Waning of humoral immunity depending on the types of COVID-19 vaccine

There are limited data on the rates of the waning of antibody levels after two-dose and booster vaccination according to the different platforms of COVID-19 vaccines. We enrolled healthcare workers (HCWs) in a tertiary care hospital who received homologous two-dose vaccination, followed by a homologous or heterologous booster mRNA vaccine. SARS-CoV-2 S1-specific IgG was measured using ELISA. A linear mixed regression model was used to compare the slope from the peak antibody titre to the lowest antibody titres 3 months after vaccination. A total of 113 HCWs (BNT162b2 (n = 48 [42%]), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (n = 52 [46%]) or mRNA-1273 (n = 13 [12%])) were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. More gradual antibody waning was observed over 3 months with the two-dose ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (ChAdOx1) than with the two-dose BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 (p p = 0.001, respectively). In addition, homologous mRNA-1273 booster induced a more durable antibody response than homologous BNT162b2 booster (p p  Two-dose homologous ChAdOx1 vaccination or homologous mRNA-1273 booster appears to induce more-durable antibody responses than 2-dose homologous mRNA vaccination, homologous BNT162b2 booster, or 2-dose ChAdOx1 followed by BNT62b2 booster, although our findings are based on the relatively short term (3-month) follow-up after the vaccinations and the evaluation of the slopes from different antibody peak levels. Further studies on long-term durability depending on the types of vaccines are needed.</p

Questions and scoring system of the author satisfaction survey.

Questions and scoring system of the author satisfaction survey.</p

Overall satisfaction scores.

Overall satisfaction scores of the EECs and the SPT from author satisfaction surveys gathered from July 2017 to December 2018. Overall satisfaction scores from (A) blind surveys and (B) non-blind surveys. Numbers on top of the bars indicate the mean values, and numbers in parentheses indicate the number of survey results. Error bars indicate standard deviation from mean. * P P P P < 0.0001 vs. SPT. EEC, external editing company; SPT, Scientific Publications Team.</p

Trend in the number of editing requests.

Trend of editing requests from AMC researchers from 2011 Q1 to 2018 Q4. (A) Quarterly number of editing requests. Numbers on top of the bars indicate the actual number of editing requests made during the respective quarters. Bars in orange indicate the period after which the Scientific Publications Team was established. (B) Trend in the number of editing requests. Asterisks (**) indicates a significant (P = 0.0097) difference in the slope of the editing request trend after intervention (establishment of the Scientific Publications Team; January 2017). (C) Number of requests that asked for in-house editing. Numbers on top of the bars indicate the actual number of editing requests that specifically asked for one of the in-house editors. Data from June 2018 was omitted because the in-house editors were on leave for most of the period, during which the number of editing requests was 2.</p

Manuscript editing workflow.

Boxes with bold texts indicate the routine workflow in processing editing requests. Boxes in faded colors indicate processes that are infrequently carried out.</p

Dose response relationship between duration of statin use and incidence of herpes zoster.

Dose response relationship between duration of statin use and incidence of herpes zoster.</p

Specific question scores.

Scores of specific questions (items #2 –#7 in Table 1) from blind survey results. Questions that showed (A) strong, (B) moderate, and (C) weak correlation with overall satisfaction score. Column bar graphs show the mean scores of each question (numbers on top of the bars); error bars indicate 95% confidence range in “Re-request” and “Recommend,” and standard deviation from mean in others. Scatter plots show the correlations between overall satisfaction and the specific questions. Trend between two variables are indicated by the solid lines. Shaded areas between dotted lines indicate 95% confidence range. * P P P P P < 0.0001 vs. SPT.</p

Flow diagram of the study.

Flow diagram giving details of the enrolled individuals, and the procedure for propensity score matching.</p

Cumulative incidences of herpes zoster (%) according to the use of statins.

<p>Kaplan–Meier curves showing cumulative incidences (%) of individuals suffering from herpes zoster. Red line indicating herpes zoster in statin users. Blue line depicting herpes zoster in non-statin users. The difference between statin users and non-statin users was significant (<i>p</i> < .0001 by the log rank test).</p

Additional file 1: of Airborne fungal spores and invasive aspergillosis in hematologic units in a tertiary hospital during construction: a prospective cohort study

Table S1. Baseline characteristics of admitted patients during periods 1 and 2. Figure S1. Cases of Aspergillus spp. isolation from clinical specimens from January 2016 to December 2018. (ZIP 671 kb