Usage Information
Citation Information: JCI Insight. 2021;6(22):e151463. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.151463.
Abstract
Understanding the presence and durability of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in the airways is required to provide insights into the ability of individuals to neutralize the virus locally and prevent viral spread. Here, we longitudinally assessed both systemic and airway immune responses upon SARS-CoV-2 infection in a clinically well-characterized cohort of 147 infected individuals representing the full spectrum of COVID-19 severity, from asymptomatic infection to fatal disease. In addition, we evaluated how SARS-CoV-2 vaccination influenced the antibody responses in a subset of these individuals during convalescence as compared with naive individuals. Not only systemic but also airway antibody responses correlated with the degree of COVID-19 disease severity. However, although systemic IgG levels were durable for up to 8 months, airway IgG and IgA declined significantly within 3 months. After vaccination, there was an increase in both systemic and airway antibodies, in particular IgG, often exceeding the levels found during acute disease. In contrast, naive individuals showed low airway antibodies after vaccination. In the former COVID-19 patients, airway antibody levels were significantly elevated after the boost vaccination, highlighting the importance of prime and boost vaccinations for previously infected individuals to obtain optimal mucosal protection.
Authors
Alberto Cagigi, Meng Yu, Björn Österberg, Julia Svensson, Sara Falck-Jones, Sindhu Vangeti, Eric Åhlberg, Lida Azizmohammadi, Anna Warnqvist, Ryan Falck-Jones, Pia C. Gubisch, Mert Ödemis, Farangies Ghafoor, Mona Eisele, Klara Lenart, Max Bell, Niclas Johansson, Jan Albert, Jörgen Sälde, Deleah D. Pettie, Michael P. Murphy, Lauren Carter, Neil P. King, Sebastian Ols, Johan Normark, Clas Ahlm, Mattias N. Forsell, Anna Färnert, Karin Loré, Anna Smed-Sörensen
Usage data is cumulative from January 2024 through January 2025.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 826 | 175 |
| 89 | 41 | |
| Figure | 125 | 33 |
| Table | 72 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 30 | 3 |
| Citation downloads | 51 | 0 |
| Totals | 1,193 | 252 |
| Total Views | 1,445 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
