Breastfeeding mothers were excluded from the clinical trials conducted for vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. Since the start of the vaccination, some doubts have arisen regarding its compatibility with breastfeeding. The aim of this study was to analyse the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in breast milk and serum (IgG and IgA) of vaccinated breastfeeding women. The main variables of the observational study were: adverse related events after vaccination and determination of the presence of IgG and IgA isotypes antibodies in serum and in breast milk of vaccinated women against the SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Results: 110 breastfeeding mothers were included; 70 women (63.6%) were vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2, 20 women (18.2%) with two doses of mRNA-1273, and 20 women (18.2%) with a single dose of ChAdOx1-S. Regarding adverse reactions and vaccine safety, 38 women had no adverse reactions; 20 (18.2%) had general malaise or adenopathies; 10 (9.1%) had a headache; and 7 (6.4%) had fever. When analysing IgG antibodies, significantly higher levels of antibodies were found in serum and breast milk from mothers vaccinated with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vs. ChAdOx1-S (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). Analysing IgA antibodies, significant differences were found when comparing mean values in serum from mothers vaccinated with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vs. ChAdOx1-S (0.12, 0.16, and 0.02, respectively; p < 0.001) and breast milk of mothers vaccinated when comparing BNT16b2 vs. ChAdOx1-S. All vaccinated breastfeeding mothers had serum anti-S1 IgG antibodies in response to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, regardless of the commercial vaccine administered. Conclusions: the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were well tolerated by the mothers and the breastfed infant. In addition, breastfeeding mothers offer their infants IgA and IgG isotype antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2 protein S in breast milk.

Autoantibodies are a hallmark of autoimmunity and, specifically, antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) are the most relevant autoantibodies present in systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). Over the years, different methods from LE cell to HEp-2 indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), solid-phase assays (SPAs), and finally multianalyte technologies have been developed to study ANA-associated SARDs. All of them provide complementary information that is important to provide the most clinically valuable information. The identification of new biomarkers together with multianalyte platforms will help close the so-called “seronegative gap” and to correctly classify and diagnose patients with SARDs. Finally, artificial intelligence and machine learning is an area still to be exploited but in a next future will help to extract patterns within patient data, and exploit these patterns to predict patient outcomes for improved clinical management.

Plasma biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are a promising tool that may help in early diagnosis. However, their levels may be influenced by physiological parameters and comorbidities that should be considered before they can be used at the population level. For this purpose, we assessed the influences of different comorbidities on AD plasma markers in 208 cognitively unimpaired subjects. We analyzed both plasma and cerebrospinal fluid levels of Aβ40, Aβ42, and p-tau181 using the fully automated Lumipulse platform. The relationships between the different plasma markers and physiological variables were studied using linear regression models. The mean differences in plasma markers according to comorbidity groups were also studied. The glomerular filtration rate showed an influence on plasma Aβ40 and Aβ42 levels but not on the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio. The amyloid ratio was significantly lower in diabetic and hypertensive subjects, and the mean p-tau181 levels were higher in hypertensive subjects. The glomerular filtration rate may have an inverse relationship on plasma Aβ40 and Aβ42 levels but not on the amyloid ratio, suggesting that the latter is a more stable marker to use in the general population. Cardiovascular risk factors might have a long-term effect on the amyloid ratio and plasma levels of p-tau181.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many studies have been carried out to evaluate different immune system components to search for prognostic biomarkers of the disease. A broad multiparametric antibody panel of cellular and humoral components of the innate and the adaptative immune response in patients with active SARS-CoV-2 infection has been evaluated in this study. A total of 155 patients were studied at admission into our center and were categorized according to the requirement of oxygen therapy as mild or severe (the latter being those with the requirement). The patients with severe disease were older and had high ferritin, D-dimer, C-reactive protein, troponin, interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels, and neutrophilia with lymphopenia at admission. Moreover, the patients with mild symptoms had significantly increased circulating non-classical monocytes, innate lymphoid cells, and regulatory NK cells. In contrast, severe patients had a low frequency of Th1 and regulatory T cells with increased activated and exhausted CD8 phenotype (CD8⁺CD38⁺HLADR⁺ and CD8⁺CD27⁻CD28⁻, respectively). The predictive model included age, ferritin, D-dimer, lymph counts, C4, CD8⁺CD27⁻CD28⁻, and non-classical monocytes in the logistic regression analysis. The model predicted severity with an area under the curve of 78%. Both innate and adaptive immune parameters could be considered potential predictive biomarkers of the prognosis of COVID-19 disease.

Objectives: Autoantibodies and, specifically antinuclear antibodies (ANA), are the hallmark of systemic autoimmune diseases (AID). In the last decades, there has been great technical development to detect these autoantibodies along with an increased request for this test by clinicians, while the overall pre-test probability has decreased. In this study, we compare the diagnostic performance of three different methods for ANA screening (indirect immunofluorescence [IIF], addressable laser bead immunoassay [ALBIA], and fluorescence enzyme immunoassay [FEIA]). Methods: Serum samples at baseline visit from 2,997 participants from the Camargo Cohort, a population with an overall low pre-test probability for systemic AID, were analyzed with the three methods. Participants have a minimum follow-up of 10 years and the development of autoimmune diseases was collected from clinical records. Results: The highest frequency of positive ANA was observed by IIF assay. However, ALBIA showed high sensitivity for AID. Likewise, solid phase assays (SPA) presented higher specificity than IIF for AID. ANA prevalence with any method was significantly higher in females and overall increased with age. Triple positivity for ANA was significantly related to the presence of anti-dsDNA–SSA/Ro60, Ro52, SSB/La, RNP, Scl-70, and centromere–specificities. No association was found for anti-Sm – RNP68, or ribosomal P – specificities. Noteworthy, triple positivity for ANA screening was associated with diagnosis of systemic AID both at baseline visit and follow-up. Conclusions: ANA detection by IIF may be better when the pre-test probability is high, whereas SPA techniques are more useful in populations with an overall low pre-test probability for systemic AID.