ArticleInternational immunopharmacology2022
Evaluation of the efficacy of four anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination using kits from two manufacturers: A prospective, longitudinal, cohort study at 11 serial time points within 160 days.
Article in International immunopharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pulse wave-based evaluation of the blood-supply capability of patients with heart failure via machine learning.Biomedical engineering online · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe accuracy of level of anti- severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies is a great concern. We aimed to compare the efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection kits from two manufacturers in evaluating the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.
methodsThe immune responses and consistency of four anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were evaluated using two manufacturers' antibody kits (A and B) in 61 subjects within 160 days after vaccination with the CoronaVac vaccine.
resultsThe total seropositivity rates of neutralizing antibodies and IgM antibodies detected by kit A were higher than those detected by kit B (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conversely, the total seropositivity rates of total antibodies and IgG antibodies were higher in kit B than kit A (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). The consistency rates showed less than 90% agreement between the kits for the detection of the four antibodies, and the κ score showed moderate or substantial consistency. The half-lives of neutralizing antibodies, total antibodies, and IgG antibodies within 160 days after vaccination, detected by kit A were 63.88 days, 80.50 days, and 63.70 days, respectively and by kit B were 97.06 days, 65.41 days, and 77.99 days, respectively.
conclusionThe efficacy of antibody detection differed between the two commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody kits, although there was moderate consistency, which may affect the clinical application and formulation of the vaccine strategy.
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.