Project description:This work evaluated neutralising antibody titres against wild type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 and four Omicron variants (BA.1, BA.2, BA.4 and BA.5) in healthcare workers who had breakthrough BA.1 infection. Omicron breakthrough infection in individuals vaccinated three or four times before infection resulted in increased neutralising antibodies against the WT virus. The fourth vaccine dose did not further improve the neutralising efficiency over the third dose against all Omicron variants, especially BA.4 and BA.5. An Omicron-specific vaccine may be indicated.

| S-EPMC9336169 | biostudies-literature

SARS-CoV-2-neutralising monoclonal antibodies to prevent COVID-19.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC9205158 | biostudies-literature

SARS‐CoV‐2‐neutralising monoclonal antibodies to prevent COVID‐19

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC8135631 | biostudies-literature

Omicron sublineage BA.2.75.2 exhibits extensive escape from neutralising antibodies.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC9560757 | biostudies-literature

Comparative effectiveness of neutralising monoclonal antibodies in high risk COVID-19 patients: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Project description:The purpose of this work was to review and synthesise the evidence on the comparative effectiveness of neutralising monoclonal antibody (nMAB) therapies in individuals exposed to or infected with SARS-CoV-2 and at high risk of developing severe COVID-19. Outcomes of interest were mortality, healthcare utilisation, and safety. A rapid systematic review was undertaken to identify and synthesise relevant RCT evidence using a Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis. Relative treatment effects for individual nMABs (compared with placebo and one another) were estimated. Pooled effects for the nMAB class compared with placebo were estimated. Relative effects were combined with baseline natural history models to predict the expected risk reductions per 1000 patients treated. Eight articles investigating four nMABs (bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab/etesevimab, casirivimab/imdevimab, sotrovimab) were identified. All four therapies were associated with a statistically significant reduction in hospitalisation (70-80% reduction in relative risk; absolute reduction of 35-40 hospitalisations per 1000 patients). For mortality, ICU admission, and invasive ventilation, the risk was lower for all nMABs compared with placebo with moderate to high uncertainty due to small event numbers. Rates of serious AEs and infusion reactions were comparable between nMABs and placebo. Pairwise comparisons between nMABs were typically uncertain, with broadly comparable efficacy. In conclusion, nMABs are effective at reducing hospitalisation among infected individuals at high-risk of severe COVID-19, and are likely to reduce mortality, ICU admission, and invasive ventilation rates; the effect on these latter outcomes is more uncertain. Widespread vaccination and the emergence of nMAB-resistant variants make the generalisability of these results to current patient populations difficult.

| S-EPMC9583057 | biostudies-literature

Two linear epitopes on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that elicit neutralising antibodies in COVID-19 patients.

Project description:Given the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, identification of immunogenic targets against the coronavirus spike glycoprotein will provide crucial advances towards the development of sensitive diagnostic tools and potential vaccine candidate targets. In this study, using pools of overlapping linear B-cell peptides, we report two IgG immunodominant regions on SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein that are recognised by sera from COVID-19 convalescent patients. Notably, one is specific to SARS-CoV-2, which is located in close proximity to the receptor binding domain. The other region, which is localised at the fusion peptide, could potentially function as a pan-SARS target. Functionally, antibody depletion assays demonstrate that antibodies targeting these immunodominant regions significantly alter virus neutralisation capacities. Taken together, identification and validation of these neutralising B-cell epitopes will provide insights towards the design of diagnostics and vaccine candidates against this high priority coronavirus.

| S-EPMC7264175 | biostudies-literature

Seropositivity and neutralising antibodies at six months after BNT162b2 vaccination in patients with solid tumours.

Project description:AimPatients with cancer are at an increased risk for severe coronavirus disease of 2019. We previously reported initial findings from a single centre prospective study evaluating antibody response after BNT162b2 vaccine, showing that adequate antibody response was achieved after two doses, but not after one, in patients with cancer vaccinated during anticancer therapy. Herein, we report a follow-up study, evaluating antibody response six months after the second vaccine dose.MethodsThe study included patients with solid tumours undergoing anticancer treatment, and immunocompetent health-care workers serving as controls. Serum titres of the receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG and neutralising antibodies (Nabs) were measured approximately six months after the second vaccine dose. Complete blood count values were collected and evaluated as predictors for antibody response.ResultsThe analysis included 93 patients with cancer (66.7% metastatic). Six months after the second vaccine dose (mean 176 ± 20 days), seropositivity rate among patients and controls was 83.9% versus 96.3% (p = 0.0001), respectively. Median RBD-IgG titre was lower among patients compared with controls (2.3 versus 3.2, p = 0.0002). Among seropositive individuals, median Nabs titre was similar between patients with cancer and controls (p = 0.566). Among patients with cancer, lymphocyte and neutrophil counts were not correlated with either RBD-IgG or Nabs titres.ConclusionsSeropositivity rates and RBD-IgG titre at six months after second BNT162b2 vaccine dose are lower among patients with cancer compared with healthy controls. However, Nabs titre is similar, suggesting a comparable protection among seropositive individuals. Lymphocyte count is not predictive of antibody response.

| S-EPMC9013177 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data