs were divided into four groups: vaccine only (VO), vaccine after SARS-CoV-2 infection (VAI), SARS-CoV-2 infection only (IO), and SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccine (IAV). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (Anti-S) antibodies were measured by Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S ELISA kit. Memory B cells (CD19
resultsThe Anti-S antibodies were detectable in all HCWs (n: 224). The median Anti-S titers (BAU/mL) was significantly higher in VAI (620 25-75% 373-1341) compared to VO (136, 25-75% 85-283) and IO (111, 25-75% 54-413, p < 0.01). VAI group had significantly lower percentage of plasmablasts (2.9; 0-8.7) compared to VO (6.8; 3.5-12.0) and IO (9.9; 4.7-47.5, p < 0.01) (n:74). Percentage of LLPCs in groups VO, VAI and IO was similar. There was no difference of IFN-γ levels between the study groups (n: 76).
conclusionThe antibody response was similar between uninfected vaccinated HCWs and unvaccinated HCWs who had natural infection. HCWs who had two doses of CoronaVac either before or after the natural SARS-CoV-2 infection elicited significantly higher antibody responses compared to uninfected vaccinated HCWs. The lower percentages of plasmablasts in the VAI group may indicate their migration to lymph nodes and initiation of the germinal center reaction phase. IFN-γ response did not differ among the groups.
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.