<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">WJV</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>World Journal of Vaccines</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2160-5815</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/wjv.2023.132002</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">WJV-124880</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Evolution of Acquired Humoral Immunity after Full Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. IgG Levels in Healthcare Workers at 6 and 9 Months
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Victoria</surname><given-names>Delicado-Useros</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Esther</surname><given-names>Navarro-Rodenas</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Indalecio-M</surname><given-names>Sánchez-Onrubia</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Carmen</surname><given-names>Ortega-Martínez</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Antonia</surname><given-names>Alfaro-Espín</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Juan-D</surname><given-names>Pérez-Serra</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff5"><sup>5</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Francisco</surname><given-names>García-Alcaraz</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Julia</surname><given-names>Lozano-Serra</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff6"><sup>6</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lorena</surname><given-names>Robles-Fonseca</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff6"><sup>6</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Teresa</surname><given-names>Pérez-Domenech</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff5"><addr-line>Emergency Department, Son Espasses Universitary Hospital, Palma de Mallorca, Spain</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff6"><addr-line>Departament of Clinical Microbiology in Albacete General Hospital, Albacete, Spain</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Emergency Department, General Hospital, Almansa, Spain</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Emergency Department, General Hospital, Albacete, Spain</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Nursing Faculty Castilla-La Mancha University, Nursing &amp;amp; Society Research Group, Albacete, Spain</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff4"><addr-line>Nursing Faculty, Nursing &amp;amp; Society Research Group, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Albacete, Spain</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>16</day><month>05</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>13</volume><issue>02</issue><fpage>13</fpage><lpage>32</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>8,</day>	<month>February</month>	<year>2023</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>13,</day>	<month>May</month>	<year>2023</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>16,</day>	<month>May</month>	<year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Background: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be a major worldwide health problem. The present study aims to contribute to surveillance of the immune and clinical response of vaccines to SARS-CoV-2. 
  Methods: Observational medication study on acquired immunity and effectiveness of vaccines. Population: 620 workers in the health service of Almansa (Spain). Representative sample of 150 individuals. Sociodemographic, clinical, and epidemiological data and samples were recorded to determine anti-SARS-CoV-2 serum IgG levels 6 and 9 months after vaccination with Pfizer. 
  Results: Mean age 46.45 years; 76% women; 85.1% working in a hospital. 19.3% had had COVID-19 in the year prior to vaccination. 96.7% were fully vaccinated with Pfizer/BioNTech. At 6 months, 100% seropositivity and mean IgG levels of 3017.2 AU/ml. Significant variations in IgG levels in individuals with prior COVID-19 infection and smokers. At 9 months, 99.3% remained seropositive; 2.8% infected after vaccination. The repeated measures analysis showed a difference in means of 669.0 AU/ml (significant decrease in IgG levels of 28.9%). 
  Conclusion: Antibody levels remained positive 6 and 9 months after vaccination, although IgG levels were found to decay.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Acquired Immunity</kwd><kwd> SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine</kwd><kwd> IgG level</kwd><kwd> Healthcare Workers</kwd><kwd> COVID-19 Incidence Rate</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>The COVID-19 pandemic, declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March 2020, continues to be a major problem with an enormous impact. The fight against SARS-CoV-2 has focused the efforts of healthcare professionals and scientific researchers, with the aim of tackling the problem at all levels, from prevention, protecting the population by means of vaccines, to caring for cases [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref2">2</xref>] .</p><p>In December 2020, the first vaccines were authorized and began to be administered in various countries. According to the WHO, by 21 February 2022, a total of 10,407,359,583 doses had been administered [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref3">3</xref>] . Vaccination coverage in Spain is high, with 93.0% of the population aged over 12 fully vaccinated and more 54% of the general population with booster doses [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref4">4</xref>] .</p><p>Since its emergence, the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been constantly evolving. To date, the WHO has designated five variants as of concern, namely, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Omicron, considering their impact on transmission, the severity of illness or their ability to evade immune protection [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref6">6</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref7">7</xref>] .</p><p>Vaccine efficacy ranges from 50% to 95% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref8">8</xref>] . The long-term protection of antibodies against subsequent reinfection after COVID-19 and/or vaccination has not yet been fully established. Understanding of antibody kinetics against SARS-CoV-2 and its vaccines is evolving rapidly [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref9">9</xref>] . Monitoring the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 is essential to evaluate long-term vaccine efficacy. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies constitute an appropriate tool to reach this goal, especially regarding the antibody trend induced by the new class of mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, which is still insufficiently defined [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref10">10</xref>] .</p><p>The WHO suggests many pivotal questions remain about the effectiveness of vaccines in real-world settings, which can only be answered in studies on post-introduction vaccine effectiveness [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref11">11</xref>] . Independent experts agree that knowledge about the protection provided by these vaccines will emerge in the coming months [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref12">12</xref>] . It is worth noting that the length of the protection provided by the vaccines may vary, as shown by immunization against other diseases such as flu [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref13">13</xref>] .</p><p>The TAG-CO-VAC (WHO Technical Advisory Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Composition) believes that vaccines against COVID-19 are necessary and should be developed and studies are needed to monitor the immune and clinical response of the vaccines [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref13">13</xref>] . Questions remain unanswered as regards the duration of immunity and whether the new variants appearing will be neutralized by the antibodies generated by current vaccines [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref14">14</xref>] . Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are highly efficient against severe forms of the disease, hospitalization and death. However, insufficient protection against several circulating viral variants could suggest a decrease in immunity and the need for additional vaccine doses [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref15">15</xref>] . Many countries are administering a third dose of COVID-19 vaccines, but the evaluation of vaccine-induced immunity is insufficient [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref16">16</xref>] .</p><p>Healthcare and socio-health professionals have been significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The report published by the Spanish Ministry of Health (10 February 2022) revealed 204,094 cases of infection since the onset of the pandemic [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref17">17</xref>] . Spain has one of the largest percentages of infected healthcare employees, which justifies the prioritization of immunization in this population, with their being one of the first groups to be vaccinated [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref18">18</xref>] . Healthcare workers (HCWs) were among the first group of people vaccinated [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref19">19</xref>] . Characterization of the kinetics of antibody response to vaccination is important to devise future vaccination strategies and studies on workers in the healthcare sector have pioneered both the assessment of the occupational risk of COVID-19 and the surveillance of the immune and clinical responses to the vaccines administered to date.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Aims</title><p>To identify the sociodemographic, clinical, and epidemiological characteristics associated with occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in a population of healthcare workers.</p><p>To determine seroprevalence and to measure levels of antibodies (IgG) against SARS-Cov-2 at 6 and 9 months after vaccination.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Methodology</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Design</title><p>Prospective, longitudinal study. This is an observational medication study (OMs) on acquired immunity and effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. The study was conducted between 2021 and 2022.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Population</title><p>A total of 620 workers from the Integrated Care Management (ICM) of Almansa (Public Health Service of the region of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain). Sample size: was calculated with the objective of guaranteeing a precision of &#177;3% at a 95% confidence interval, assuming a true seroconversion rate of 95%. We added an additional 10% to this number, in case of possible losses. The resulting sample size was 179 individuals. Simple random sampling (SRS) was used, drawing on the corporate mailing lists provided by the ICM of Almansa, and the persons selected were invited to participate in the study, using an informed consent form. Those that accepted were included in the sample. Those that failed to answer or refused to participate were replaced by others from the same population. The final sample of persons recruited and that participated in the study comprised 150 individuals (83.8% of the initial sample).</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Study Variables</title><p>The main study variable was the immunological response to the vaccine, measured according to the level of IgG antibodies 6 and 9 months after full vaccination. The following were also studied: sociodemographic variables, such as age, sex, professional category, job and healthcare facility; clinical and epidemiological variables, such as antecedent of COVID-19 and date of PCR, occupational exposure to COVID-19, risk factors and level of risk (Ministry of Health Classification), date and type of vaccination and prior COVID19 diagnosis if applicable.</p></sec><sec id="s3_4"><title>3.4. Data Collection</title><p>An internally developed questionnaire on sociodemographic, clinical, epidemiological data, date of vaccination and other information of interest was administered. The questionnaire was developed by the research team using WHO-validated classification criteria; it was subjected to expert review and an initial pilot test was carried out to ensure that the items were well understood. The English version of the questionnaire can be found in Annex 1 in the supplementary material.</p><p>Determination of anti-SARS-CoV2 serum IgG levels: the Alinity SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay (Abbott<sup>&#174;</sup>) was performed for all the samples. This test is based on chemiluminescent microparticle analysis (CMIA), which quantitatively and qualitatively determines IgG antibodies against the receptor binding domain (RBD) and spike protein subunit 1 (S1) of SARS-CoV-2. According to the laboratory, sensitivity is 100% and specificity 99.9%. The unit of measurement is AU/ml (arbitrary units per milliliter) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref20">20</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref21">21</xref>] . Serum samples were centrifuged at 2500 rpm for 10 minutes and stored at 4˚C until processing.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5"><title>3.5. Data Collection Procedure and Samples</title><p>The eligible population was given a study information sheet and an informed consent form. The data collection questionnaire was anonymized. Participants were called to attend serological analysis on two dates approximately 6 and 9 months after full vaccination, having previously completed the questionnaire.</p></sec><sec id="s3_6"><title>3.6. Follow-Up and Control of Possible Losses</title><p>Participants were followed up and given an appointment for the second sample (November-December 2021). This second data collection involved various noteworthy events since the previous measurement, from both a clinical viewpoint and an occupational exposure perspective. Despite the personal contact with the participants in the second sampling, not all the individuals from the first measurement were available and/or met the requirements, and thus the comparative analyses of IgG evolution were limited to 132 persons (9 months).</p></sec><sec id="s3_7"><title>3.7. Statistical Analysis</title><p>The data were processed and analyzed using SPSS<sup>&#174;</sup> IBM 24.0, which was also used for the statistical analysis.</p><p>We conducted a univariate descriptive analysis using central tendency and dispersion measures: arithmetic means, standard deviations (SDs), minimum and maximum, for the continuous variables, and absolute frequencies and proportions for the categorical variables. Confidence intervals were calculated at 95%. Due to the non-normal distribution of IgG values, logarithms were taken, and geometric means were calculated, and then bivariate analysis and group comparisons with parametric tests were performed (chi-square tests, Student’s t-test, ANOVA…). The relationships between the quantitative variables were analyzed using Spearman’s correlation.</p><p>In all cases, bilateral comparisons were used with a significance level of p &lt; 0.05.</p></sec><sec id="s3_8"><title>3.8. Bias Control</title><p>To minimize losses, contact was maintained with all the participants. Those who wished to know their results were duly informed, individually and upholding confidentiality in all cases.</p></sec><sec id="s3_9"><title>3.9. Ethical Considerations</title><p>The project was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM) and the Albacete Health Service Area, as well as by the Spanish Medicines Agency (5/21/2021). The Castilla-La Mancha Health Service (SESCAM) gave its approval to the study (Code 2021-27) on June 11, 2021. It was published in the Spanish Registry of Clinical Trials, which is mandatory for this type of design: observational medication study. All the participants gave their signed informed consent to participate in the study. The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Results</title><p>Below, we present the results of the study, which respond to our aims. The sociodemographic characteristics of the study population are mean age 46.45 years; (SD = 9.95); Range = 41.74; Minimum value = 23.9 years; Maximum value = 65.8 years; Median (Mn) = 45.4 (9 subjects did not report their age). <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1"><xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>1</xref> shows distribution by age group, sex, education level, occupation, and area of work (hospital, primary care and socio-health care). There is a notably high proportion of women, 40 to 49 years is the largest age group (42.6% of total), a majority have university studies and a large percentage are nursing professionals. Thus, the predominant profile is that of a female nurse working in a hospital and aged below 50.</p><sec id="s4_1"><title>4.1. COVID-19 Incidence Rate in the Study Population</title><p>The cases diagnosed before vaccination were recorded and the cumulative incidence rate (CIR) was calculated, summing both the cases with a PCR diagnosis and suspected and possible cases (according to the current classification [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref22">22</xref>] . COVID-19 incidence in the year prior to vaccination was 29 cases in the study sample, which represents a rate of 19.33%. In most cases, the origin of the source</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1"><xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>1</xref></label><caption><title> Participants’ sociodemographic characteristics. N = 150 (Total study population)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Age (groups)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >n (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Professional category</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >n (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 - 29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8 (5.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Doctors</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >20 (13.6)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >30 - 39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25 (17.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Nurses</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >50 (34.0)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >40 - 49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60 (42.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Practical nurses</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >41 (27.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >50 - 59</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31 (22.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Lab and X-ray technicians</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >5 (3.4)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥60</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17 (12.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Porters</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >9 (6.2)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Missing values</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non-health professionals</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >13 (8.9)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sex</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n (%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Other qualified professionals</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >9 (6.2)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Female</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >114 76%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Missing values</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Male</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36 (24%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Area of service in ICM Almansa</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >n</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Education level</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n (%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Primary/ESO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Hospital</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >117</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >85.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Intermediate VT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38 (26.0)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Higher VT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19 (13.0)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Primary care</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >9.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >University</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >87 (59.6)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Missing values</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Socio-health facilities</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Missing values</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Legend: ESO (Compulsory Secondary Education, Spanish acronym); VT (Vocational training). Lost values are not included. Percentages are calculated over valid values. Data on the study population from ICM Almansa (Albacete) 2022.</p><p>of infection was unknown, while a third of cases reported work-related origins. Subsequent to vaccination, 7 cases were reported, 4 after full vaccination and 3 after the first vaccine dose.</p></sec><sec id="s4_2"><title>4.2. Factors Related to Immunity</title><p>The distribution in the population of health habits related to immunity, such as the consumption of toxic substances (tobacco and alcohol), was evaluated ( <xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>S1 in supplementary material). It is worth highlighting the percentage of active smokers (17.5%), which is a lower proportion than the most recent data on Spanish adult population. Alcohol consumption is more widespread, although the frequency and weekly consumption declared by participants is moderate to low, as only 12.8% report weekly consumption, which does not reach the risk-level consumption recognized by the WHO.</p><p>We found high adherence to vaccination in both the healthcare and non- healthcare staff, with only 2.7% of unvaccinated individuals at the start of the study. Nonetheless, most of the latter had delayed the vaccination and, before the end of 2021, three of every four unvaccinated participants had initiated the vaccination process.</p></sec><sec id="s4_3"><title>4.3. IgG Levels at 6 Months</title><p>All the 142 vaccinated participants had a positive antibody (IgG) level 6 months after full vaccination, considered as ≥ 50 AU/ml. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>2 shows the values for IgG levels 6 months following full vaccination and the bivariate analysis with factors that might cause variations in immunity. Among the variables typically considered as affecting IgG levels, an association was found between smoking (as an immune response depressor) and the antecedent of SARS-CoV-2 infection as an inductor of a higher immune response (hybrid immunity). No association was found between IgG levels and age, occupational exposure to COVID-19, type of occupation or moderate alcohol consumption.</p></sec><sec id="s4_4"><title>4.4. IgG Levels and Their Evolution: Follow-Up at 9 Months</title><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>2 shows the descriptive statistics for IgG levels 9 months after completing full vaccination. In only one case was the antibody level negative (&lt;50 AU/ml), being a person with a low antibody level at the initial measurement (6 months). Seronegativity was 0.7%, with 99.3% retaining antibodies.</p><p>The most noteworthy result of the comparison between IgG values 6 and 9 months after full vaccination, in the complete sample, is a slight decrease in mean values. However, the differences are not statistically significant, as can be seen in the confidence intervals of the mean, as common data are included.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig">Figure </xref>S1 (supplementary material) shows the differences in the mean IgG values by sex and age group. These differences were not statistically significant.</p><p>All the 142 vaccinated participants had a positive antibody (IgG) level 6 months after full vaccination, considered as ≥ 50 AU/ml. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>2 shows the descriptive statistics for IgG levels 6 months following full vaccination and the bivariate analysis with factors that might cause variations in immunity. Among the variables typically considered as affecting IgG levels, an association was found between smoking (as an immune response depressor) and the antecedent of SARS-CoV-2 infection as an inductor of a higher immune response (hybrid immunity). No association was found between IgG levels and age, occupational exposure to COVID-19, type of occupation or moderate alcohol consumption.</p><p>In the repeated measures comparison of IgG levels (n = 102), the means difference, statistically significant, is 669.0 AU/ml, representing a fall in IgG levels of 28.9% (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>3).</p><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>3 shows the means differences between 6 and 9 month follow-up in groups where the results are significant or more pronounced than in the overall study population, as is the case of over 50-year-olds, women and smokers. In these groups, the decrease in the mean IgG value between 6 and 9 months was 37% in those over 50 years of age, 41.6% in active smokers and 33% in women. Other groups in which the decrease in this measure was lower than the mean for the group studied were men (with a decrease of 20.7%) and non-smokers, with a decrease of 24.9%.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig">Figure </xref>1 shows the distribution of IgG levels at 6 and 9 months for the individuals with two measurements.</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>2</label><caption><title> Descriptive statistics for IgG levels in vaccinated population. Bivariate analysis was performed with Log 10 of IgG and geometric means</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >IgG 6 months AU/ml</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >IgG 9 months AU/ml</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Total individuals (n)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >137</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >132</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Mean</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >3017.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >2941.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >(95% CI)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >(2105.4 - 3928.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >(1901.6 - 3981)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Geometric mean</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1402.66 AU/ml</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1053.69 AU/ml</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >SD</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >5396.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >6038.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Minimum value</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >62.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >&lt;50</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Maximum value</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >36644.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >40178.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Median</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1158</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >840</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Interquartile range</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >571.9 - 2585</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >399.4 - 2485.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Sex</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="5"  >Geometric mean comparison</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Women</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1285.28</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >981.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Men</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1827.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1299.15</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Statistic and p-value</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >t = 1.556; p = 0.122 (NS)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >t = 1.053; p = 0.295 (NS)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Age groups</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="5"  >Geometric mean comparison</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >&lt;35 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >2006.47</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1783.36</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >35 - 49 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1165.80</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >987.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >≥50 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1647.95</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >972.63</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Statistic and p-value</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >ANOVA, Dunnett test. p &gt; 0.05</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >ANOVA, Dunnett test. p &gt; 0.05</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Smoking</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="5"  >Geometric mean comparison</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Non-smokers</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1787.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1209.41</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Smokers</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >783.38</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >640.23</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Ex-smokers</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1.364.61</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1.16016</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Statistic and p-value</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >ANOVA, Dunnett test. p = 0.005*</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >ANOVA, Dunnett test. p &gt; 0.05</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="7"  >*Smoker and non-smoker comparison shows significant differences</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Alcohol consumption comparison</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="5"  >Geometric mean comparison</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Never</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1.55334</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1.31357</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Sporadic</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1.54434</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1.04180</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Occasional</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1.31776</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >91520</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Weekly</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1.40919</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1.32548</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Statistic and p-value</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >ANOVA, Dunnett test p &gt; 0.05 (NS)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >ANOVA, Dunnett test p &gt; 0.05 (NS)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Occupational exposure to COVID-19</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="5"  >Geometric mean comparison</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1234.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >910.59</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >2270.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >1759.77</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Statistic and p-value</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >t = 1.783; p = 0.087</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >t = 1.732; p = 0.096</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Prior COVID-19 infection (prevaccination)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="5"  >Geometric mean comparison</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >3893.11</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >3104.72</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1021.50</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >777.34</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Statistic and p-value</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >t = 6.649; p = 0.000*</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >t = 5.591; p = 0.000*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>IgG values expressed in AU/ml—The comparison statistic and p-value are shown. Data on study population from ICM Almansa (Albacete) 2022.</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>3</label><caption><title> IgG levels in vaccinated population 6 and 9 months after vaccination. Means comparison (repeated measures)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Means comparison for IgG at 6 and 9 months (n = 102)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Means, statistic and p-value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 6 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2368.52 (DE 2933.12)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 9 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1699.48 (DE 2443.77)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Wilcoxon Z = −7.770; p = 0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Groups in which the decrease in IgG levels are significant</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Means, statistic and p-value</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&gt;50 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 6 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1971.63 (SD 2021.07)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 9 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1241.99 (SD 1500.62)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Wilcoxon Z = −4.869; p = 0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Men</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 6 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3345.23 (SD 3543.07)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 9 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2653.07 (SD 2978.28)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Wilcoxon Z = −3.70; p = 0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Women</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 6 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1998.96 (SD 2599.17)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 9 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1338.67 (SD 2121.59)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Wilcoxon Z = −6.89; p = 0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Active smokers</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 6 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1151.94 (SD 1204.47)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 9 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >673.18 (SD 626.10)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non-smokers</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 6 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2737.76 (SD 3507.67)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IgG 9 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2056.28 (SD 2961.99)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Mean IgG values expressed in AU/ml—The comparison statistic and p-value are shown. Source: study population from ICM Almansa (Albacete) 2022.</p></sec><sec id="s4_5"><title>4.5. COVID-19 Incidence Rate between Doses and after Full Vaccination</title><p>In the study population, there were 7 cases of COVID-19 following vaccination, 4 after full vaccination and 3 after the first dose, yielding a CIR of 2.8%. The comparison of CIR for our healthcare workers before vaccination (CIR unvacc) and after full vaccination (CIR vacc) was CIR unvacc/CIR vacc = 6.88. In other words, COVID-19 incidence fell almost seven times less after vaccination, which represents an 85.46% fall in incidence rate, which can be attributed to the vaccination. Additionally, none of the cases diagnosed after vaccination presented either moderate or serious symptoms.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Discussion</title><p>Numerous studies have measured the immune response in healthcare workers to both SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccines. Drawing on this bibliography, we compared our data with those from studies focused on similar variables (those assessing humoral immune response following vaccination with Pfizer and with follow-ups at several months). The healthcare professionals included in other studies have similar profiles to those of our sample, with an average age of 54.4 years and a mean of 46.3. The mean ages typically range between 40 and 48 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref23">23</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref24">24</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref25">25</xref>] , although some studies use a younger population with a mean age of between 33 and 37 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref26">26</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref27">27</xref>] and [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref28">28</xref>] . In all cases, there is a greater proportion of women, ranging from just over 50% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref26">26</xref>] , around 60% - 69% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref24">24</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref25">25</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref27">27</xref>] and more than 70% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref28">28</xref>] , as in our study, with 76% of women. Some of the works include populations of which more than 80% are women [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref23">23</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref29">29</xref>] and [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref30">30</xref>] . The findings on age-related variations in the immune response are conditioned by this limited diversity in the ages of the health service employees. As regards the sex-related variations, given the largely female populations and the scant number of men in some groups, the differences reported are, arguably, not always significant or clear.</p><p>The incidence of previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers is typically higher than among the general population in their respective countries, which is in line with the results of our study. The incidence data vary greatly and tend to be reported as a percentage of persons infected, ranging between 7% and 25%. The range of values is as follows: studies with the lowest incidence rates of 7% and 7.8% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref27">27</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref30">30</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref31">31</xref>] ; around 10% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref32">32</xref>] ; others with figures similar to our 19.3%, such as 19.22% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref23">23</xref>] ; and others with higher incidence rates of 23% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref14">14</xref>] 25% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref26">26</xref>] and 32.1% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref33">33</xref>] .</p><p>Based on a cutoff point of 50 AU/mL for IgG Spike positivity (RBD), 100% of the participants in our study had antibodies following vaccination, in line with other studies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref14">14</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref30">30</xref>] . These results are described in some studies as seroconversion, as they present data compared with baseline levels, finding that all vaccinated employees without prior COVID-19 infection have positive IgG levels [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref9">9</xref>] , or percentages close to 100% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref30">30</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref31">31</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref32">32</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref36">36</xref>] . Discrepant data were also reported with 22.9%, being seronegative [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref19">19</xref>] .</p><p>Terpos et al. followed up a group of healthcare workers for several months after vaccination, finding persistent but attenuated anti-SARS-CoV-2 humoral immunity at 3 months after the second vaccination with BNT162b2 in healthy individuals [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref32">32</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref34">34</xref>] . Several studies have established peak level circulating antibodies at 3 - 4 weeks after the second vaccination, and there is a considerable consensus on the decrease in levels over time, especially after the third month [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref26">26</xref>] . Additionally, most of the studies present dispersion in the values in coherence with our findings.</p><p>The study by Rode et al. reported that most of the participants present positive values, from 50 to 2000 AU/mL was the most representative range of antibody titers in almost 80% of subjects [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref35">35</xref>] . The interquartile range for our data at 6 months was slightly higher although the conclusions of immune response efficacy are mostly similar.</p><p>Among the factors related to differences in IgG levels on which there is more evidence, the most notable are age and previous infection. Regarding age, evidence suggests that younger individuals tend to present higher levels of immunoglobulin G anti-SARS-CoV-2 (19, 29 and 30). In our work, no association was found between IgG level and age.</p><p>We found no differences in IgG levels by sex, which is consistent with the findings of other studies (35 and 39). However, some studies have detected higher IgG levels in women in the initial immune responses after vaccination (9, 19, 21, 30, 32 and 34).</p><p>Comparisons of antibody levels in persons with previous infection and subsequent vaccination confirm hybrid immunity is more robust in IgG measurements a few weeks after vaccination. Individuals with prior infection present higher IgG levels at all time points [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref31">31</xref>] and these differences are maintained various months after vaccination [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref25">25</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref35">35</xref>] , although they are more pronounced in the early weeks post-vaccination. Seropositivity was significantly higher in healthcare workers with prior COVID-19 infection, according to the cross-sectional study by El-Ghitany et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref33">33</xref>] . In our study, the differences in IgG levels remained significantly higher in persons with prior infection both 6 and 9 months after vaccination.</p><p>Hansen et al. found that a single dose of the BNT1622b vaccine induces a robust antibody response in individuals with previous infection, which, in immunogenicity, is equivalent to a double dose of the vaccine [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref30">30</xref>] . Consequently, it is considered that a single dose might be sufficient in individuals with previous infections, regardless of the time elapsed since the diagnosis [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref24">24</xref>] . Nonetheless, a generalized decline in antibody levels over time has been found in vaccinated individuals both with and without prior infection.</p><p>Some works have found an impact on immune response levels of other factors, such as chronic diseases, smoking and high BMI. Nonetheless, the findings are inconclusive [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref26">26</xref>] . El-Ghitany et al. found a relationship with smoking, with antibody positivity being significantly lower in smokers (61.9%) compared to non-smokers (87.7%) (p = 0.003) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref33">33</xref>] . Our study also confirms that smoking inhibits immune response</p><p>As regards BMI, the studies by Hansen et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref30">30</xref>] and de El-Ghitany et al. provide no conclusive data to support a relationship between high BMI and impaired immune response [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref33">33</xref>] . Papadopoulos et al., however, found an association between older participants, higher BMI and the presence of autoimmune diseases with negative effects on the development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies 9 months after full-vaccination [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref36">36</xref>] .</p><p>Our findings point to durable immunity despite the decline in antibody levels 9 months post-vaccination. Other works coincide with our findings. Studies indicate a decline from peak levels in neutralizing antibody titers, although these remained detectable in most participants 6 months post-vaccination [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref29">29</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref37">37</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref38">38</xref>] . The data reported by Rode et al. at 6 months after full vaccination (mean IgG 966.0 AU/mL) are similar to those in our study [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref35">35</xref>] .</p><p>The recent systematic review by Notarte et al., characterizing the kinetics of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies following the second dose of a primary cycle of mRNA vaccination, revealed that the peak humoral response was reached at 21 - 28 days after the second dose. Subsequently, serum levels progressively decreased at 4 - 6 months post-vaccination. and the results showed that, regardless of age, sex, serostatus and presence of comorbidities, there is an antibody decay [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref39">39</xref>] .</p><p>The studies that offer findings more than 6 months after vaccination (in general they do not exceed 8 or 9 months) show antibodies largely remain active, despite a notable decline in levels [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref37">37</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref40">40</xref>] , with important variations according to groups of subjects [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref41">41</xref>] .</p><p>There is concern about whether the vaccines will be less effective against the new variants of the virus (Delta, Omicron, Omicron B.A.2). Although studies have already been published on Omicron and the Delta and Beta variants and RNA vaccines are reported to provide protection against severe and lethal forms of COVID-19 but infection persists against these SARS-CoV-2 variants [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref37">37</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref41">41</xref>] .</p><p>There is considerable agreement on implementing booster doses in high-risk populations, such as daily alcohol drinkers, frail elderly, smokers and other groups, in whom both a greatly diminished humoral and cellular immune response has been evidenced, and in which booster doses may be warranted [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref16">16</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref41">41</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref42">42</xref>] . Some studies point towards the need to customize additional booster doses to achieve an adequate neutralizing response against the new circulating variants, which justifies the decisions on the third dose implemented in European countries and those that may be recommended by health authorities in the coming months [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref34">34</xref>] .</p><p>Immunosurveillance studies estimate the duration of immunity and are especially necessary for designing public health responses to the general population, healthcare workers and, particularly, specific population groups with a compromised immune response [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref43">43</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref44">44</xref>] . It is even noted that the heterogeneity of responses to vaccines suggests that personalized recommendations based on COVID-19 history and lifestyle are necessary [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.124880-ref45">45</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>6. Conclusions</title><p>The incidence of COVID-19 disease in healthcare workers is higher than in the general population.</p><p>A high proportion, close to 100% of immunized individuals was detected, with positive IgG levels at both 6 and 9 months after vaccination.</p><p>The immune response was found to be more robust in certain groups of individuals, with evidence of a clear, positive association with prior COVID-19 infection in vaccinated persons.</p><p>Non-smokers develop a more powerful immune response and present higher IgG levels compared to smokers.</p><p>Antibody levels remain positive 9 months after full vaccination despite the evidence of a decline in IgG levels.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>7. Limitations</title><p>The external validity of the study might be limited by the mean age of the study population, given that it did not include individuals at age extremes. Additionally, as a healthy adult population, comorbidity was low.</p><p>Prior COVID-19 infection was self-reported by the participants. In the initial questionnaire and at the second sample taking, the participants reported any prior infection, providing data on the date of the diagnostic test (PCR o antigen test).</p><p>Data and sample collection were affected by circumstances beyond the control of the researchers, primarily changes in the employment status of the workers or a lack of response despite having agreed to participate in the study.</p><p>Between the first data and sample collection and the second, 18 subjects (12%) were lost, which may increase the error in the estimates.</p><p>The diagnostic method used to detect anti-SARS-Cov2 serum levels did not allow the neutralizing capacity of these antibodies to be determined. Additionally, we were unable to differentiate the antibodies generated by the vaccine (anti-S, RBD), from those generated naturally by participants following infection (anti-N assays).</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Funding</title><p>This research was funded by Albacete Provincial Council, Call resolution code 1780 (03/02/2022) and application 30591.</p></sec><sec id="s9"><title>Author Contributions</title><p>“Conceptualization, V.D-U. and E.N-R. and T.P-D. and JD.P-S and C.O-M.; methodology, V.D-U. and E.N-R. and T.P-D. and JD.P-S and C.O-M. and IM.S-O and J.L-S and L.R-F and A.A-E; software, IM.S-O and V.D-U and E.N-R and C.O-M.; formal analysis, IM.S-O and V.D-U and E.N-R; investigation, V.D-U. and E.N-R. and T.P-D. and JD.P-S and C.O-M. and IM.S-O and A.A-E ; resources, E.N-R. and T.P-D. and A.A-E and F.G-A ; data curation. V.D-U. and E.N-R. and T.P-D. and JD.P-S and C.O-M. and IM.S-O and A.A-E and F.G-A and J.L-S and L.R-F; writing—original draft preparation, V.D-U. and E.N-R. and T.P-D. and C.O-M. and IM.S-O; writing—review and editing, V.D-U. and E.N-R. and T.P-D. and JD.P-S and C.O-M. and IM.S-O and A.A-E and F.G-A and J.L-S and L.R-F; supervision, V.D-U; project administration, V.D-U. and E.N-R. and T.P-D and F.G-A.; funding acquisition, V.D-U. and E.N-R. and T.P-D and F.G-A. and C.O-M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.”</p></sec><sec id="s10"><title>Institutional Review Board Statement</title><p>The project (Code 2021-27 prospective OsD) was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM) and the Albacete Health Service Area (4/27/2021), as well as by the Spanish Medicines Agency (05/21/2021). The Castilla-La Mancha Health Service (SESCAM) gave its approval to the study on June 11, 2021. It was published in the Spanish Registry of Clinical Trials, which is mandatory for this type of design: observational study of drugs (OsD). All the participants gave their signed informed consent to participate in the study.</p></sec><sec id="s11"><title>Informed Consent Statement</title><p>Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.</p></sec><sec id="s12"><title>Data Availability Statement</title><p>Data is available on request due to restrictions ethical.</p></sec><sec id="s13"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>All the research team would like to thank the management of the ICM Almansa; without their help, it would not have been possible to conduct this study. This work has received funding from the Provincial Council of Albacete, the Faculty of Nursing of Albacete (UCLM) and the Integrated Care Management of Almansa. We would also like to thank the following: Sim&#243;n G&#243;mez-Biedma, head of the laboratory service at Almansa General Hospital. The laboratory service at the Hospital of Almansa and the microbiology service at Albacete University Hospital. Nurse Ver&#243;nica Ortiz D&#237;az, for her unconditional help in collecting samples. Pedro Delicado-Useros for his attention and advice on sampling and statistical inference. All the participants for their selfless collaboration.</p></sec><sec id="s14"><title>Key Points</title><p>• High adherence to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination regimen was observed among health personnel (almost 100%).</p><p>• The acquired immune response is positive (IgG &gt; 50 AU/ml), from the first dose of the vaccine (seroconversion close to 100% of cases).</p><p>• IgG levels remain high at 6 and 9 months after administration of the complete regimen, although there is a significant decline at 9 months (around 28.9%) in individuals with repeated measures.</p><p>• The cumulative incidence of COVID-19 in healthcare workers was 19.33% in the year prior to vaccination and 2.3% in a similar period after the start of vaccination.</p><p>The study of factors associated with immunity has identified that smoking favors a weaker immune response, as evidenced by a significantly decreased IgG level in the smoking population.</p></sec><sec id="s15"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.</p></sec><sec id="s16"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Delicado-Useros, V., Navarro-Rodenas, E., S&#225;nchez-Onrubia, I.M., Ortega-Mart&#237;nez, C., Alfaro-Esp&#237;n, A., P&#233;rez-Serra, J.D., Garc&#237;a-Alcaraz, F., Lozano-Serra, J., Robles-Fonseca, L. and P&#233;rez-Domenech, T. (2023) Evolution of Acquired Humoral Immunity after Full Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. IgG Levels in Healthcare Workers at 6 and 9 Months. World Journal of Vaccines, 13, 13-32. https://doi.org/10.4236/wjv.2023.132002</p></sec><sec id="s17"><title>Supplementary Material</title><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table">Table </xref>S1</label><caption><title> Consumption and lifestyle habits related to immunity</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Smoking</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >n</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >%</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Consumption in packs/year:</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non-smoker</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.3</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >66% of smoker have smoked</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ex-smoker</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >more than 10 years</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Active smoker</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >65% smoke ≤ 10 cig/day</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Alcohol</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >%</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Average weekly Standard units per week</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Never</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sporadic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >49.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 to 4:</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 (11.9%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Occasional</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Weekly</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 to 9:</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1.3%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Other toxic substances</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.7%</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Lost values not included. Percentages are calculated over valid data. Own preparation. Data on the study population from ICMAlmansa (Albacete) 2022.</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.124880-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ministerio de Sanidad. Instituto de Salud Carlos III (2022) Estrategia de Vigilancia Y Control Frente a COVID-19 Tras la Fase Aguda de la Pandemia.  
https://www.sanidad.gob.es/profesionales/saludPublica/ccayes/alertasActual/nCov/documentos/Nueva_estrategia_vigilancia_y_control.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">de Sanidad, M. (2022) Situación En Espana.  
https://www.sanidad.gob.es/profesionales/saludPublica/ccayes/alertasActual/nCov/documentos/Actualizacion_630_COVID-19.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">World Health Organization (2022) WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. https://covid19.who.int/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ministerio de Sanidad (2022) Situación Actual Coronavirus.  
https://www.sanidad.gob.es/profesionales/saludPublica/ccayes/alertasActual/nCov/situacionActual.htm</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Centro de coordinación de alertas y emergencias sanitarias (2022) Actualización de la situación epidemiológica de las variantes de SARS-CoV-2 en Espana.  
https://www.sanidad.gob.es/profesionales/saludPublica/ccayes/alertasActual/nCov/documentos/20220113_MICROBIOLOGIA.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Grupo Consultivo Técnico sobre la Evolución del Virus SARS-CoV-2 (2022) Clasificación de la variante ómicron (B.1.1.529) del SARS-CoV-2como variante preocupante.  
https://www.who.int/es/news/item/26-11-2021-classification-of-omicron-(b.1.1.529)-sars-cov-2-variant-of-concern</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2022) Variante ómicron: Lo que debe. 
https://espanol.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/omicron-variant.html</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Khoury, D.S., Cromer, D., Reynaldi, A., Schlub, T.E., Wheatley, A.K., Juno, J.A., et al. (2021) Neutralizing Antibody Levels Are Highly Predictive of Immune Protection from Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection. Nature Medicine, 27, 1205-1211.  
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01377-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Beh, C.C., Zulkufli, N.S., Loh, L.M., Cheng, K.W., Choo, L.M., Cheah, M.W., et al. (2021) SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence and Antibody Trends in Vaccinated, Multi-Ethnic Healthcare Employees. Tropical Biomedicine, 38, 552-560.  
https://doi.org/10.47665/tb.38.4.098</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brisotto, G., Muraro, E., Montico, M., Corso, C., Evangelista, C., Casarotto, M., et al. (2021) IgG Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Decay But Persist 4 Months after Vaccination in a Cohort of Healthcare Workers. Clinica Chimica Acta, 523, 476-482. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8555109/  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2021.10.035</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">World Health Organization (2021) Estimating COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness against Severe Acute Respiratory Infections (SARI) Hospitalisations Associated with Laboratory-Confirmed SARS-CoV-2: An Evaluation Using the Test-Negative Design: Guidance Document. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/341111</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Krause, P.R., Fleming, T.R., Peto, R., Longini, I.M., Figueroa, J.P., Sterne, J.A.C., et al. (2021) Considerations in Boosting COVID-19 Vaccine Immune Responses. The Lancet, 398, 1377-1380. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02046-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Grupo Consultivo Técnico de la OMS sobre la Composición de las Vacunas contra la COVID-19 (TAG-CO-VAC) (2022) Declaración provisional sobre las vacunas contra la COVID-19, en el contexto de la circulación de la variante ómicron del SARS-CoV-2, del Grupo Consultivo Técnico de la OMS sobre la Composición de las Vacunas contra la COVID-19 (TAG-CO-VAC).  
https://www.who.int/groups/technical-advisory-group-on-covid-19-vaccine-composition-(tag-co-vac)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zurac, S.B., Nichita, L., Mateescu, B., Mogodici, C., Bastian, A., Popp, C., et al. (2021) COVID-19 Vaccination and IgG and IgA Antibody Dynamics in Healthcare Workers. Molecular Medicine Reports, 24, Article No. 578.  
https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2021.12217</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chivu-Economescu, M., Bleotu, C., Grancea, C., Chiriac, D., Botezatu, A., Iancu, I.V., et al. (2022) Kinetics and Persistence of Cellular and Humoral Immune Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Healthcare Workers with or without Prior COVID-19. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, 26, 1293-1305.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.17186</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ikezaki, H., Nomura, H. and Shimono, N. (2022) Dynamics of Anti-Spike IgG Antibody Level after the Second BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccination in Health Care Workers. Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy Home, 28, 802-805.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiac.2022.02.024</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ministerio de Sanidad (2022) Actualización no 562. Enfermedad por el coronavirus (COVID-19).  
https://www.sanidad.gob.es/profesionales/saludPublica/ccayes/alertasActual/nCov/documentos/Actualizacion_562_COVID-19.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ministerio de Sanidad (2022) Estrategia de vacunación COVID-19 en Espana.  
https://www.sanidad.gob.es/profesionales/saludPublica/ccayes/alertasActual/nCov/vacunaCovid19.htm</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cham, J., Pandey, A.C., New, J., Huynh, T., Hong, L., Orendain, N., et al. (2022) 6 Month Serologic Response to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine among Healthcare Workers. PLOS ONE, 17, e0266781.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rodgers, M.A., Olivo, A., Harris, B.J., Lark, C., Luo, X., Berg, M.G., et al. (2022) Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Variants by Abbott Molecular, Antigen, and Serological Tests. Journal of Clinical Virology, 147, Artice ID: 105080.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2022.105080</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Narasimhan, M., Mahimainathan, .L, Araj, E., Clark, A.E., Markantonis, J., Green, A., et al. (2021) Clinical Evaluation of the Abbott Alinity SARS-CoV-2 Spike-Specific Quantitative IgG and IgM Assays among Infected, Recovered, and Vaccinated Groups. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 59, e00388-21.  
https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00388-21</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ministerio de sanidad (2021) Estrategia De Detección Precoz, Vigilancia Y Control De COVID-19 Actualizado a 26 de febrero de 2021 Este documento ha sido aprobado por la Ponencia de Alertas y Planes de Preparación y Respuesta y por la Comisión de Salud Pública del Consejo Interterrito.  
https://www.mscbs.gob.es/profesionales/saludPublica/ccayes/alertasActual/nCov/documentos/COVID19_Estrategia_vigilancia_y_control_e_indicadores.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhong, D., Xiao, S., Debes, A.K., Egbert, E.R., Caturegli, P., Colantuoni, E., et al. (2021) Durability of Antibody Levels after Vaccination with mRNA SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Individuals with or without Prior Infection. Journal of the American Medical Association, 326, 2524-2526. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34724529/  
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.19996</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Buonfrate, D., Piubelli, C., Gobbi, F., Martini, D., Bertoli, G., Ursini, T., et al. (2021) Antibody Response Induced by the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in a Cohort of Health-Care Workers, with or without Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Prospective Study. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 27, 1845-1850.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2021.07.024</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Terpos, E., Trougakos, I.P., Karalis, V., Ntanasis-Stathopoulos, I., Gumeni, S., Apostolakou, F., et al. (2021) Kinetics of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Responses 3 Months Post Complete Vaccination with BNT162B2; A Prospective Study in 283 Health Workers. Cells 2021, 10, Article 1942. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10081942</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bayram, A., Demirbakan, H., Günel Karadeniz, P., Erdogan, M. and Kocer, I. (2021) Quantitation of Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein after Two Doses of CoronaVac in Healthcare Workers. Journal of Medical Virology, 93, 5560-5567.  
https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27098</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hillus, D., Schwarz, T., Tober-Lau, P., Vanshylla, K., Hastor, H., Thibeault, C., et al. (2021) Safety, Reactogenicity, and Immunogenicity of Homologous and Heterologous Prime-Boost Immunisation with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2: A Prospective Cohort Study. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 9, 1255-1265.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00357-X</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yigit, M., Ozkaya-Parlakay, A., Cosgun, Y., Ince, Y.E., Bulut, Y.E. and Senel, E. (2022) Should a Third Booster Dose Be Scheduled after Two Doses of CoronaVac? A Single-Center Experience. Journal of Medical Virology, 94, 287-290.  
https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.27318</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Havervall, S., Marking, U., Greilert-Norin, N., Ng, H., Gordon, M., Salomonsson, A.C., et al. (2021) Antibody Responses after a Single Dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine in Healthcare Workers Previously Infected with SARS-CoV-2. EBioMedicine, 70, Article 103523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103523</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hansen, C.B., Jarlhelt, I., Hasselbalch, R.B., Hamm, S.R., Fogh, K., Pries-Heje, M.M., et al. (2021) Antibody-Dependent Neutralizing Capacity of the SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine BNT162b2 with and without Previous COVID-19 Priming. Journal of Internal Medicine, 290, 1272-1274. https://doi.org/10.1111/joim.13366</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ebinger, J.E., Fert-Bober, J., Printsev, I., Wu, M., Sun, N., Prostko, J.C., et al. (2021) Antibody Responses to the BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine in Individuals Previously Infected with SARS-CoV-2. Nature Medicine, 27, 981-984.  
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01325-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Terpos, E., Trougakos, I.P., Apostolakou, F., Charitaki, I., Sklirou, A.D., Mavrianou, N., et al. (2021) Age-Dependent and Gender-Dependent Antibody Responses against SARS-CoV-2 in Health Workers and Octogenarians after Vaccination with the BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine. American Journal of Hematology, 96, E257-E259.  
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.26185</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">El-Ghitany, E.M., Hashish, M.H., Farag, S., Omran, E.A., Farghaly, A.G. and El-Moez Azzam, N.F.A. (2022) Determinants of the Development of SARS-CoV-2 Anti-Spike Immune-Response after Vaccination among Healthcare Workers in Egypt. Vaccines, 10, Article 174. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10020174</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Terpos, E., Karalis, V., Ntanasis-Stathopoulos, I., Evangelakou, Z., Gavriatopoulou, M., Manola, M.S., et al. (2022) Comparison of Neutralizing Antibody Responses at 6 Months Post Vaccination with BNT162b2 and AZD1222. Biomedicines, 10, Article 338. https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9059/10/2/338/htm  
https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10020338</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rode, O.D., Bodulic, K., Zember, S., Balent, N.C., da Novokmet, A., Culo, M., et al. (2022) Decline of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibody Levels 6 Months after Complete BNT162b2 Vaccination in Healthcare Workers to Levels Observed following the First Vaccine Dose. Vaccines, 10, Article 153.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10020153</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Papadopoulos, D., Ntanasis-Stathopoulos, I., Gavriatopoulou, M., Evangelakou, Z., Malandrakis, P., Manola, M.S., et al. (2022) Predictive Factors for Neutralizing Antibody Levels Nine Months after Full Vaccination with BNT162b2: Results of a Machine Learning Analysis. Biomedicines, 10, Article 204.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10020204</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Goel, R.R., Painter, M.M., Apostolidis, S.A., Mathew, D., Meng, W., Rosenfeld, A.M., et al. (2021) mRNA Vaccines Induce Durable Immune Memory to SARS-CoV-2 and Variants of Concern. Science, 374, 6572. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abm0829</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Goel, R.R., Painter, M.M., Apostolidis, S.A., Mathew, D., Meng, W., Rosenfeld, A.M., et al. (2021) mRNA Vaccination Induces Durable Immune Memory to SARS-CoV-2 with Continued Evolution to Variants of Concern. bioRxiv: The Preprint Server for Biology.  
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.23.457229v1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Notarte, K.I., Guerrero-Arguero, I., Velasco, J.V., Ver, A.T., Oliveira, M.H.S., Catahay, J.A., et al. (2022) Characterization of the Significant Decline in Humoral Immune Response Six Months Post-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination: A Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Virology, 94, 2939-2961. 
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmv.27688 https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.10.21267593</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Benning, L., Morath, C., Bartenschlager, M., Reineke, M., Tollner, M., Nusshag, C., et al. (2022) Neutralizing Antibody Activity against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant 8 Months after Two-Dose Vaccination with BNT162b2 in Health Care Workers. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 28, 1024.E7-1024.E12.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2022.01.011</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Haveri, A., Solastie, A., Ekstrom, N., Osterlund, P., Nohynek, H., Nieminen, T., et al. (2022) Neutralizing Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant after Third mRNA Vaccination in Health Care Workers and Elderly Subjects. European Journal of Immunology, 52, 816-824. https://doi.org/10.1002/eji.202149785</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Collier, D.A., Ferreira, I.A.T.M., Kotagiri, P., Datir, R.P., Lim, E.Y., Touizer, E., et al. (2021) Age-Related Immune Response Heterogeneity to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine BNT162b2. Nature, 596, 417-422. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.03.21251054</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tsatsakis, A., Vakonaki, E., Tzatzarakis, M., Flamourakis, M., Nikolouzakis, T.K., Poulas K, et al. (2021) Immune Response (IgG) following Full Inoculation with BNT162b2 COVID-19 mRNA among Healthcare Professionals. International Journal of Molecular Medicine, 48, Article No. 200.  
https://doi.org/10.3892/ijmm.2021.5033</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Plebani, M., Cosma, C. and Padoan, A. (2021) SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Assay after Vaccination: One Size Does Not Fit All. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 59, e380-e381.  
https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2021-0703/html  
https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2021-0703</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.124880-ref45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Moncunill, G., Aguilar, R., Ribes, M., Ortega, N., Rubio, R., Salmerón, G., et al. (2022) Determinants of Early Antibody Responses to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines in a Cohort of Exposed and Naive Healthcare Workers. EBioMedicine, 75, Article 103805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103805</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>