4.6 Article

SARS-CoV-2-directed antibodies persist for more than six months in a cohort with mild to moderate COVID-19

期刊

INFECTION
卷 49, 期 4, 页码 739-746

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s15010-021-01598-6

关键词

SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Serological immune response; Antibody titer; ELISA; Severity of disease

资金

  1. Projekt DEAL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study followed the serological immune responses of front-line healthcare workers after PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for 30 weeks, finding that the majority retained IgG antibodies after 12 weeks and 90% remained positive at 30 weeks, while IgA and IgM responses declined more rapidly, with a portion of participants no longer having detectable antibodies at 30 weeks.
Objective To follow serological immune responses of front-line healthcare workers after PCR-confirmed COVID-19 for a mean of 30 weeks, describe the time-course of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-specific IgG, IgA and IgM levels and to identify associations of the immune response with symptoms, demographic parameters and severity of disease. Methods Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S protein-specific IgG, IgA and IgM antibodies were measured at three time points during the 30-week follow-up. COVID-19-specific symptoms were assessed with standardized questionnaires. Results 95% of the participants mounted an IgG response with only modest decline after week 12. IgG-type antibodies were still detectable in almost 90% of the subjects at 30 weeks. IgA and IgM responses were less robust and antibody titers decreased more rapidly. At 30 weeks, only 25% still had detectable IgA-type and none had IgM-type antibodies. Higher age and higher disease severity were independently associated with higher IgG antibody levels, albeit with wide variations. Conclusion Serological immune responses after COVID-19 show considerable inter-individual variability, but show an association with increasing age and higher severity of disease. IgG-type anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies remain positive in 90% of the individuals 30 weeks after onset of symptoms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据