Background: We evaluated the post-booster (BNT162b2) antibody responses in Singapore. Methods: Participants (n = 43) were tested pre-booster and 20/30/60/90 days post-booster. Participants were boosted 120–240 days (mean 214 days) after their second dose and had no history or serologic evidence of prior COVID-19 infection; all participants had undetectable SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibodies throughout the study. Total nucleocapsid and spike antibodies (S-Ab) were assessed on the Roche Elecsys e802 and neutralizing antibody (N-Ab) on the Snibe quantitative N-Ab assay. Results: Pre-booster median S-Ab/N-Ab titers were 829 BAU/mL/0.83 µg/mL; 2 participants were below manufacturer’s N-Ab cut-offs of 0.3 µg/mL (0.192 and 0.229). Both S-Ab and N-Ab titers peaked at 30 days post-booster (median S-Ab 25,220 BAU/mL and N-Ab 30.3 µg/mL) at 30–37× pre-booster median levels. These peak post-booster S-Ab/N-Ab titers were 11× (25,220 vs. 2235 BAU/mL) and 9× (30.3 vs. 3.52 µg/mL) higher than the previously reported peak post-second dose levels. Antibody titers declined to 12,315 BAU/mL (51% decrease) and 14.3 µg/mL (53% decrease) 90 days post-booster. Non-linear regression estimates for S-Ab/N-Ab half-lives were 44/58 days. At 180 days post-booster, S-Ab/N-Ab are estimated to be 2671 BAU/mL/4.83 µg/mL. Conclusions: Both S-Ab and N-Ab show a good response following post-booster vaccination, with half-lives that may provide a prolonged antibody response.

Background: Subjects with previous COVID-19 have augmented post-vaccination responses. However, the antibody response in COVID-naïve subjects from Southeast Asia is not well known. Methods: 77 COVID-naïve vaccinees were tested with a full antibody panel [spike antibodies (total (T-Ab), IgG, IgM) and neutralizing antibodies (N-Ab)] pre-vaccination, 10 days after dose 1, and 20/40/60/90/120/150/180 days after dose 2. Results: 10 days after dose 1, 67.6% (48/71)/69.0% (49/71) were T-Ab/IgG positive; only 15.5% (11/71)/14.1% (10/71) were N-Ab/IgM positive. While all (100%) subjects had brisk T-Ab, IgG and N-Ab antibody responses 20 days after complete vaccination, only 79.1% (53/67) were IgM positive. At 180 days (n = 8), T-Ab/IgG/N-Ab were still reactive (lowest T-Ab 186 U/mL, IgG 617 AU/mL, N-Ab 0.39 µg/mL), but IgM was negative in all samples. Spike antibody thresholds of T-Ab 74.1 U/mL (r = 0.95) and IgG 916 AU/mL (r = 0.95) corresponded to N-Ab reactivity (>0.3 µg/mL). Non-linear regression analysis showed that N-Ab would decrease to 0.3 µg/mL by 241 days, whereas T-Ab/IgG would need 470/163 days to reach titers of T-Ab/IgG associated with a N-Ab 0.3 µg/mL (76.4 U/mL and 916 AU/mL respectively). Conclusions: The antibody responses of T-Ab, IgG and N-Ab remain high and durable even at 180 days. N-Ab titers are expected to remain reactive up to 241 days post-vaccination.

While sensitivity and specificity are important characteristics for any diagnostic test, the influence of prevalence is equally, if not more, important when such tests are used in community screening. We review the concepts of positive/negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) and how disease prevalence affects false positive/negative rates. In low-prevalence situations, the PPV decreases drastically. We demonstrate how using two tests in an orthogonal fashion can be especially beneficial in low-prevalence settings and greatly improve the PPV of the diagnostic test results.

Introduction: We compared the early total spike antibody (S-Ab) and neutralizing antibody (N-Ab) responses to two vaccines. Methods: We studied 96 Pfizer and 34 Sinovac vaccinees over a 14-month period from January 2021 to February 2022. All vaccinees received three doses of one type of vaccine. Antibody levels (Roche Elecsys total S-Ab and the Snibe N-Ab) were tested 10 days after the first dose, 20 days after the second dose, and 20 days after the booster dose. Results: At all time points, the mRNA vaccine generated higher S-Ab and N-Ab responses than the inactivated virus vaccine (S-Ab: first dose 2.48 vs. 0.4 BAU/mL, second dose 2174 vs. 98 BAU/mL, third dose 15,004 vs. 525 BAU/mL; N-Ab: first dose 0.05 vs. 0.02 µg/mL, second dose 3.48 vs. 0.38 µg/mL, third dose 19.8 vs. 0.89 µg/mL). mRNA vaccine recipients had a 6.2/22.2/28.6-fold higher S-Ab and 2.5/9.2/22.2-fold higher N-Ab response than inactivated virus vaccine recipients after the first/second/third inoculations, respectively. Mann–Whitney U analysis confirmed the significant difference in S-Ab and N-Ab titers between vaccination groups at each time point. Conclusions: The mRNA vaccines generated a more robust S-Ab and N-Ab response than the inactivated virus vaccine at all time points after the first, second, and third vaccinations.

Introduction: We tested the total spike antibody (S-Ab), IgG/IgM S-Ab, and neutralizing antibody (N-Ab) responses of COVID-19-naïve subjects from before their first BNT162b2 vaccination up to 210 days after boosting. Methods: We studied 136 COVID-19-naïve subjects who received three doses of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine (39 males, 97 females, mean age 43.8 ± 13.5 years) from January 2021 to May 2022. Serum was assessed for total S-Ab (Roche), IgG/M (Abbott), and N-Ab (Snibe). Results: Peak antibody levels were measured 20-30 days after each dose, with booster dosing eliciting significantly higher peak antibodies than the second dose: total S-Ab 2219 vs. 19,551 BAU/mL (difference 16,667 BAU/mL, p < 0.0001); IgG 2270 vs. 2932 BAU/mL (difference 660 BAU/mL, p = 0.04); and N-Ab 3.52 vs. 26.4 µg/mL (difference 21.4 µg/mL, p < 0.0001). Only IgM showed a lower peak post-booster antibody titer (COI 2.11 vs. 0.23, difference 1.63, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.38, p < 0.0001). By 180–210 days after the second or third vaccination, total S-Ab/IgG/N-Ab had decreased by 68.7/93.8/73.6% vs. 82.8/86.3/79.5%. The half-lives of IgG and N-Ab antibodies were longer after the third vaccination (IgG: 65 vs. 34 days, N-Ab: 99 vs. 78 days). Conclusion: Total S-Ab/IgG/N-Ab showed a greater increase post-booster, with IgG/N-Ab having a longer half-life.

Background: We evaluated the performance of the Abbott N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) assay against the Roche NT-proBNP immunoassay across two sites. Methods: Precision, linearity, and sensitivity studies were performed. A combined method of comparison and regression analysis was performed between the Roche and Abbott assays using samples from both sites (n = 494). To verify biotin interference, lyophilised biotin powder was reconstituted and spiked into serum samples at two medical decision levels (final concentration 500/4250 ng/mL) and compared to controls. NT-proBNP was also measured in anonymised leftover sera (n = 388) in a cardio-renal healthy population and stratified into three age bands—75 (n = 60). Results: Between-run precision (CV%) for NT-proBNP was 4.17/4.50 (139.5/142.0 pg/mL), 3.83/2.17 (521.6/506.3), and 4.60/2.51 (5053/4973), respectively. The assay was linear from 0.7–41,501 pg/mL. The limit of blank/quantitation was 1.2/7.9 pg/mL. The assay showed no interference from biotin up to 4250 ng/mL. Passing–Bablok regression analysis showed excellent agreement between the two assays (r = 0.999, 95% CI 0.999 to 0.999, p < 0.0001). The Roche assay had a slightly persistent, negative bias across different levels of NT-proBNP. ESC age cut-offs for diagnosing acute heart failure are applicable for the Abbott assay, with the median NT-proBNP of subjects < 50 years old at 43.0 pg/mL (range 4.9–456 pg/mL), 50–75 years old at 95.1 pg/mL (range 10.5–1079 pg/mL), and >75 years old at 173.1 pg/mL (range 23.2–1948 pg/mL). Conclusions: The Abbott Architect NT-proBNP assay has good performance that agrees with the manufacturer’s specifications. ESC/AHA recommended NT-proBNP age groups for acute heart failure diagnosis are applicable to this assay.