Observational studyPloS one2026
Prospective Evaluation of Antibody Response post COVID-19 vaccination in older persons ≧ 60 years old (PEARL 60): A longitudinal 15-months study in a tertiary centre in Malaysia.
Observational study in PloS one, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Older adults exhibit heterogeneous immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination, yet the relative contributions of age, comorbidity, vaccine platform, and infection history to antibody durability remain incompletely defined. Understanding these determinants is essential to inform booster strategies in ageing populations. We conducted a longitudinal observational study of 300 participants (250 aged ≥60 years and 50 younger controls) followed for up to 15 months. Anti-spike (anti-S) antibody responses were assessed at four event-anchored timepoints: ≤ 3 months post-primary vaccination (TP1), ~ 3 months post-first booster (TP2), 6-9 months post-first booster capturing waning immunity (TP3), and ≤3 months post-second booster where available (TP4). Multivariable log-linear regression models were used to identify independent determinants of antibody levels, with additional analyses stratified by infection status and vaccine platform. Among older adults, 78.8% had moderate-to-severe comorbidity burden, 40.0% were pre-frail, and only 16.8% received a second booster. At TP3, older age was associated with lower antibody levels in univariable analysis (GMR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97) but not after adjustment (aGMR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51-1.22, p = 0.279). Independent predictors of higher TP3 antibody levels included female sex (aGMR 1.24, 95% CI 1.02-1.51, p = 0.028), prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (aGMR 1.39, 95% CI 1.14-1.71, p = 0.001), and mRNA (aGMR 5.16, 95% CI 3.57-7.47, p=<0.001) or viral vector boosters (aGMR 6.05, 95% CI 4.03-9.08, p=<0.001), while renal disease was associated with lower responses (aGMR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54-0.94, p = 0.017). Similar associations were observed at TP4. Frailty and sarcopenia were not independently associated with antibody levels. Neutralising antibodies against Omicron were absent after primary vaccination and detected in only 25.9% of infection-naïve older adults after the first booster. Sustained humoral immunity following COVID-19 vaccination is driven primarily by vaccine platform and immune history rather than chronological age or geriatric syndromes alone. Waning immunity unmasks vulnerability in older adults, while low uptake of second boosters highlights a critical gap between immunological risk and vaccine utilisation. These findings support targeted, equity-focused booster strategies prioritising highly immunogenic platforms and high-risk older adults.
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.