ArticleFrontiers in immunology2025
Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 IgG responses in hemodialysis patients and healthcare workers after COVID-19 vaccination.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to compare SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels in hemodialysis (HD) patients and healthcare workers (HCWs) after COVID-19 vaccination and to identify factors influencing these levels. Materials and methods: A total of 193 participants were included: 104 HD patients and 89 age- and sex-matched HCWs as controls. All had completed a primary COVID-19 vaccination series (two doses of CoronaVac or BNT162b2) and a booster dose. SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG was measured at least one month after the last vaccine dose using a commercial immunoassay (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant, CMIA). Results in Arbitrary Units (AU/mL) were converted to WHO standard Binding Antibody Units (BAU/mL) (1 AU/mL = 0.142 BAU/mL). IgG titers ≥7.1 BAU/mL (equivalent to 50 AU/mL) were considered positive. Results: All participants had positive SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. There were no statistically significant differences in IgG levels between HD patients and HCWs at any individual time interval (<3 months, 3-6 months, or >6 months) or in the overall mean titers (HD: 1259 ± 1112 BAU/mL; HCW: 1002 ± 765 BAU/mL; p = 0.216). No individual in either group had an IgG titer below 7.1 BAU/mL. Vaccine type, dialysis vintage, and presence of comorbidities did not significantly impact antibody levels. In the HCWs group, those vaccinated only with CoronaVac had significantly lower IgG levels than those receiving only BNT162b2 or a heterologous regimen (CoronaVac followed by BNT162b2). However, among HD patients, IgG levels did not differ by vaccine regimen. Conclusion: HD patients mounted a SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response comparable to that of healthy HCWs, with no participant falling below the positivity threshold. Dialysis duration and comorbid conditions did not significantly affect post-vaccination IgG levels. While HCWs who received only CoronaVac showed lower antibody titers than those who received BNT162b2 or a heterologous schedule, this difference was not observed in HD patients. These results suggest that COVID-19 vaccination elicits a robust humoral immune response in the HD population, underscoring the benefit of vaccination in this high-risk group.
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.