<scp>COVID</scp>‐19 vaccine humoral response in frequent platelet donors with plateletpheresis‐associated lymphopenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Plateletpheresis involves platelet separation and collection from whole blood while other blood cells are returned to the donor. Because platelets are replaced faster than red blood cells, as many as 24 donations can be done annually. However, some frequent apheresis platelet donors (>20 donations annually) display severe plateletpheresis‐associated lymphopenia; in particular, CD4 + T but not B cell numbers are decreased. COVID‐19 vaccination thereby provides a model to assess whether lymphopenic platelet donors present compromised humoral immune responses. Study Design and Methods We assessed vaccine responses following 2 doses of COVID‐19 vaccination in a cohort of 43 plateletpheresis donors with a range of pre‐vaccination CD4 + T cell counts (76–1537 cells/μl). In addition to baseline T cell measurements, antibody binding assays to full‐length Spike and the Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) were performed pre‐ and post‐vaccination. Furthermore, pseudo‐particle neutralization and antibody‐dependent cellular cytotoxicity assays were conducted to measure antibody functionality. Results Participants were stratified into two groups: <400 CD4/μl ( n = 27) and ≥ 400 CD4/μl ( n = 16). Following the first dose, 79% seroconverted within the <400 CD4/μl group compared to 87% in the ≥400 CD4/μl group; all donors were seropositive post‐second dose with significant increases in antibody levels. Importantly differences in CD4 + T cell levels minimally impacted neutralization, Spike recognition, and IgG Fc‐mediated effector functions. Discussion Overall, our results indicate that lymphopenic plateletpheresis donors do not exhibit significant immune dysfunction; they have retained the T and B cell functionality necessary for potent antibody responses after vaccination.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".