Background Quantitative serological assays detecting response to SARS-CoV-2 are needed to quantify immunity. This study analyzed the performance and correlation of two quantitative anti-S1 assays in oligo-/asymptomatic individuals from a population-based cohort. Methods In total, 362 plasma samples (108 with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR]-positive pharyngeal swabs, 111 negative controls, and 143 with positive serology without confirmation by RT-PCR) were tested with quantitative assays (Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 QuantiVac enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [EI-S1-IgG-quant]) and Roche Elecsys ® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S [Ro-RBD-Ig-quant]), which were compared with each other and confirmatory tests, including wild-type virus micro-neutralization (NT) and GenScript ® cPass™. Square roots R of coefficients of determination were calculated for continuous variables and non-parametric tests were used for paired comparisons. Results Quantitative anti-S1 serology correlated well with each other (true positives, 96%; true negatives, 97%). Antibody titers decreased over time (< 30 to > 240 days after initial positive RT-PCR). Agreement with GenScript-cPass was 96%/99% for true positives and true negatives, respectively, for Ro-RBD-Ig-quant and 93%/97% for EI-S1-IgG-quant. Ro-RBD-Ig-quant allowed distinct separation between positives and negatives, and less non-specific reactivity versus EI-S1-IgG-quant. Raw values (95% CI) ≥ 28.7 U/mL (22.6–36.4) for Ro-RBD-Ig-quant and ≥ 49.8 U/mL (43.4–57.1) for EI-S1-IgG-quant predicted NT > 1:5 in 95% of cases. Conclusions Our findings suggest both quantitative anti-S1 assays (EI-S1-IgG-quant and Ro-RBD-Ig-quant) may replace direct neutralization assays in quantitative measurement of immune protection against SARS-CoV-2 in certain circumstances. However, although the mean antibody titers for both assays tended to decrease over time, a higher proportion of Ro-RBD-Ig-quant values remained positive after 240 days. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00475-x.

Introduction Semi-occluded vocal tract exercises, such as water resistance therapy (WRT), are widely used in voice therapy. However, the potential positive effects of such a therapy on vocal fold oscillation patterns in patients indicating a need for phonomicrosurgery have not yet been explored. The presented study aims to analyze the effect of WRT in patients suffering from vocal fold mass lesions. Materials and methods Eight participants with vocal fold mass lesions were asked to sustain a phonation on the vowel /i/ at a comfortable loudness and a fundamental frequency of 250 Hz (females) or 125 Hz (males). During phonation the subjects were simultaneously recorded with transnasal high-speed videoendoscopy (HSV, 20.000 fps), electroglottography, and audio signals. These subjects then performed a WRT (phonation in a silicone tube of 30 cm length, 5 cm below the water surface) for 10 min. Repeated measurements of sustained phonation were performed 0, 10, and 30 min after exercising. From the HSV data the glottal area waveform (GAW) was segmented and GAW parameters were computed. Results During WRT there was an increase of the GAW related open quotient and closing quotient. Immediately after WRT, there was a drop of both values followed by a rise of these parameters up to 30 min after the intervention. Furthermore, there was no correlation between GAW and electroglottographical open quotients. Conclusions The effects observed after a single session of WRT on participants with vocal fold mass lesions showed a similar pattern to vocal fatigue.

The diagnosis of cancer and its treatment have an incomparable impact on a patient’s life. In the early postoperative stages after the surgical treatment of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), functions and well-being are limited, which leads to a fundamental decline of the quality of life (QoL). To date, no studies have been performed that focus on the development of special aspects during the time of the in-patient stay of OSCC patients. With the results of this cross-sectional study, we are able to identify those patients who tend to require special support. This cross-sectional study determined the postoperative QoL with a questionnaire (QU) that was handed out twice to OSCC patients after surgery during their inpatient stay. The questions were based on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)’s Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and QLQ-H&N35. In our study, we found that for postoperative OSCC patients, eating, swallowing and speech were influenced the most. After decannulation, tracheotomy showed no impact on functions. Social contact was impaired at both timepoints. Especially female patients consider themselves to be more impaired on the scale of social contact. QoL should be checked with a standardized QU as an established tool during hospitalization in every oncology department. Only this procedure can pinpoint those patients who have struggles with their surgical outcome and need more assistance.

Background Population-based serological studies allow to estimate prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections despite a substantial number of mild or asymptomatic disease courses. This became even more relevant for decision making after vaccination started. The KoCo19 cohort tracks the pandemic progress in the Munich general population for over two years, setting it apart in Europe. Methods Recruitment occurred during the initial pandemic wave, including 5313 participants above 13 years from private households in Munich. Four follow-ups were held at crucial times of the pandemic, with response rates of at least 70%. Participants filled questionnaires on socio-demographics and potential risk factors of infection. From Follow-up 2, information on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was added. SARS-CoV-2 antibody status was measured using the Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-N assay (indicating previous infection) and the Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-S assay (indicating previous infection and/or vaccination). This allowed us to distinguish between sources of acquired antibodies. Results The SARS-CoV-2 estimated cumulative sero-prevalence increased from 1.6% (1.1-2.1%) in May 2020 to 14.5% (12.7-16.2%) in November 2021. Underreporting with respect to official numbers fluctuated with testing policies and capacities, becoming a factor of more than two during the second half of 2021. Simultaneously, the vaccination campaign against the SARS-CoV-2 virus increased the percentage of the Munich population having antibodies, with 86.8% (85.5-87.9%) having developed anti-S and/or anti-N in November 2021. Incidence rates for infections after (BTI) and without previous vaccination (INS) differed (ratio INS/BTI of 2.1, 0.7-3.6). However, the prevalence of infections was higher in the non-vaccinated population than in the vaccinated one. Considering the whole follow-up time, being born outside Germany, working in a high-risk job and living area per inhabitant were identified as risk factors for infection, while other socio-demographic and health-related variables were not. Although we obtained significant within-household clustering of SARS-CoV-2 cases, no further geospatial clustering was found. Conclusions Vaccination increased the coverage of the Munich population presenting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, but breakthrough infections contribute to community spread. As underreporting stays relevant over time, infections can go undetected, so non-pharmaceutical measures are crucial, particularly for highly contagious strains like Omicron.

Background Measuring specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies has become one of the main epidemiological tools to survey the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, but also vaccination response. The WHO made available a set of well-characterized samples derived from recovered individuals to allow normalization between different quantitative anti-Spike assays to defined Binding Antibody Units (BAU). Methods To assess sero-responses longitudinally, a cohort of ninety-nine SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive subjects was followed up together with forty-five vaccinees without previous infection but with two vaccinations. Sero-responses were evaluated using a total of six different assays: four measuring anti-Spike proteins (converted to BAU), one measuring anti-Nucleocapsid proteins and one SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization. Both cohorts were evaluated using the Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2-ELISA anti-S1 IgG and the Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-S1 assay. Results In SARS-CoV-2-convalesce subjects, the BAU-sero-responses of Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2-ELISA anti-S1 IgG and Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-S1 peaked both at 47 (43–51) days, the first assay followed by a slow decay thereafter (> 208 days), while the second assay not presenting any decay within one year. Both assay values in BAUs are only equivalent a few months after infection, elsewhere correction factors up to 10 are necessary. In contrast, in infection-naive vaccinees the assays perform similarly. Conclusion The results of our study suggest that the establishment of a protective correlate or vaccination booster recommendation based on different assays, although BAU-standardised, is still challenging. At the moment the characteristics of the available assays used are not related, and the BAU-standardisation is unable to correct for that.