Submit a comment
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the currently prevailing, milder Omicron variant of COVID-19, older adults remain at elevated risk of hospital admission, critical illness, and death. Loss of efficacy of the immune system, including reduced strength, quality, and durability of antibody responses, may render generalized recommendations on booster vaccinations inadequate. There is a lack of data on the efficacy of antibody levels in older adults and on the utility of vaccination status versus antibody levels as a correlate of protection. It is further unclear whether antibody levels may be used to guide the timing of booster vaccinations in older adults.METHODS We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study comprising hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Anti–SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies were measured on hospital admission. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Patients were stratified by age, antibody levels, and vaccination status. Multiple logistic regression and Cox regression analyses were conducted.RESULTS In total, 785 older patients (≥60 years of age [a]) and 367 controls (<60a) were included. After adjusting for confounders, risk of mortality, ICU admission, endotracheal intubation, and oxygen administration was 4.9, 2.6, 6.5, and 2.3 times higher, respectively, if antibody levels were < 1,200 BAU/mL (aOR, 4.92 [95%CI, 2.59–9.34], P < 0.0001; aOR, 2.64 [95%CI, 1.52–4.62], P = 0.0006; aOR, 6.50 [95%CI, 1.48–28.47], P = 0.013; aOR, 2.34 [95%CI, 1.60–3.343], P < 0.0001). Older adults infected with the Omicron variant were approximately 6 times more likely to die if antibody levels were < 1,200 BAU/mL (aOR, 6.3 [95% CI, 2.43–16.40], P = 0.0002).CONCLUSION Antibody levels were a stronger predictor of in-hospital mortality than vaccination status. Monitoring antibody levels may constitute a better and more direct approach for safeguarding older adults from adverse COVID-19 outcomes.
Authors
Sylvia Mink, Christoph H. Saely, Andreas Leiherer, Patrick Reimann, Matthias Frick, Janne Cadamuro, Wolfgang Hitzl, Heinz Drexel, Peter Fraunberger
Guidelines
The Editorial Board will only consider comments that are deemed relevant and of interest to readers. The Journal will not post data that have not been subjected to peer review; or a comment that is essentially a reiteration of another comment.
- Comments appear on the Journal’s website and are linked from the original article’s web page.
- Authors are notified by email if their comments are posted.
- The Journal reserves the right to edit comments for length and clarity.
- No appeals will be considered.
- Comments are not indexed in PubMed.
Specific requirements
- Maximum length, 400 words
- Entered as plain text or HTML
- Author’s name and email address, to be posted with the comment
- Declaration of all potential conflicts of interest (even if these are not ultimately posted); see the Journal’s conflict-of-interest policy
- Comments may not include figures
