PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Ganusov, Vitaly V. TI - Appropriate sampling and long follow-up are required to rigorously evaluate longevity of humoral memory after vaccination AID - 10.1101/2023.06.28.23291950 DP - 2023 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2023.06.28.23291950 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/06/29/2023.06.28.23291950.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/06/29/2023.06.28.23291950.full AB - One of the goals of vaccination is to induce long-term immunity against the infection and/or disease. However, evaluating the duration of protection following vaccination often requires long-term follow-ups that can conflict with the desire to rapidly publish results. Arunachalam et al. JCI 2023 followed individuals receiving third or fourth dose of mRNA COVID19 vaccines for up to 6 months and in finding that the levels of SARS-CoV2-specific antibodies (Abs) declined with similar rates for the two groups came to the conclusion that additional boosting is unnecessary to prolong immunity to SARS-CoV-2. However, this may be premature conclusion to make. Accordingly, we demonstrate that measuring Ab levels at 3 time points and only for a short (up to 6 month) duration does not allow to accurately and rigorously evaluate the long-term half-life of vaccine-induced Abs. By using the data from a cohort of blood donors followed for several years, we show that after re-vaccination with vaccinia virus (VV), VV-specific Abs decay bi-phasically and even the late decay rate exceeds the true slow loss rate of humoral memory observed years prior to the boosting. We argue that mathematical modeling should be used to better optimize sampling schedules to provide more reliable advice about the duration of humoral immunity after repeated vaccinations.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNIH R01AI158963Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The data have been provided by Dr. Mark Slifka from their previously published work by Amanna et al. NJEM 2007I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.Yesas supplement to the paperVVvaccinia virusEUELISA unitsNLSnonlinear least squaresASCsantibody-secreting cellsNLMEnonlinear mixed effects.