Thus, the government and private clinical diagnostics industries have been obliged to filter through the flood of available commercial assays and create in house strategies to vet, choose and adopt individual approaches to SARS-CoV-2 population screening without global requirements [8]. In the rush to contain the spread of infection through testing, mistakes have been made with the adoption of rapid blood and/or saliva tests with such poor accuracy that they were discarded costing some governments millions of dollars [9], [10], [11]. Regrettably, there has been little vetting of their effectiveness and accuracy with real world samples in demanding clinical trials due to Cilliobrevin D the urgent populace testing requirements to minimize transmission and spread [5], [6], [7], [8]. Therefore, the government and private clinical diagnostics industries have been obliged to filter through the flood of available commercial assays and create in house strategies to vet, choose and adopt individual approaches to SARS-CoV-2 populace screening without global requirements [8]. In the rush to contain the spread of illness through testing, mistakes have been made with the adoption of quick blood and/or saliva checks with such poor accuracy that they were discarded charging some governments millions of dollars [9], [10], [11]. There has also been concern round the cutoff cycle for many qPCR molecular checks that may have resulted in a large number of false positive results upending the lives of those individuals requiring quarantine [12], [13]. The mass production and distribution of vaccines from multiple commercial Cilliobrevin D suppliers has raised further questions and concerns pertaining to screening: (1) Since different commercial vaccines have widely different SARS-CoV-2 strain-dependent efficacies ranging from 10% to 95% [14], [15], [16], how is definitely protection assured post-vaccination in the context of circulating crazy type and variant strains? (2) How long does immunity persist after administration of vaccines? (3) What checks are relevant and provide probably the most actionable info in populations of combined vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals? The pace of data produced and published pertaining to SARS-CoV-2 offers eclipsed most other fields of study since the onset of the pandemic requiring almost daily literature reviews to filter the solid content articles that are improving the field [17], [18], [19]. There is now strong evidence correlated from multiple peer-reviewed content articles in solid journals to answer the above questions. 2.?How is safety assured post-vaccination? All vaccines are designed to elicit an immune response to either the spike Cilliobrevin D protein of SARS-CoV-2 or the attenuated computer virus [14], [15], [20]. The goal being to train the immune system to engage the computer virus with a strong immune response with front-line, neutralizing antibodies (nAb’s) along with T and B cells. Neutralizing antibody (nAb) levels post-vaccination have been shown to INF2 antibody be highly predictive of vaccine effectiveness and immune safety from symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 illness [21], [22], [23]. Furthermore, their early presence within 14 days of illness has been negatively correlated to COVID-19 morbidity [24]. However, two recent studies shown that 30% of elderly people over 80 years of age receiving the Biontech/Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine and 71.5% of immunocompromised patients receiving the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine did not elicit a measurable nAb response [25], [26]. Also, the level of protection from illness by the native SARS-CoV-2 and growing variants has been shown to differ greatly between the vaccines [14], [15]. Luckily, there is a growing body of evidence correlating a strong vaccine or illness induced nAb response to immunity from your SARS-CoV-2 crazy type and variant Cilliobrevin D forms of the computer virus [21], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36]. Taken collectively, these data warrant the measurement of neutralizing antibodies post-vaccination. Although a global consensus relating neutralizing antibody titers to vaccine effectiveness and safety has not yet been reached, some very recent content articles support this premise. Of notice, the Gilbert et?al. pre-print paper demonstrates that vaccine effectiveness drops precipitously below 90% when neutralizing antibody titers are below 100 WHO International Standard (IS) Models/mL [22]. The Feng et?al. Nature Medicine article demonstrates neutralizing antibody titers below about 200 WHO IS Models per mL equates to vaccine effectiveness below.
Thus, the government and private clinical diagnostics industries have been obliged to filter through the flood of available commercial assays and create in house strategies to vet, choose and adopt individual approaches to SARS-CoV-2 population screening without global requirements [8]