ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Performance of Whole Blood Stimulation Assays for the Quantification of SARS-CoV-2 Specific T-Cell Response: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Higher and Sustained Cell-Mediated Immune Responses After 3 Doses of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Therapy.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis between STANDARD-E Covi-FERON ELISA with pre-existing IFN-γ release assays and determination of the optimum cutoff value for assessment of T-Cell response to SARS-CoV-2.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2023Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Since the identification of the new severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a huge effort in terms of diagnostic strategies has been deployed. To date, serological assays represent a valuable tool for the identification of recovered COVID-19 patients and for the monitoring of immune response elicited by vaccination. However, the role of T-cell response should be better clarified and simple and easy to perform assays should be routinely introduced. The main aim of this study was to compare a home-made assay for whole blood stimulation with a standardized ELISpot assay design in our laboratory for the assessment of spike-specific T-cell response in vaccinated subjects. Even if a good correlation between the assays was reported, a higher percentage of responder subjects was reported for immunocompromised subjects with ELISpot assay (56%) than home-made whole blood stimulation assay (33%). Additionally, three commercial assays were compared with our home-made assay, reporting a good agreement in terms of both positive and negative results.
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.