Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42198805›Full record

ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2026

Long-Term Durability and Dynamics of Anti-S-RBD IgG Response in Healthcare Workers: A Comparative Analysis of Homologous and Heterologous SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Schedules in a 1-Year Serial Cross-Sectional Study.

Çiğdem Demirel, Filiz Kibar, Gülçin Dağlıoğlu, Salih Çetiner, Aslıhan Candevir, Ayşe Seza İnal, Sevinç Püren Yücel Karakaya, Özlem Görüroğlu Öztürk, Hatice Hale Gümüş, Tamer Cevat İnal

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Çiğdem DemirelDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0009-0005-9088-8529
Filiz KibarDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-2983-2399
Gülçin DağlıoğluHospital Central Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-2454-3723
Salih ÇetinerHospital Central Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-5464-0340
Aslıhan CandevirDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-9340-516X
Ayşe Seza İnalDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Çukurova University, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-1182-7164
Sevinç Püren Yücel KarakayaDepartment of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-5768-3549
Özlem Görüroğlu ÖztürkHospital Central Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-9325-5296
Hatice Hale GümüşDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-9071-9606
Tamer Cevat İnalHospital Central Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-3502-0012

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND The waning of post-vaccination immunity necessitates effective booster strategies, especially for high-risk healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to compare the 1-year antibody response dynamics of homologous and heterologous SARS-CoV-2 vaccination schedules in Turkish HCWs. MATERIAL AND METHODS This prospective, serial cross-sectional study included 307 HCWs grouped by vaccination history reflecting the national vaccination program: homologous inactivated (SSS, 3 doses of CoronaVac), homologous mRNA (BBB, 3 doses of mRNA-BNT162b2), and heterologous mRNA-boosted (SSB, SSBB, SSBBB; where S represents CoronaVac and B represents BNT162b2). Anti-S-RBD IgG levels were measured at 3 time points between December 2021 and September 2022. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS The SSS group showed significantly lower antibody levels (median: 77.5 AU/mL) compared to all mRNA-containing groups (P<0.001). No significant difference was found between the BBB group and heterologous regimens (P>0.05), indicating an mRNA booster dose achieves a humoral response comparable to a full mRNA series. Antibody levels waned significantly over time in all mRNA-containing groups (P<0.05) but remained stable in the SSS group (P=0.987). Natural infection significantly increased antibody levels only in the SSS group (P=0.014), suggesting a ceiling effect in mRNA-vaccinated individuals. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS Homologous inactivated vaccination results in lower but more stable antibody levels. In contrast, both homologous mRNA and heterologous mRNA-boosted schedules achieve higher, albeit waning, antibody titers. The presence of at least 1 mRNA vaccine dose is the primary driver of high anti-S-RBD IgG levels. These findings support using heterologous mRNA boosters to enhance humoral immunity in individuals primed with inactivated vaccines.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHealth PersonnelImmunoglobulin GSARS-CoV-2Spike Glycoprotein, CoronavirusAdultAntibodies, ViralBNT162 VaccineCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansImmunization ScheduleImmunization, SecondaryMaleMiddle AgedAntibodies, ViralBNT162 VaccineCOVID-19 VaccinesImmunoglobulin GSpike Glycoprotein, Coronavirusspike protein, SARS-CoV-2Vaccines, Inactivated

Identifiers

PMID42198805
PMCPMC13221898

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.