Reduced magnitude and durability of humoral immune responses by COVID-19 mRNA vaccines among older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background mRNA vaccines reduce COVID-19 incidence and severity, but the durability of vaccine-induced immune responses, particularly among the elderly, remains incompletely characterized. Methods Anti-spike RBD antibody titers, ACE2 competition and virus neutralizing activities were longitudinally assessed in 151 healthcare workers and older adults (overall aged 24-98 years) up to three months after vaccination. Results Older adults exhibited lower antibody responses after one and two vaccine doses for all measures. In multivariable analyses correcting for sociodemographic, chronic health and vaccine-related variables, age remained independently associated with all response outcomes. The number of chronic health conditions was additionally associated with lower binding antibody responses after two doses, and male sex with lower ACE2 competition activity after one dose. Responses waned universally at three months after the second dose, but binding antibodies, ACE2 competition and neutralizing activities remained significantly lower with age. Older adults also displayed reduced ability to block ACE2 binding by the Delta variant. Conclusions The humoral immune response to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines is significantly weaker with age, and universally wanes over time. This will likely reduce antibody-mediated protection against SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant as the pandemic progresses. Older adults may benefit from additional immunizations as a priority.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".