« Previous
Next »
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Volume 123, Issue 1
, Pages
195-200
, January 2009
Antibody response to pneumococcal vaccination as a function of preimmunization titer
-
Antibody response interpreted as fold increase (postimmunization vs preimmunization) in titer on a per-serotype basis. A, The percentage of subjects per serotype with a preimmunization titer of 1.3 μg
Antibody response interpreted as fold increase (postimmunization vs preimmunization) in titer on a per-serotype basis. A, The percentage of subjects per serotype with a preimmunization titer of 1.3 μg/mL or greater. B, Geometric mean fold increase associated with preimmunization titers of 1.3 μg/mL or greater. C, The percentage of subjects with preimmunization titers of 1.3 μg/mL or greater who achieved at least a 4-fold increase over baseline.
-
Results from multivariable logistic regression analysis of antibody response as a function of preimmunization titer adjusted for age, sex, and IgG level. The data shown represent the odds ratio of a 4Results from multivariable logistic regression analysis of antibody response as a function of preimmunization titer adjusted for age, sex, and IgG level. The data shown represent the odds ratio of a 4-fold or greater increase in antibody titer as a function of the absolute preimmunization titer, starting at the lower limit of 1.3 μg/mL. As the absolute preimmunization titer value increases, the odds ratio of a 4-fold or greater response approaches zero for all serotypes. The solid line represents the mean value, and the dashed lines represent the 95% CIs.
-
The patients were divided in 2 categories: those who were eventually given a diagnosis of an immune abnormality and those who were not found to have any major immunodeficiency. The latter group was coThe patients were divided in 2 categories: those who were eventually given a diagnosis of an immune abnormality and those who were not found to have any major immunodeficiency. The latter group was considered normal subjects (n = 223). The values for the normal subject (A) and patient (B) groups were reanalyzed, and the odds ratio was calculated as in Fig 2.
Dr Smith is supported by National Cancer Institute grant P30 CA086862-09. Dr Ballas is supported by VA Merit and National Institutes of Health grant AA014418-06.
Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: B. J. Smith has received research support from the National Institutes of Health. Z. K. Ballas has consulting arrangements with Novartis DSMB (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) and has received research support from Talecris Biotherapeutics, VA Merit Review, and the National Institutes of Health. N. D. Hare has declared that he has no conflict of interest.
PII: S0091-6749(08)01684-9
doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2008.09.021
© 2009 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
« Previous
Next »
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Volume 123, Issue 1
, Pages
195-200
, January 2009
