ArticlePloS one2022
Comparison of the kinetics and magnitude of antibody responses to different SARS-CoV-2 proteins in Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV vaccinees following the BNT162b2 booster or natural infection.
Article in PloS one, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical characteristics and prediction model of re-positive nucleic acid tests among Omicron infections by machine learning: a real-world study of 35,488 cases.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- A Longitudinal Study in Tunisia to Assess the Anti-RBD IgG and IgA Responses Induced by Three Different COVID-19 Vaccine Platforms.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 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
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The kinetics and magnitude of antibody responses to different proteins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV vaccinees has not been previously studied. Therefore, we investigated antibody responses to different SARS-CoV-2 proteins at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months post-second dose in previously infected (n = 20) and uninfected (n = 20) Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV vaccinees. The IgG antibodies to the S, S1 and S2 and N were several folds higher in those who had natural infection compared to uninfected individuals at all time points. We then compared the persistence of antibody responses and effect of natural omicron infection or BNT162b2 booster in Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV vaccinees. We measured the total antibodies to the RBD, ACE2 blocking antibodies and antibody responses to different SARS-CoV-2 proteins in Sinopharm vaccinees at 7 months post second dose, including those who remained uninfected and not boosted (n = 21), or those who had previous infection and who did not obtain the booster (n = 17), those who were not infected, but who received a BNT162b2 booster (n = 30), or those who did not receive the booster but were infected with omicron (n = 29). At 7 months post second dose uninfected (no booster) had the lowest antibody levels to the RBD, while omicron infected vaccinees showed significantly higher anti-RBD antibody levels (p = 0.04) than vaccinees who received the booster. Only 3/21 cohort A (14.3%) had ACE2 blocking antibodies, while higher frequencies were observed in naturally infected individuals (100%), those who received the booster (18/21, 85.7%), and omicron infected individuals (100%). Pre-vaccination, naturally infected had the highest antibody levels to the N protein. These data suggest that those previously infected Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV vaccinees have a robust antibody response, 7 months post vaccination, while vaccinees who were naturally infected with omicron had a similar immune response to those who received the booster. It will be important to investigate implications for subsequent clinical protection.
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.