Cited by 4SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchImmune responses and vaccinationsVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy

BNT162b2 Vaccine-Induced Immune Responses and Dynamics Vary Among Age Groups, Sex and Co-Morbidities: A Longitudinal Prospective Cohort Study

Open access
Lustig, Yaniv, Sapir, Einav, Regev-Yochay, Gili, Cohen, Carmit, Fluss, Ronen, Olmer, Liraz, Indenbaum, victoria, Mandelboim, Michal +8 more·2021·SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract

Background: Concurrent to BNT162b2 vaccine rollout in Israel, we performed a longitudinal prospective cohort study to assess the early antibody response and antibody kinetics after each vaccine dose among health care workers (HCW) of different ages, gender and co-morbidities. Methods: Overall 2,607 vaccinated HCW were followed for five weeks after vaccination and Immunoglobulin (Ig)M, IgA, IgG and neutralizing antibodies were measured by Beckman-coulter SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG, ELISA-RBD and pseudo-virus neutralization assays. Scatter plot and correlation analyses, logistic and linear regression analyses and linear mixed models were used to investigate the longitudinal antibody response. Findings: The first vaccine dose elicited low IgG and neutralizing antibody response in the majority of HCW which were rapidly induced 10 and 32 folds, respectively following the second vaccine dose. High (r=0.92) correlation was detected between IgG and neutralizing titers. First dose induced IgG response was significantly lower in older (>65, Ratio of means=0.25 95%CI 0.19-0.31) and immunosuppressed (0.21 95%CI 0.14-0.31) individuals. Yet, this was partially abrogated following the second dose. Overall, lower antibody levels were consistently associated with males (0.84 95%CI 0.80-0.89), older age (>65, 0.64 95%CI 0.58-0.71), immunosuppression (0.44 95%CI 0.33-0.58), and other specific comorbidities (diabetes (0.88 95%CI 0.79-0.98), hypertension (0.90 95%CI 0.82-0.98), heart disease (0.86 95%CI…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.3790408

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 95% of vaccinated health care workers had a neutralizing antibody titer >256 within 2 weeks after the second BNT162b2 dose.

    “We have previously reported that 95% of vaccinated health care workers were found to have a neutralizing antibody titer of more than 256 within 2 weeks after the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose.11”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lustig, Y., Sapir, E., Regev-Yochay, G., Cohen, C., Fluss, R., Olmer, L., Indenbaum, V., Mandelboim, M., Doolman, R., Amit, S., Mendelson, E., Ziv, A., Huppert, A., Rubin, C., Freedman, L., & Kreiss, Y.
Affiliations
  • Sheba Medical Center (IL)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
Corresponding author
Lustig, Yaniv
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021
ISSN
1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3160806458
Cited by
4
References
1
Citations by year
2023: 2 · 2021: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immune responses and vaccinations
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Keywords
BNT162b2, COVID-19 vaccines, SARS-CoV-2, antibody response, neutralizing antibodies, IgG, IgA, IgM, antibody kinetics, age differences, sex differences, comorbidities, immunosuppression, healthcare workers, vaccine efficacy, neutralization test

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review