ArticlePathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Estimating the Optimal COVID-19 Booster Timing Using Surrogate Correlates of Protection: A Longitudinal Antibody Study in Naïve and Previously Infected Individuals.
Article in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Standardized, one-size-fits-all COVID-19 booster schedules may be suboptimal due to individual variation in immune backgrounds, particularly prior infection, which induces robust hybrid immunity. This study estimated optimal booster timing by modeling antibody decay in relation to surrogate correlates of protection (CoP). In a prospective cohort of 177 Japanese healthcare workers, we longitudinally monitored anti-spike receptor-binding domain (S-RBD) antibody titers following BNT162b2 vaccination. Participants were stratified into SARS-CoV-2-naïve and previously infected groups. Mixed-effects models were developed to predict when antibody titers would decline below predefined CoP thresholds. The model estimated optimal booster timing after a two-dose primary series to be 3-5 months for naïve individuals and approximately one year for those with prior infection. Following a third dose, the estimated interval extended to 8-12 months for the naïve group and 1.5-2 years for the previously infected group. These substantial differences underscore the limitations of uniform booster schedules. Our findings provide a quantitative framework for personalized vaccination strategies based on individual antibody profiles and immune status, thereby optimizing 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.