Time since SARS-CoV-2 infection and humoral immune response following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To optimise the use of available SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, some advocate delaying second vaccination for individuals infected within six months. We studied whether post-vaccination immune response is equally potent in individuals infected over six months prior to vaccination. METHODS: We tested serum IgG binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and neutralising capacity in 110 healthcare workers, before and after both BNT162b2 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccinations. We compared outcomes between participants with more recent infection (n = 18, median two months, IQR 2-3), with infection-vaccination interval over six months (n = 19, median nine months, IQR 9-10), and to those not previously infected (n = 73). FINDINGS: Both recently and earlier infected participants showed comparable humoral immune responses after a single mRNA vaccination, while exceeding those of previously uninfected persons after two vaccinations with 2.5 fold (p = 0.003) and 3.4 fold (p < 0.001) for binding antibody levels, and 6.4 and 7.2 fold for neutralisation titres, respectively (both p < 0.001). The second vaccine dose yielded no further substantial improvement of the humoral response in the previously infected participants (0.97 fold, p = 0.92), while it was associated with a 4 fold increase in antibody binding levels and 18 fold increase in neutralisation titres in previously uninfected participants (both p < 0.001). Adjustment for potential confounding of sex and age did not affect these findings. INTERPRETATION: Delaying the second vaccination in individuals infected up to ten months prior may constitute a more efficient use of limited vaccine supplies. FUNDING: Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development ZonMw; Corona Research Fund Amsterdam UMC; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".