Zahra Panahi, Parisa Kianpour, Sajad Sahab-Negah, M. H. Karbalaie Niya, S. Nadji, Reza Mourtami, Atabak Najafi, Babak Jahangiri, Reza Pourfallah, Mahdi Chahabi, Mina Nouri, Fatemeh Beiraghdar, Mahin Jamshidi Makiani
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are very good at protecting individuals from serious illness, needing hospital care, and dying from different strains of the virus. However, vaccines might not completely prevent individuals from catching and spreading the virus, and this might depend on some personal factors. Objectives: To find out the immune response of COVID-19 vaccines, this cross-sectional study conducted within June 2021 to May 2023 assessed different types of COVID-19 vaccine antibody responses among healthcare professionals and their associations with demographic factors and comorbidity risk factors. Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted on recruited healthcare professionals from Sina, Imam Khomeini Complex, 501 AJA, Baqiayatallah, and Firoozgar hospitals in Tehran, Iran. The vaccines whose antibody response was investigated in this study are Sinopharm® (China), AstraZeneca® (United Kingdom), Sputnik® (Russia), and Covaxin® (India). Anti-spike, anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD), and anti-neutralizing immunoglobulin G (IgG) were evaluated by commercial kits according to instructions. Results: This study involved 1 029 healthcare workers who were over 18 years old. The average age was 41.48 ± 9.9 years, and 602 (58.5%) of them were male. The vaccines they received were Sputnik V (392 or 38.16%), AstraZeneca (335 or 32.61%), Baharat (45 or 4.3%), and Sinopharm (255 or 24.82%). The Covaxin and AstraZeneca vaccines increased both anti-RBD and anti-neutralizing IgG Ab levels; however, the Sinopharm vaccine increased only the latter. The Sputnik vaccine was the least effective. Gender and diabetes influenced the antibody levels, but age did not. Conclusions: This study revealed the substantial effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in generating robust antibody responses among healthcare professionals. All four vaccine types, Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, Sputnik, and Covaxin, elicited significant antibody responses in over 70% of participants, highlighting the crucial role of vaccination in building defense against COVID-19.
{"title":"Comprehensive Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccines Antibody Response Among Healthcare Professionals: A Multi-Center Study in Iran","authors":"Zahra Panahi, Parisa Kianpour, Sajad Sahab-Negah, M. H. Karbalaie Niya, S. Nadji, Reza Mourtami, Atabak Najafi, Babak Jahangiri, Reza Pourfallah, Mahdi Chahabi, Mina Nouri, Fatemeh Beiraghdar, Mahin Jamshidi Makiani","doi":"10.5812/archcid-143913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5812/archcid-143913","url":null,"abstract":"Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are very good at protecting individuals from serious illness, needing hospital care, and dying from different strains of the virus. However, vaccines might not completely prevent individuals from catching and spreading the virus, and this might depend on some personal factors. Objectives: To find out the immune response of COVID-19 vaccines, this cross-sectional study conducted within June 2021 to May 2023 assessed different types of COVID-19 vaccine antibody responses among healthcare professionals and their associations with demographic factors and comorbidity risk factors. Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted on recruited healthcare professionals from Sina, Imam Khomeini Complex, 501 AJA, Baqiayatallah, and Firoozgar hospitals in Tehran, Iran. The vaccines whose antibody response was investigated in this study are Sinopharm® (China), AstraZeneca® (United Kingdom), Sputnik® (Russia), and Covaxin® (India). Anti-spike, anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD), and anti-neutralizing immunoglobulin G (IgG) were evaluated by commercial kits according to instructions. Results: This study involved 1 029 healthcare workers who were over 18 years old. The average age was 41.48 ± 9.9 years, and 602 (58.5%) of them were male. The vaccines they received were Sputnik V (392 or 38.16%), AstraZeneca (335 or 32.61%), Baharat (45 or 4.3%), and Sinopharm (255 or 24.82%). The Covaxin and AstraZeneca vaccines increased both anti-RBD and anti-neutralizing IgG Ab levels; however, the Sinopharm vaccine increased only the latter. The Sputnik vaccine was the least effective. Gender and diabetes influenced the antibody levels, but age did not. Conclusions: This study revealed the substantial effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in generating robust antibody responses among healthcare professionals. All four vaccine types, Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, Sputnik, and Covaxin, elicited significant antibody responses in over 70% of participants, highlighting the crucial role of vaccination in building defense against COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":505511,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":"64 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139863148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Zahra Panahi, Parisa Kianpour, Sajad Sahab-Negah, M. H. Karbalaie Niya, S. Nadji, Reza Mourtami, Atabak Najafi, Babak Jahangiri, Reza Pourfallah, Mahdi Chahabi, Mina Nouri, Fatemeh Beiraghdar, Mahin Jamshidi Makiani
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are very good at protecting individuals from serious illness, needing hospital care, and dying from different strains of the virus. However, vaccines might not completely prevent individuals from catching and spreading the virus, and this might depend on some personal factors. Objectives: To find out the immune response of COVID-19 vaccines, this cross-sectional study conducted within June 2021 to May 2023 assessed different types of COVID-19 vaccine antibody responses among healthcare professionals and their associations with demographic factors and comorbidity risk factors. Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted on recruited healthcare professionals from Sina, Imam Khomeini Complex, 501 AJA, Baqiayatallah, and Firoozgar hospitals in Tehran, Iran. The vaccines whose antibody response was investigated in this study are Sinopharm® (China), AstraZeneca® (United Kingdom), Sputnik® (Russia), and Covaxin® (India). Anti-spike, anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD), and anti-neutralizing immunoglobulin G (IgG) were evaluated by commercial kits according to instructions. Results: This study involved 1 029 healthcare workers who were over 18 years old. The average age was 41.48 ± 9.9 years, and 602 (58.5%) of them were male. The vaccines they received were Sputnik V (392 or 38.16%), AstraZeneca (335 or 32.61%), Baharat (45 or 4.3%), and Sinopharm (255 or 24.82%). The Covaxin and AstraZeneca vaccines increased both anti-RBD and anti-neutralizing IgG Ab levels; however, the Sinopharm vaccine increased only the latter. The Sputnik vaccine was the least effective. Gender and diabetes influenced the antibody levels, but age did not. Conclusions: This study revealed the substantial effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in generating robust antibody responses among healthcare professionals. All four vaccine types, Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, Sputnik, and Covaxin, elicited significant antibody responses in over 70% of participants, highlighting the crucial role of vaccination in building defense against COVID-19.
{"title":"Comprehensive Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccines Antibody Response Among Healthcare Professionals: A Multi-Center Study in Iran","authors":"Zahra Panahi, Parisa Kianpour, Sajad Sahab-Negah, M. H. Karbalaie Niya, S. Nadji, Reza Mourtami, Atabak Najafi, Babak Jahangiri, Reza Pourfallah, Mahdi Chahabi, Mina Nouri, Fatemeh Beiraghdar, Mahin Jamshidi Makiani","doi":"10.5812/archcid-143913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5812/archcid-143913","url":null,"abstract":"Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are very good at protecting individuals from serious illness, needing hospital care, and dying from different strains of the virus. However, vaccines might not completely prevent individuals from catching and spreading the virus, and this might depend on some personal factors. Objectives: To find out the immune response of COVID-19 vaccines, this cross-sectional study conducted within June 2021 to May 2023 assessed different types of COVID-19 vaccine antibody responses among healthcare professionals and their associations with demographic factors and comorbidity risk factors. Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted on recruited healthcare professionals from Sina, Imam Khomeini Complex, 501 AJA, Baqiayatallah, and Firoozgar hospitals in Tehran, Iran. The vaccines whose antibody response was investigated in this study are Sinopharm® (China), AstraZeneca® (United Kingdom), Sputnik® (Russia), and Covaxin® (India). Anti-spike, anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD), and anti-neutralizing immunoglobulin G (IgG) were evaluated by commercial kits according to instructions. Results: This study involved 1 029 healthcare workers who were over 18 years old. The average age was 41.48 ± 9.9 years, and 602 (58.5%) of them were male. The vaccines they received were Sputnik V (392 or 38.16%), AstraZeneca (335 or 32.61%), Baharat (45 or 4.3%), and Sinopharm (255 or 24.82%). The Covaxin and AstraZeneca vaccines increased both anti-RBD and anti-neutralizing IgG Ab levels; however, the Sinopharm vaccine increased only the latter. The Sputnik vaccine was the least effective. Gender and diabetes influenced the antibody levels, but age did not. Conclusions: This study revealed the substantial effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in generating robust antibody responses among healthcare professionals. All four vaccine types, Sinopharm, AstraZeneca, Sputnik, and Covaxin, elicited significant antibody responses in over 70% of participants, highlighting the crucial role of vaccination in building defense against COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":505511,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":"26 38","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139803323","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Shahrzad Matinfar, Sahar Mortezagholi, Darya Amiri, Hossein Pashaiefar, Maryam Eskandarian, Somayeh Ghadimi, Mohammad Farzad Nazari, Shole Tavakoli, Melika Valizadeh, Saeed Namaki, P. Tabarsi, Mehdi Boutrabi, Mahdi Shabani
Background: Inducing a humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 may partially control virus dissemination. However, there is a lack of consistency in the reported kinetics of IgM and IgG responses to SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, the humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 may differ from that elicited by vaccination. Therefore, we were motivated to evaluate the kinetics of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in both infected and vaccinated individuals. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the seroconversion patterns of specific antibodies against various antigens of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and vaccinated individuals, focusing specifically on comparing the humoral responses elicited by infection and vaccination. Methods: Serial blood and swab samples were collected from 134 COVID-19 patients at six time points following admission. Real-time RT-PCR specific for SARS-CoV-2, as well as anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG, were tested using ELISA. Additionally, 141 serum samples were obtained from vaccinated individuals. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike and RBD IgGs, along with neutralizing antibodies (NAs), were assessed using ELISA in both the vaccinated group and 96 COVID-19 patients. Results: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM was found positive in 23.3% of patients at 0 - 7 days after symptom onset, with seropositivity increasing to 71.7% at 15 - 21 days. Subsequently, IgM positivity gradually decreased to 62.7% at > 28 days post-symptom onset. Meanwhile, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG was positive in 28.3% of patients at 0 -7 days, rising to 83.7% at 22 - 28 days after symptom onset, and remained constant thereafter. Anti-spike and RBD IgGs, along with NAs, were detected in 89.7%, 87.4%, and 87.9% of vaccinated individuals, respectively, and in 37.5%, 32.3%, and 32.3% of COVID-19 patients, respectively. There was a significant correlation between anti-spike IgG and anti-RBD IgG levels and NAs in both COVID-19-infected and vaccinated individuals. The mean concentrations of anti-spike and RBD IgGs were higher in vaccinated individuals with a history of COVID-19 infection compared to those without prior infection. Conclusions: The antibody profile for IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2 suggests that as time passes after the onset of disease symptoms, the seropositivity in COVID-19 patients increases. Furthermore, antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are produced more efficiently through COVID-19 vaccination than natural infection.
{"title":"Investigating the Seroconversion Patterns of Specific Antibodies Against Various Antigens of SARS-CoV-2 in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients and Vaccinated Individuals","authors":"Shahrzad Matinfar, Sahar Mortezagholi, Darya Amiri, Hossein Pashaiefar, Maryam Eskandarian, Somayeh Ghadimi, Mohammad Farzad Nazari, Shole Tavakoli, Melika Valizadeh, Saeed Namaki, P. Tabarsi, Mehdi Boutrabi, Mahdi Shabani","doi":"10.5812/archcid-140414","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5812/archcid-140414","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Inducing a humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 may partially control virus dissemination. However, there is a lack of consistency in the reported kinetics of IgM and IgG responses to SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, the humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 may differ from that elicited by vaccination. Therefore, we were motivated to evaluate the kinetics of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in both infected and vaccinated individuals. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the seroconversion patterns of specific antibodies against various antigens of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and vaccinated individuals, focusing specifically on comparing the humoral responses elicited by infection and vaccination. Methods: Serial blood and swab samples were collected from 134 COVID-19 patients at six time points following admission. Real-time RT-PCR specific for SARS-CoV-2, as well as anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG, were tested using ELISA. Additionally, 141 serum samples were obtained from vaccinated individuals. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike and RBD IgGs, along with neutralizing antibodies (NAs), were assessed using ELISA in both the vaccinated group and 96 COVID-19 patients. Results: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM was found positive in 23.3% of patients at 0 - 7 days after symptom onset, with seropositivity increasing to 71.7% at 15 - 21 days. Subsequently, IgM positivity gradually decreased to 62.7% at > 28 days post-symptom onset. Meanwhile, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG was positive in 28.3% of patients at 0 -7 days, rising to 83.7% at 22 - 28 days after symptom onset, and remained constant thereafter. Anti-spike and RBD IgGs, along with NAs, were detected in 89.7%, 87.4%, and 87.9% of vaccinated individuals, respectively, and in 37.5%, 32.3%, and 32.3% of COVID-19 patients, respectively. There was a significant correlation between anti-spike IgG and anti-RBD IgG levels and NAs in both COVID-19-infected and vaccinated individuals. The mean concentrations of anti-spike and RBD IgGs were higher in vaccinated individuals with a history of COVID-19 infection compared to those without prior infection. Conclusions: The antibody profile for IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2 suggests that as time passes after the onset of disease symptoms, the seropositivity in COVID-19 patients increases. Furthermore, antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are produced more efficiently through COVID-19 vaccination than natural infection.","PeriodicalId":505511,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139805680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：