Search

Background: Understanding the immune response to evolving viral strains is crucial for evidence-informed public health strategies. The main objective of this study is to assess the influence of vaccination on the neutralizing activity of SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron infection against various SARS-CoV-2 variants. Methods: A total of 97 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases were included. To assess the influence of vaccination on neutralizing activity, we measured the neutralizing activity of SARS-CoV-2 delta or omicron (BA.1 or BA.2) infection against wild-type (WT), delta, BA.1, and BA.2, with the results stratified based on vaccination status. Results: The neutralizing activity against the WT, delta, and omicron variants (BA.1 and BA.2) was significantly higher in the vaccinated patients than those in the unvaccinated patients. In the unvaccinated individuals infected with the delta variant, the decrease in binding to BA.1 and BA.2 was statistically significant (3.9- and 2.7-fold, respectively) compared to the binding to delta. In contrast, vaccination followed by delta breakthrough infection improved the cross-neutralizing activity against omicron variants, with only 1.3- and 1.2-fold decreases in BA.1 and BA.2, respectively. Vaccination followed by infection improved cross-neutralizing activity against WT, delta, and BA.2 variants in patients infected with the BA.1 variant, compared to that in unvaccinated patients. Conclusions: Vaccination followed by delta or BA.1 infection is associated with improved cross-neutralizing activity against different SARS-CoV-2 variants. The enhanced protection provided by breakthrough infections could have practical implications for optimizing vaccination strategies.

Background: The goal of this study was to develop and validate a UPLC-MS/MS method for simultaneous measurement of 13 AEDs, including carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, topiramate, primidone, zonisamide, gabapentin, lacosamide, perampanel, pregabalin, rufinamide, and vigabatrin, in whole blood samples. Methods: A UPLC-MS/MS method for simultaneous determination of 13 AEDs in whole blood was developed, and validation was conducted for accuracy, precision, limit of quantification (LOQ), matrix effect, and stability. Our method was compared to two different hospitals using UPLC-MS/MS. Results: All AEDs exhibited linearity across the AMR (analytical measurement range), with R² values ranging from 0.994 to 1.000. The imprecision and inaccuracy for low and high quality control (QC) levels were within an acceptable range, with the coefficient of variation (CV) < 15%. The LOQ was 0.62 μg/mL for carbamazepine, 1.61 μg/mL for oxcarbazepine, 1.30 μg/mL for lamotrigine, 13.20 μg/mL for levetiracetam, 1.26 μg/mL for topiramate, 1.01 μg/mL for primidone, 1.59 μg/mL for zonisamide, 1.09 μg/mL for lacosamide, 1.61 μg/mL for gabapentin, 0.50 μg/mL for pregabalin, 0.07 ng/mL for perampanel, 3.00 μg/mL for rufinamide, and 2.06 μg/mL for vigabatrin. All AEDs demonstrated acceptable assay parameters for carryover, stability, and matrix effects. Moreover, the assay showed satisfactory results compared to two different hospitals with a bias of less than 15%. Conclusions: We successfully developed and validated a fast and robust UPLC-MS/MS method for routine therapeutic drug monitoring of thirteen antiepileptic drugs simultaneously. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is little data about the performance of multiplex rapid antigen tests (RATs) on the detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A (Flu A), and influenza B (Flu B). This study is to evaluate the performance of Panbio COVID-19/Flu A&B rapid panel (Abbott Diagnostics, Korea) and analyze the factors influencing its sensitivity. Methods: Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected and stored at the Korea University Anam hospital. In total, 400 residual samples from nasopharyngeal swabs were examined. The diagnostic accuracy of RAT was compared to that of RT-qPCR using the Allplex SARS-CoV-2/FluA/FluB/RSV Assay (Seegene, Seoul, South Korea). Results: Panbio COVID-19/Flu A&B rapid panel showed the sensitivities of 88.0%, 92.0%, and 100% for SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, and Flu B, respectively, and specificities of 100% for all. The agreements with previously licensed single-plex RATs were shown to be high. In the analysis of variables affecting sensitivity, inappropriate sampling time after symptom onset (STASO) and high cycle threshold (Ct value) were shown to negatively affect the sensitivity. Conclusions: In conclusion, the multiplex RAT is useful for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 and Flu A/B, but more clinical studies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]