ライフサイエンスコーパス: microneutralization

1 oV-2 receptor-binding domain IgA and IgG and microneutralization activity against live SARS-CoV-2 vir

2 tion and those who were vaccinated exhibited microneutralization activity against SARS-CoV-2.

3 concentration was positively associated with microneutralization activity and participant age, with p

4 Microneutralization activity increased throughout time i

5 ction, we evaluated serum Ab concentrations, microneutralization activity, and enumerated SARS-CoV-2-

6 ed after infection and vaccination exhibited microneutralization activity.

7 body specificity and titer were defined by a microneutralization and a pseudotype assay that could as

8 Serum samples were tested with microneutralization and hemagglutination inhibition assa

9 d vaccination were tested for H5 antibody by microneutralization and hemagglutination inhibition.

10 ELISA results show positive correlation with microneutralization and Plaque Reduction Neutralization

11 levels of IgG, neutralizing antibodies, and microneutralization and the secondary outcomes are the l

12 ibody positive if they were positive by both microneutralization and Western blot testing.

13 In plaque reduction, microneutralization, and fusion-inhibition assays, MEDI-

14 measured by a pseudovirus entry inhibition, microneutralization, and HA inhibition assays.RESULTSAd4

15 ogenicity using hemagglutination inhibition, microneutralization, and immunoglobulin A (IgA) and G en

16 nity (ie, hemagglutination inhibition [HAI], microneutralization, and immunoglobulin G and immunoglob

17 A 2.7- and 3.5-fold rise in RSV/A and RSV/B microneutralization antibodies were noted at day 56.

18 Primary endpoints were safety and microneutralization antibody against-wild-type (Micro-VN

19 nced seroconversion rates and geometric mean microneutralization antibody titers.

20 developed procedures for the standard PRNT, microneutralization assay (MNA) and pseudotyped virus ne

21 vaccine titer as assessed through a standard microneutralization assay (p<0.05, q <0.2).

22 he vaccine virus were 83% (95% CI 70-97%) by microneutralization assay (titre >=20) and 97% (90-100%)

23 living with HIV (PLWH), we analyze anti-RBD, microneutralization assay and IFN-gamma production in 21

24 ed 18 to 59 years were achieved by using the microneutralization assay combined with Western blotting

25 Direct comparison of an HI assay and the microneutralization assay demonstrated that the latter w

26 We have developed an alternative microneutralization assay for influenza virus using a qu

27 P)-based approach to develop a vaccine and a microneutralization assay for ZIKV.

28 IgG and microneutralization assay results were compared with 32

29 A live virus-based modified microneutralization assay revealed that bepridil possess

30 ibition and microneutralization assays, with microneutralization assay titers >40 considered positive

31 was tested using a quantitative colorimetric microneutralization assay to demonstrate antibody titers

32 Therefore, we developed a more sensitive microneutralization assay to detect antibodies to avian

33 A microneutralization assay using an ELISA-based endpoint

34 Microneutralization assay was as sensitive as rtRT-PCR i

35 The sensitivity of the GFP-based microneutralization assay we developed was similar to th

36 The sensitivity and specificity of the microneutralization assay were compared with those of an

37 The RVP-based microneutralization assay worked similarly to the PRNT a

38 erse events, wild-type virus neutralization (microneutralization assay), and T-cell responses (cytoki

39 ase chain reaction (rtRT-PCR), and serology (microneutralization assay).

40 lizing antibody responses were measured by a microneutralization assay, and hemagglutinin (HA)-specif

41 a by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and a microneutralization assay, respectively.

42 parable to that obtained by the conventional microneutralization assay, suggesting that the use of th

43 Using a microneutralization assay, we measured cross-reactive an

44 nd showed good concordance with a live virus microneutralization assay.

45 lizing antibody titers were measured using a microneutralization assay.

46 postpartum and tested using an RSV antibody microneutralization assay.

47 bition (HI) assay and, for a subset, also by microneutralization assay.

48 to test for H5N1 neutralizing antibodies by microneutralization assay.

49 mock-treated control ferrets, as assessed by microneutralization assay.

50 d for their ability to neutralize virus in a microneutralization assay.

51 .74-fold MFR versus standard-dose vaccine by microneutralization assay.

52 mmunofluorescence, with results confirmed by microneutralization assay.

53 CP donors were tested by all five EIAs and a microneutralization assay.

54 (H3N2) was further assessed post-hoc using a microneutralization assay; the post-vaccination adjusted

55 with a clade 1 vaccine were characterized by microneutralization assays and modified hemagglutination

56 We recently developed high-throughput virus microneutralization assays using an endpoint assessment

57 30 by hemagglutination inhibition and virus microneutralization assays were lower among 2017-2018 st

58 In 30 RTRs, microneutralization assays were performed to reveal the

59 cted in ELISA, hemagglutinin-inhibition, and microneutralization assays with these monoclonal antibod

60 (i.e., from hemagglutination inhibition and microneutralization assays) and HA protein sequences.

61 dy responses (hemagglutination inhibition or microneutralization assays) were highest in the two-dose

62 by means of hemagglutination inhibition and microneutralization assays, with microneutralization ass

63 raminidase (enzyme-linked lectin assay), and microneutralization assays.

64 ere unable to neutralize viral infection via microneutralization assays.

65 measured by hemagglutination inhibition and microneutralization assays.

66 conversion by hemagglutination inhibition or microneutralization assays.

67 ainst Vibrio cholerae O1 were assessed using microneutralization assays.

68 ssessed in hemagglutination inhibition (HI), microneutralization, ELISA, lymphoproliferative, ELISpot

69 The microneutralization GMTs after the first, second, third,

70 lt in higher hemagglutination inhibition and microneutralization GMTs, compared with the GMTs resulti

71 on and 227 nonexposed U.S. individuals using microneutralization (MN) and hemagglutination inhibition

72 Microneutralization (MN) and hemagglutination-inhibition

73 munogenicity (hemagglutinin inhibition (HI), microneutralization (MN) antibodies and CD4, CD8 effecto

74 bjects who demonstrated >=2-fold increase in microneutralization (MN) antibodies to Belgium2015 (the

75 Hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) antibodies were measured on day

76 by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay, microneutralization (MN) assay, and a newly standardized

77 g A/Washington/16/2017) were determined by a microneutralization (MN) assay.

78 n using hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and microneutralization (MN) assays and data from two vaccin

79 using hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) assays for the homologous influ

80 ated by hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and microneutralization (MN) assays, H7 viruses and vaccines

81 y hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and virus microneutralization (MN) assays.

82 ults of hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and microneutralization (MN) assays.

83 ains by hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and microneutralization (MN) assays.

84 uenza A/H1N1, B/Yamagata, and B/Victoria and microneutralization (MN) for A/H3N2 against cell-grown v

85 ed with hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and microneutralization (MN) titers (all P < 0.001).

86 ecific hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) titers and subsequent symptomat

87 crog dose of A/Vietnam vaccine induced virus microneutralization (MN) titers of >/=1:20 against the A

88 HI titers, microneutralization (MN) titers, and the frequency of ci

89 red by the hemagglutination inhibition (HI), microneutralization (MN), and single radial hemolysis (S

90 Antibody persistence (defined as microneutralization [MN] titer >/=1:40) 1 year after ini

91 Avidity, T cell activation, and microneutralization of sera against different variants o

92 A simplified microneutralization procedure is described that uses an

93 et of M2SR recipients with a vaccine-induced microneutralization response against the challenge virus

94 obust responses across measurements and have microneutralization responses against diverse H5N1 clade

95 asal series, hemagglutination inhibition and microneutralization responses are minimal.

96 in standard hemagglutination inhibition and microneutralization serological assays.

97 uently, recombinant RSVs were engineered for microneutralization susceptibility testing.

98 ceived intravenous high-titer CP ( 1:160, by microneutralization test) plus ST.

99 e protein were tested by IgG and IgM ELISAs, microneutralization test, Ortho total Ig S1 ELISA, and r

100 sing enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays or a microneutralization test.

101 Microneutralization tests using postvaccination serum sh

102 hem were further evaluated through anti-ZIKV microneutralization tests.

103 re, we assessed a new marker, live virus 50% microneutralization titer (LV-MN(50)), and compared and

104 Microneutralization titers tended to be higher than HAI

105 ELISA and microneutralization titers were concordant.

106 Comparison of microneutralization titers with those obtained with pseu

107 Hemagglutinin inhibition (HI) responses, microneutralization titers, and antineuraminidase antibo

108 surement of haemagglutination inhibition and microneutralization titres.