Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 28 - 33 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070 İndeks Tarihi: 04-05-2023

Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses

Öz:
Objective: There is no definitive information yet about antibody kinetics produced in response to coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection. It is essential to know the antibody levels in different patient groups. Our study compared the immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) type antibody levels developed against COVID-19 infection by age groups and first-time complaints. Materials and Methods: IgM and IgG levels were investigated on the day of diagnosis and on the 21st day on serum samples with a point-of-care tests device in ninety-four COVID-19 patients. Antibody responses were evaluated according to age groups and clinical complaints. Results: First day IgM levels than 21st day and 21st day IgG levels than the first day were significantly higher (p=0.006, p<0.001, respectively). IgG on the first day and IgM on the 21st day was positive (>1). While IgG type antibody response was dominant in children, it was found that a robust antibody response occurred in young adults and over 65 years of age. Conclusion: Anti-spike severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 IgM antibodies remain positive for more extended periods, unlike known infectious agents, and measuring positive IgG values on the first day is insignificant in terms of protection against infection and appears specific to COVID-19. While IgG type antibodies dominate children, strong IgG and IgM type responses can be detected in young adults and the elderly. Different antibody responses may develop according to clinical findings.
Anahtar Kelime:

İlk ve 21. Gün anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM ve IgG Yanıtlarının Karşılaştırılması

Öz:
Amaç: Koronavirüs hastalığı-2019 (COVID-19) enfeksiyonuna yanıt olarak üretilen antikor kinetikleri hakkında henüz kesin bilgi yoktur. Farklı hasta gruplarında antikor seviyelerinin bilinmesi hayatidir. Çalışmamızda, COVID-19 enfeksiyonuna karşı geliştirilen immünoglobulin M (IgM) ve immünoglobulin G (IgG) tipi antikor düzeylerinin yaş grupları ve ilk şikayetlere göre karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Doksan dört COVID-19 hastasında tanı günü ve 21. günde hasta-başı test cihazı ile serum örneklerinde IgM ve IgG düzeyleri incelenmiştir. Antikor yanıtları yaş gruplarına ve klinik şikayetlere göre değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: İlk gün IgM düzeyleri 21. günden ve 21. gün IgG düzeyleri birinci günden anlamlı olarak yüksekti (sırasıyla, p=0.006, p<0.001). İlk gün IgG ve 21. gün IgM düzeyleri pozitif saptanmıştır (>1). Çocuklarda IgG tipi antikor yanıtı baskın olurken, 65 yaş üstü ve genç erişkinlerde güçlü bir antikor yanıtının oluştuğu gözlenmiştir. Sonuç: Başak proteinine karşı oluşan şiddetli akut solunum yolu sendromu-koronavirüsü-2 IgM antikorları, Sars-Cov-2'ye özgün olmak ile birlikte, ilk günden IgG antikorlarının oluşmasına rağmen, enfeksiyona karşı tam bir koruma sağlamıyor gibi görünmektedir. IgG tipi antikorlar çocukluk çağında baskınken, genç yetişkinlerde ve yaşlılarda güçlü IgG ve IgM tipi yanıtlar tespit edilebilmektedir. Klinik bulgulara göre farklı antikor yanıtları gelişebilir.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • 1. National Institute of Health. U.S National Library of Medicine. COVID-19 Clinical Trials. Retrieved from; https://clinicaltrials. gov/ct2/results?cond=COVID-19. Accessed online at; 21.02.2021.
  • 2. Forthal DN. Functions of Antibodies. Microbiol Spectr. 2014;2:1- 17.
  • 3. Premkumar L, Segovia-Chumbez B, Jadi R, Martinez DR, Raut R, Markmann A, et al. The receptor-binding domain of the viral spike protein is an immunodominant and highly specific target of antibodies in SARS-CoV-2patients. Sci Immunol. 2020;5:eabc8413.
  • 4. Long QX, Liu BZ, Deng HJ, Wu GC, Deng K, Chen YK, et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19. Nat Med. 2020;26:845-8.
  • 5. Ma H, Zeng W, He H, Zhao D, Jiang D, Zhou P, et al. Serum IgA, IgM, and IgG responses in COVID-19. Cell Mol Immunol. 2020;17:773-5.
  • 6. Our World in Data. Statistics and Research. Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccinations. Retrieved from; https:// ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations. Accessed online at; 21.02.2021.
  • 7. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, Takwoingi Y, Davenport C, Spijker R, Taylor- Phillips S, et al. Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;6:CD013652.
  • 8. Petherick A. Developing antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2. Lancet. 2020;395:1101-2.
  • 9. Kucirka LM, Lauer SA, Laeyendecker O, Boon D, Lessler J. Variation in False-Negative Rate of Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction-Based SARS-CoV-2Tests by Time Since Exposure. Ann Intern Med. 2020;173:262-7.
  • 10. Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Buitrago-Garcia D, Simancas-Racines D, Zambrano-Achig P, Campo RD, Ciapponi A, et al. False-negative results of initial RT-PCR assays for COVID-19: A systematic review. PloS One. 2020;15:e0242958.
  • 11. Schroeder HW, Cavacini L. Structure and function of immunoglobulins. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010;125(2 Suppl 2):S41-52.
  • 12. John A, Price CP. Existing and Emerging Technologies for Point- of-Care Testing. Clin Biochem Rev. 2014;35:155-67.
  • 13. La Marca A, Capuzzo M, Paglia T, Roli L, Trenti T, Nelson SM. Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19): a systematic review and clinical guide to molecular and serological in-vitro diagnostic assays. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;41:483-99.
  • 14. Sette A, Crotty S. Adaptive immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19. Cell. 2021;184:861-80.
  • 15. Gallais F, Velay A, Nazon C, Wendling MJ, Partisani M, Sibilia J, et al. Intrafamilial Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 Associated with Cellular Immune Response without Seroconversion, France. Emerg Infect Dis. 2021;27:113-21.
  • 16. Le Bert N, Tan AT, Kunasegaran K, Tham CYL, Hafezi M, Chia A, et al. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell immunity in cases of COVID-19 and SARS, and uninfected controls. Nature 2020;584:457-62.
  • 17. Ameratunga R, Woon ST, Jordan A, Longhurst H, Leung E, Steele R, et al. Perspective: diagnostic laboratories should urgently develop T cell assays for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2021;17:421-30.
  • 18. Huang AT, Garcia-Carreras B, Hitchings MDT, Yang B, Katzelnick LC, Rattigan SM, et al. A systematic review of antibody mediated immunity to coronaviruses: kinetics, correlates of protection, and association with severity. Nat Commun. 2020;11:4704.
  • 19. Kellam P, Barclay W. The dynamics of humoral immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 infection and the potential for reinfection. J Gen Virol. 2020;101:791-7.
  • 20. Kucharski AJ, Russell TW, Diamond C, Liu Y, Edmunds J, Funk S, et al. Early dynamics of transmission and control of COVID-19: a mathematical modeling study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20:553-8.
  • 21. Akyala AI, Awayimbo JR, Ogo AC, Chima NJ, Billyrose OMA, Engom AOG. Clinical diagnostic performance evaluation of five immunoassays for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in a real- life routine care setting. Pan Afr Med J. 2021;39:3.
  • 22. Robbiani DF, Gaebler C, Muecksch F, Lorenzi JCC, Wang Z, Cho A, et al. Convergent antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2in convalescent individuals. Nature. 2020;584:437-42.
  • 23. Wajnberg A, Amanat F, Firpo A, Altman DR, Bailey MJ, Mansour M, et al. Robust neutralizing antibodies to SARS-CoV-2infection persist for months. Science. 2020;320:1227-30.
  • 24. Balajelini MHT, Vakili MA, Saeidi M, Tabarraei A, Hosseini SM. Using Anti-SARS-CoV-2IgG and IgM Antibodies to Detect Outpatient Cases with Olfactory and Taste Disorders Suspected as Mild Form of COVID-19: a Retrospective Survey. SN Compr Clin Med. 2020;2:2554-60.
  • 25. Lu X, Zhang L, Du H, Zhang J, Li YY, Qu J, et al. SARS-CoV- 2Infection in Children. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:1663-5.
  • 26. Weisberg SP, Connors TJ, Zhu Y, Baldwin MR, Lin WH, Wontakal S, et al. Distinct antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2in children and adults across the COVID-19 clinical spectrum. Nat Immunol. 2021;22:25-31.
  • 27. Shao X, Guo X, Esper F, Weibel C, Kahn JS. Seroepidemiology of group I human coronaviruses in children. J Clin Virol. 2007;40:207-13.
  • 28. Ponnappan S, Ponnappan U. Aging and immune function: molecular mechanisms to interventions. Antioxid Redox Signal. 2011;14:1551-85.
  • 29. Nikolich-Zugich J, Knox KS, Rios CT, Natt B, Bhattacharya D, Fain MJ. SARS-CoV-2and COVID-19 in older adults: what we may expect regarding pathogenesis, immune responses, and outcomes. Geroscience. 2020;42:505-14.
APA DÜZ M, BALCI A, MENEKŞE E, Durmaz M, Gümüş A (2022). Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. , 28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
Chicago DÜZ Muhammed Emin,BALCI AYDIN,MENEKŞE Elif,Durmaz Mustafa,Gümüş Alper Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. (2022): 28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
MLA DÜZ Muhammed Emin,BALCI AYDIN,MENEKŞE Elif,Durmaz Mustafa,Gümüş Alper Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. , 2022, ss.28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
AMA DÜZ M,BALCI A,MENEKŞE E,Durmaz M,Gümüş A Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. . 2022; 28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
Vancouver DÜZ M,BALCI A,MENEKŞE E,Durmaz M,Gümüş A Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. . 2022; 28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
IEEE DÜZ M,BALCI A,MENEKŞE E,Durmaz M,Gümüş A "Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses." , ss.28 - 33, 2022. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
ISNAD DÜZ, Muhammed Emin vd. "Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses". (2022), 28-33. https://doi.org/10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
APA DÜZ M, BALCI A, MENEKŞE E, Durmaz M, Gümüş A (2022). Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. Turkish Journal of Immunology, 10(1), 28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
Chicago DÜZ Muhammed Emin,BALCI AYDIN,MENEKŞE Elif,Durmaz Mustafa,Gümüş Alper Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. Turkish Journal of Immunology 10, no.1 (2022): 28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
MLA DÜZ Muhammed Emin,BALCI AYDIN,MENEKŞE Elif,Durmaz Mustafa,Gümüş Alper Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. Turkish Journal of Immunology, vol.10, no.1, 2022, ss.28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
AMA DÜZ M,BALCI A,MENEKŞE E,Durmaz M,Gümüş A Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. Turkish Journal of Immunology. 2022; 10(1): 28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
Vancouver DÜZ M,BALCI A,MENEKŞE E,Durmaz M,Gümüş A Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses. Turkish Journal of Immunology. 2022; 10(1): 28 - 33. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
IEEE DÜZ M,BALCI A,MENEKŞE E,Durmaz M,Gümüş A "Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses." Turkish Journal of Immunology, 10, ss.28 - 33, 2022. 10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070
ISNAD DÜZ, Muhammed Emin vd. "Comparison of First and 21st Day anti SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgM and IgG Responses". Turkish Journal of Immunology 10/1 (2022), 28-33. https://doi.org/10.4274/tji.galenos.2022.58070