Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
J Infect Dis ; 228(2): 149-159, 2023 Jul 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2282978

ABSTRACT

Omicron and its subvariants have steadily gained greater capability of immune escape compared to other variants of concern, resulting in an increased incidence of reinfections even among vaccinated individuals. We evaluated the antibody response to Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and BA.4/5 in US military members vaccinated with the primary 2-dose series of Moderna mRNA-1273 in a cross-sectional study. While nearly all vaccinated participants had sustained spike (S) IgG and neutralizing antibodies (ND50) to the ancestral strain, only 7.7% participants had detectable ND50 to Omicron BA.1 at 8 months postvaccination. The neutralizing antibody response to BA.2 and BA.5 was similarly reduced. The reduced antibody neutralization of Omicron correlated with the decreased antibody binding to the receptor-binding domain. The participants' seropositivity to the nuclear protein positively correlated with ND50. Our data emphasizes the need for continuous vigilance in monitoring for emerging variants and the need to identify potential alternative targets for vaccine design.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Military Personnel , Humans , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , Antibody Formation , Cross-Sectional Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral
2.
J Gen Virol ; 102(3)2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1015423

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), presents a challenge to laboratorians and healthcare workers around the world. Handling of biological samples from individuals infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus requires strict biosafety measures. Within the laboratory, non-propagative work with samples containing the virus requires, at minimum, Biosafety Level-2 (BSL-2) techniques and facilities. Therefore, handling of SARS-CoV-2 samples remains a major concern in areas and conditions where biosafety for specimen handling is difficult to maintain, such as in rural laboratories or austere field testing sites. Inactivation through physical or chemical means can reduce the risk of handling live virus and increase testing ability especially in low-resource settings due to easier and faster sample processing. Herein we assess several chemical and physical inactivation techniques employed against SARS-CoV-2 isolates from Cambodia. This data demonstrates that all chemical (AVL, inactivating sample buffer and formaldehyde) and heat-treatment (56 and 98 °C) methods tested completely inactivated viral loads of up to 5 log10.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/virology , Containment of Biohazards , SARS-CoV-2 , Specimen Handling , Virus Inactivation , Animals , Cambodia , Cells, Cultured , Chlorocebus aethiops , Hot Temperature , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Viral Load/drug effects , Viral Load/statistics & numerical data , Virus Inactivation/drug effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL