Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 915, 2022 Dec 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2153522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several methodological tests are available to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibody. Tests are mostly used in the aid of diagnosis or for serological assessment. No tests are fully confirmatory and have variable level of diagnostic ability. We aimed at assessing agreement with three serological tests: quantitative anti receptor binding domain ELISA (Q-RBD), qualitative ELISA (WANTAI SARS-CoV-2 Ab) and qualitative chemiluminescence assay (CLIA). METHODS: This study was a part of a large population based sero-epidemiological cohort study. Participants aged 1 year or older were included from 25 randomly selected clusters each in Delhi urban (urban resettlement colony of South Delhi district) and Delhi rural (villages in Faridabad district, Haryana). Three type of tests were applied to all the baseline blood samples. Result of the three tests were evaluated by estimating the total agreement and kappa value. RESULTS: Total 3491 blood samples collected from March to September, 2021, out of which 1700 (48.7%) from urban and 1791 (51.3%) from rural. Overall 44.1% of participants were male. The proportion of sero-positivity were 78.1%, 75.2% and 31.8% by Wantai, QRBD and CLIA tests respectively. The total agreement between Wantai and QRBD was 94.5%, 53.1% between Wantai and CLIA, and 56.8% between QRBD and CLIA. The kappa value between these three tests were 0.84 (95% CI 0.80-0.87), 0.22 (95% CI 0.19-0.24) and 0.26 (95% CI 0.23-0.28). CONCLUSIONS: There was strong concordance between Wantai and QRBD test. Agreement between CLIA with other two tests was low. Wantai and QRBD tests measuring the antibody to same S protein can be used with high agreement based on the relevant scenario.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Male , Female , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Research
2.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 12038, 2022 07 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1931492

ABSTRACT

This is a comprehensive report on immunogenicity of COVAXIN® booster dose against ancestral and Variants of Concern (VOCs) up to 12 months. It is well known that neutralizing antibodies induced by COVID-19 vaccines wane within 6 months of vaccination leading to questions on the effectiveness of two-dose vaccination against breakthrough infections. Therefore, we assessed the persistence of immunogenicity up to 6 months after a two or three-dose with BBV152 and the safety of a booster dose in an ongoing phase 2, double-blind, randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04471519). We report persistence of humoral and cell mediated immunity up to 12 months of vaccination, despite decline in the magnitude of antibody titers. Administration of a third dose of BBV152 increased neutralization titers against both homologous (D614G) and heterologous strains (Alpha, Beta, Delta, Delta Plus and Omicron) with a slight increase in B cell memory responses. Thus, seronversion rate remain high in boosted recipients compared to non-booster, even after 6 months, post third dose against variants. No serious adverse events observed, except pain at the injection site, itching and redness. Hence, these results indicate that a booster dose of BBV152 is safe and necessary to ensure persistent immunity to minimize breakthrough infections of COVID-19, due to newly emerging variants.Trial registration: Registered with the Clinical Trials Registry (India) No. CTRI/2021/04/032942, dated 19/04/2021 and on Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04471519.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Humans , Immunity, Cellular , Immunity, Humoral , Immunization, Secondary , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Vaccines, Inactivated
3.
Indian J Public Health ; 64(Supplement): S139-S141, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-560568

ABSTRACT

The number of secondary cases from each primary case determines how fast an epidemic grows. It is known that all cases do not spread the infection equally; super spreaders play an important role as they contribute disproportionately to a much larger number of cases including in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Super spreaders have been reported for more than a century, but limited information is available in scientific literature. An epidemic containment strategy needs to include early identification of super spreaders to limit an explosive growth. Super spreaders tend to get stigmatized, resulting in late reporting and hiding of cases. It is important for program managers to be sensitive to the manner in which related information is shared with media and general public.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Humans , India/epidemiology , Pandemics , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL