Weak humoral immune reactivity among residents of long-term care facilities following one dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Several Canadian provinces are extending the interval between COVID-19 vaccine doses to increase population vaccine coverage more rapidly. However, immunogenicity of these vaccines after one dose is incompletely characterized, particularly among the elderly, who are at greatest risk of severe COVID-19. Methods: We assessed SARS-CoV-2 humoral responses pre-vaccine and one month following the first dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, in 12 COVID-19 seronegative residents of long-term care facilities (median age, 82 years), 18 seronegative healthcare workers (HCW; median age, 36 years) and 4 convalescent HCW. Total antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) and spike protein receptor binding domain (S/RBD) were assessed using commercial immunoassays. We quantified IgG and IgM responses to S/RBD and determined the ability of antibodies to block S/RBD binding to ACE2 receptor using ELISA. Neutralizing antibody activity was also assessed using pseudovirus and live SARS-CoV-2. Results: After one vaccine dose, binding antibodies against S/RBD were ~4-fold lower in residents compared to HCW (p<0.001). Inhibition of ACE2 binding was 3-fold lower in residents compared to HCW (p=0.01) and pseudovirus neutralizing activity was 2-fold lower (p=0.003). While six (33%) seronegative HCW neutralized live SARS-CoV-2, only one (8%) resident did (p=0.19). In contrast, convalescent HCW displayed 7- to 20-fold higher levels of binding antibodies and substantial ability to neutralize live virus after one dose. Interpretation: Extending the interval between COVID-19 vaccine doses may pose a risk to the elderly due to lower vaccine immunogenicity in this group. We recommend that second doses not be delayed in elderly individuals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".