<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>10(9)</volume><submitter>Dimeglio C</submitter><pubmed_abstract>The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern has greatly influenced the immune correlates of protection, and there are little data about the antibody threshold concentrations to protect against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 or BA.2. We analyzed the antibody responses of 259 vaccinated healthcare workers, some of whom had been previously infected by SARS-CoV-2. The median follow-up was 179 days (IQR: 171-182) after blood collection. We detected 88 SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infections during the follow-up period, 55 (62.5%) with SARS-CoV-2 BA.1, and 33 (37.5%) with SARS-CoV-2 BA.2. A neutralizing antibody titer below 8 provided no protection against a BA.1 infection, a titer of 16 or 32 gave 73.2% protection, and a titer of 64 or 128 provided 78.4% protection. Conversely, the BA.2 infection rate did not vary as a function of anti-BA.2 neutralizing antibody titers. Binding antibody concentrations below 6000 BAU/mL provided no protection against Omicron BA.1 infection, 6000-20,000 BAU/mL provided 55.6% protection, and 20,000 or more provided 87.7% protection. There was no difference in BA.2 infection depending on the binding antibody concentration. Further studies are needed to investigate the relationship between antibody concentrations and infection with the Omicron BA.4/5 variants that are becoming predominant worldwide.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Vaccines</journal><pagination>1548</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC9506424</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Antibody Titers and Protection against Omicron (BA.1 and BA.2) SARS-CoV-2 Infection.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC9506424</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Herin F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dimeglio C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gernigon C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Migueres M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Porcheron M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chapuy-Regaud S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Da-Silva I</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Martin-Blondel G</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Izopet J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bouzid N</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Antibody Titers and Protection against Omicron (BA.1 and BA.2) SARS-CoV-2 Infection.</name><description>The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern has greatly influenced the immune correlates of protection, and there are little data about the antibody threshold concentrations to protect against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 or BA.2. We analyzed the antibody responses of 259 vaccinated healthcare workers, some of whom had been previously infected by SARS-CoV-2. The median follow-up was 179 days (IQR: 171-182) after blood collection. We detected 88 SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infections during the follow-up period, 55 (62.5%) with SARS-CoV-2 BA.1, and 33 (37.5%) with SARS-CoV-2 BA.2. A neutralizing antibody titer below 8 provided no protection against a BA.1 infection, a titer of 16 or 32 gave 73.2% protection, and a titer of 64 or 128 provided 78.4% protection. Conversely, the BA.2 infection rate did not vary as a function of anti-BA.2 neutralizing antibody titers. Binding antibody concentrations below 6000 BAU/mL provided no protection against Omicron BA.1 infection, 6000-20,000 BAU/mL provided 55.6% protection, and 20,000 or more provided 87.7% protection. There was no difference in BA.2 infection depending on the binding antibody concentration. Further studies are needed to investigate the relationship between antibody concentrations and infection with the Omicron BA.4/5 variants that are becoming predominant worldwide.</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 Sep</publication><modification>2025-04-21T21:30:46.448Z</modification><creation>2025-04-05T18:20:39.403Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC9506424</accession><cross_references><pubmed>36146626</pubmed><doi>10.3390/vaccines10091548</doi></cross_references></HashMap>