MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206978805 · doi:10.1101/2022.01.21.22269667

Does a humoral correlate of protection exist for SARS-CoV-2? A systematic review

2022· review· en· W4206978805 on OpenAlexafffund
Julie Perry, Selma Osman, Jim Wright, Melissa Richard‐Greenblatt, Sarah A. Buchan, Manish Sadarangani, Shelly Bolotin

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Children's HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersBC Children's HospitalMichael Smith Health Research BCPublic Health AgencyCanadian Child Health Clinician Scientist ProgramChildren's Hospital FoundationPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationAntibodyImmunologyPopulationViral loadIncidence (geometry)Environmental healthVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background A correlate of protection (CoP) is an immunological marker associated with protection against infection. A CoP can be used to determine whether an individual is protected from infection, evaluate candidate vaccines, guide vaccination dosing intervals and policy, and understand population-level immunity against a pathogen. Despite an urgent need, a CoP for SARS-CoV-2 is currently undefined, leaving an evidence gap for informing public health policy and adapting it appropriately as new variants of concern emerge. The objective of this study was to systematically review and assess the evidence for a humoral SARS-CoV-2 CoP. Methods and Findings We searched OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, Biosis Previews and Scopus from inception to January 4, 2022 and pre-prints (using NIH iSearch COVID-19 portfolio) from inception to December 31, 2021, for studies describing SARS-CoV-2 re-infection or breakthrough infection with associated antibody measures. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and performed quality assessment. Twenty-five studies were included in our systematic review. Several studies reported re-infection or breakthrough cases that occurred in the presence of robust antibody levels. Studies that compared aggregate antibody concentrations from individuals who experienced re-infection or breakthrough compared to those who remained protected did not always find differences that were statistically significant. However, several studies found an inverse relationship between antibody levels and infection incidence, risk, or viral load, and a correlation between antibody levels and vaccine efficacy (VE). Estimates of the contribution of antibody levels to VE varied from 48.5% to 94.2%, suggesting that both humoral immunity and other immune components contribute to protection. Only two studies estimated a quantitative CoP. For Ancestral SARS-CoV-2, these included 154 (95% confidence interval (CI) 42, 559) anti-S binding antibody units/mL (BAU/mL), and 28.6% (95% CI 19.2, 29.2%) of the mean convalescent antibody level following infection. One study reported a CoP for the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant of concern of 171 (95% CI 57, 519) BAU/mL. As of our search date, no studies reported an Omicron-specific CoP. Conclusions The reviewed literature was limited by a wide variation in assay methodology and antibody targets. Few studies reported SARS-CoV-2 lineage. The studies included in our review suggest that if it exists, a SARS-CoV-2 CoP is likely relative, where higher antibody levels decrease the risk of infection, but do not eliminate it completely. More work is urgently needed in this area to establish a SARS-CoV-2 CoP and guide policy as the pandemic continues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.160
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207