Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39309610›Full record

ArticleVaccine: X2024

Kinetics of humoral and cellular immune responses 5 months post-COVID-19 booster dose by immune response groups at the peak immunity phase: An observational historical cohort study using the Fukushima vaccination community survey.

Yurie Kobashi, Takeshi Kawamura, Yuzo Shimazu, Yudai Kaneko, Yoshitaka Nishikawa, Akira Sugiyama, Yuta Tani, Aya Nakayama, Makoto Yoshida, Tianchen Zho and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Yurie KobashiDepartment of Radiation Health Management, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima City, Fukushima, Japan.
Takeshi KawamuraIsotope Science Center, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yuzo ShimazuDepartment of Radiation Health Management, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima City, Fukushima, Japan.
Yudai KanekoLaboratory for Systems Biology and Medicine, Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoshitaka NishikawaDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Hirata Central Hospital, Hirata, Ishikawa District, Fukushima, Japan.
Akira SugiyamaIsotope Science Center, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yuta TaniMedical Governance Research Institute, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Aya NakayamaIsotope Science Center, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Makoto YoshidaMedical Governance Research Institute, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Tianchen ZhoDepartment of Radiation Health Management, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima City, Fukushima, Japan.
Chika YamamotoDepartment of Radiation Health Management, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima City, Fukushima, Japan.
Hiroaki SaitoDepartment of Radiation Health Management, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima City, Fukushima, Japan.
Morihito TakitaDepartment of Radiation Health Management, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima City, Fukushima, Japan.
Masatoshi WakuiDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Tatsuhiko KodamaLaboratory for Systems Biology and Medicine, Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Masaharu TsubokuraDepartment of Radiation Health Management, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima City, Fukushima, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Understanding the waning of immunity after booster vaccinations is important to identify which immune-low populations should be prioritized. Methods: We investigated longitudinal cellular and humoral immunity after the third vaccine dose in both high- and low-cellular and humoral immunity groups at the peak immunity phase after the booster vaccination in a large community-based cohort. Blood samples were collected from 1045 participants at peak (T1: median 54 days post-third dose) and decay (T2: median 145 days post-third dose) phases to assess IgG(S), neutralizing activity, and ELISpot responses. Participants were categorized into high/low ELISpot/IgG(S) groups at T1. Cellular and humoral responses were tracked for approximately five months after the third vaccination. Results: In total, 983 participants were included in the cohort. IgG(S) geometric mean fold change between timepoints revealed greater waning in the >79 years age group (T2/T1 fold change: 0.27) and higher IgG(S) fold change in the low-ELISpot group at T1 (T2/T1 fold change: 0.32-0.33) than in the other groups, although ELISpot geometric mean remained stable. Conclusions: Antibody level of those who did not respond well to third dose vaccination waned rapidly than those who responded well. Evidence-based vaccine strategies are essential in preventing potential health issues caused by vaccines, including side-effects.

Indexed as

Booster dose vaccine effectivenessCellular immunityCOVID-19Humoral immunitySARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID39309610
PMCPMC11416657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.