Profile of specific antibodies to SARS-CoV-2: The first report

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Response Among Spectators of Amir Cup 2020 With a History of Recovery From COVID-19 in Qatar: A Historic Cohort Study

Aim The aim of the study is to describe the antibody response after COVID-19 infection and assess its effectiveness against reinfection. Background COVID-19 has recently emerged as a contagious infectious disease caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This infection is followed by a humoral immune antibody response, which may remain in the blood for a number of weeks. Studies have shown that antibodies protect against reinfection for at least seven months. The current study is aimed at investigating the persistence of circulating SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after COVID-19 infection and its behavior over 18 months of follow-up period, in addition to assessing the risk of reinfection of COVID-19 in unvaccinated individuals. Methodology A longitudinal historical cohort study of 3378 COVID-19 recovered individuals in connection with the Amir Cup football tournament held in Qatar, in December 2020 was analyzed. The health records of study participants were followed for a maximum of 18 months after serology testing or until the first dose of COVID-19 vaccination to detect any evidence of recurrent infection. Results The study found a statistically significant association between recurrence risk and the duration of risk exposure since the first COVID-19 episode. Compared to those with the lowest risk of exposure to reinfection (shortest duration after first infection) those beyond 299 days of at-risk exposure since the first episode, have a 51-fold higher risk of developing recurrent COVID-19. Conclusion Immunity developed after primary infection with SARS-CoV-2 may protect against reinfection from subsequent exposure to the virus in seropositive individuals up to nine months post-infection.

Comparative Analysis of Antimicrobial Antibodies between Mild and Severe COVID-19

Patients with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) exhibit a broad spectrum of clinical presentations. A person's antimicrobial antibody profile, as partially shaped by past infection or vaccination, can reflect the immune system health that is critical to control and resolve the infection. We performed an explorative immunoproteomics study using microbial protein arrays displaying 318 full-length antigens from 77 viruses and 3 bacteria. We compared antimicrobial antibody profiles between 135 patients with mild COVID-19 disease and 215 patients with severe disease in 3 independent cohorts from Mexico and Italy. Severe disease patients were older with higher prevalence of comorbidities. We confirmed that severe disease patients elicited a stronger anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) response. We showed that antibodies against HCoV-229E and HcoV-NL63 but not against HcoV-HKU1 and HcoV-OC43 were also higher in those who had severe disease. We revealed that for a set of IgG and IgA antibodies targeting coronaviruses, herpesviruses, and other respiratory viruses, a subgroup of patients with the highest reactivity levels had a greater incidence of severe disease compared to those with mild disease across all three cohorts. On the contrary, fewer antibodies showed consistent greater prevalence in mild disease in all 3 cohorts. IMPORTANCE The clinical presentations of COVID-19 range from asymptomatic to critical illness that may lead to intensive care or even death. The health of the immune system, as partially shaped by past infections or vaccinations, is critical to control and resolve the infection. Using an innovative protein array platform, we surveyed antibodies against hundreds of full-length microbial antigens from 80 different viruses and bacteria in COVID-19 patients from different geographic regions with mild or severe disease. We not only confirmed the association of severe COVID-19 disease with higher reactivity of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 but also uncovered known and novel associations with antibody responses against herpesviruses and other respiratory viruses. Our study represents a significant step forward in understanding the factors contributing to COVID-19 disease severity. We also demonstrate the power of comprehensive antimicrobial antibody profiling in deciphering risk factors for severe COVID-19. We anticipate that our approach will have broad applications in infectious diseases.

Diagnostic performance of four lateral flow immunoassays for COVID-19 antibodies in Peruvian population

Serological assays have been used in seroprevalence studies to inform the dynamics of COVID-19. Lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) tests are a very practical technology to use for this objective; however, one of their challenges may be variable diagnostic performance. Given the numerous available LFIA tests, evaluation of their accuracy is critical before real-world implementation. We performed a retrospective diagnostic evaluation study to independently determine the diagnostic accuracy of 4 different antibody-detection LFIA tests: Now Check (Bionote), CareStart (Access bio), Covid-19 BSS (Biosynex) and OnSite (CTK Biotech). The sample panel was comprised of specimens collected and stored in biobanks; specifically, specimens that were RT-PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2 collected at various times throughout the COVID-19 disease course and those that were collected before the pandemic, during 2018 or earlier, from individuals with upper respiratory symptoms but were negative for tuberculosis. Clinical performance (sensitivity and specificity) was analyzed overall, and subset across individual antibody isotypes, and days from symptoms onset. A very high specificity (98% - 100%) was found for all four tests. Overall sensitivity was variable, ranging from 29% [95% CI: 21%-39%] to 64% [95% CI: 54%-73%]. When considering detection of IgM only, the highest sensitivity was 42% [95% CI: 32%-52%], compared to 57% [95% CI: 47%-66%] for IgG only. When the analysis was restricted to at least 15 days since symptom onset, across any isotype, the sensitivity reached 90% for all four brands. All four LFIA tests proved effective for identifying COVID-19 antibodies when two conditions were met: 1) at least 15 days have elapsed since symptom onset and 2) a sample is considered positive when either IgM or IgG is present. With these considerations, the use of this assays could help in seroprevalence studies or further exploration of its potential uses.

A false positive serology test of SARS‑CoV‑2 in a patient with Waldenström's macroglobulinemia: A case report

The serology test of SARS-CoV-2 is one of the critical assays to make a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The gold immunochromatography assay (GICA) is a common measure to test SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG and IgM. The sensitivity and specificity of the assay are ~>80%. It has been reported that the result of GICA could be compromised in various situations, such as auto-immune diseases, Kawasaki disease, pregnancy or other conditions. However, following the European Hematology Association's consensus statement on the management of Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia (WM) patients, serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 specific IgM should not be affected by the total IgM or paraprotein levels. The present study reports a patient with duplicate positive serology tests of SARS-CoV-2 which is hypothesized to be due to monoclonal IgM caused by WM.

SARS-CoV-2 Testing Strategies in the Diagnosis and Management of COVID-19 Patients in Low-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

The accuracy of diagnostic laboratory tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can impact downstream clinical procedures in managing and controlling the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To assess the effectiveness of laboratory tools for managing COVID-19 patients in low-income countries (LICs), we systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Scopus and CINHAL databases for reports published between January 2020 and June 2022. We found that 22 of 1303 articles reported the performance of various SARS-CoV-2 detection tools across 10 LICs. These tools were (1) real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR); (2) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP); (3) rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs); (4) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); and (5) dot-blot immunoassay. The detection of COVID-19 is largely divided into two main streams-direct virus (antigen) detection and serology (immunoglobulin)-based detection. Point-of-care testing using antigen-based RDTs is preferred in LICs because of cost effectiveness and simplicity in the test procedures. The nucleic acid amplification technology (RT-PCR and RT-LAMP) has the highest diagnostic performance among the available tests, but it is not broadly used in this context due to costs and shortage of facilities/trained staff. The serology-based test method is affected by antibody interferences and varying amounts of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulins expressed at different stages of disease onset. We further discuss the effectiveness and shortcomings of each of these tools in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19. Using the LICs as the study model, our findings highlight ways to improve the quality and turnaround time of COVID-19 testing in resource-constrained settings, notably through local/international collaborative efforts to refine the molecular-based or immunoassay-based testing technologies.

Clinical application of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection and monoclonal antibody therapies against COVID-19

The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical application of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) specific antibody detection and anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in the treatment of coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19). The dynamic changes of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies during COVID-19 were studied. Immunoglobulin M (IgM) appeared earlier and lasted for a short time, while immunoglobulin G (IgG) appeared later and lasted longer. IgM tests can be used for early diagnosis of COVID-19, and IgG tests can be used for late diagnosis of COVID-19 and identification of asymptomatic infected persons. The combination of antibody testing and nucleic acid testing, which complement each other, can improve the diagnosis rate of COVID-19. Monoclonal anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies can be used to treat hospitalized severe and critically ill patients and non-hospitalized mild to moderate COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 convalescent plasma, highly concentrated immunoglobulin, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific mAbs are examples of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody products. Due to the continuous emergence of mutated strains of the novel coronavirus, especially omicron, its immune escape ability and infectivity are enhanced, making the effects of authorized products reduced or invalid. Therefore, the optimal application of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody products (especially anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific mAbs) is more effective in the treatment of COVID-19 and more conducive to patient recovery.

The COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa: The significance of presumed immune sufficiency

A novel coronavirus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first reported in China in 2019 and later ignited a global pandemic. Contrary to expectations, the effect of the pandemic was not as devastating to Africa and its young population compared to the rest of the world. To provide insight into the possible reasons for the presumed immune sufficiency to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Africa, this review critically examines literature published from 2020 onwards on the dynamics of COVID-19 infection and immunity and how other prevalent infectious diseases in Africa might have influenced the outcome of COVID-19. Studies characterising the immune response in patients with COVID-19 show that the correlates of protection in infected individuals are T-cell responses against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and neutralising titres of immunoglobin G and immunoglobin A antibodies. In some other studies, substantial pre-existing T-cell reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 was detected in many people from diverse geographical locations without a history of exposure. Certain studies also suggest that innate immune memory, which offers protection against reinfection with the same or another pathogen, might influence the severity of COVID-19. In addition, an initial analysis of epidemiological data showed that COVID‑19 cases were not severe in some countries that implemented universal Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccination policies, thus supporting the potential of BCG vaccination to boost innate immunity. The high burden of infectious diseases and the extensive vaccination campaigns previously conducted in Africa could have induced specific and non-specific protective immunity to infectious pathogens in Africans.

[An electron microscopic study of neocortex of Syrian hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) infected with SARS-CoV-2 (Coronaviridae: Coronavirinae: Betacoronavirus: Sarbecovirus)]

INTRODUCTION

Convalescent COVID-19 patients have various signs of central nervous system damage, including those directly associated with SARS-CoV-2. Hence, studies of SARS-COV-2 related morphological changes in neocortex are particularly relevant for understanding the mechanisms of their formation and development of approaches to preclinical evaluation of the effectiveness of antiviral drugs. The purpose of the research is a longitudinal study of the ultrastructural alterations in Syrian hamsters neocortex after experimental SARS-CoV-2 infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Male Syrian hamsters weighing 80100 g, aged 4 to 6 weeks, were infected with 26 l SARS-CoV-2 intranasally with 4104 TCD50/ml of viral particles. The animals were euthanized on days 3, 7 or 28 post-infection, the brain was extracted with the cortex excision. The material analysis was performed using transmission electron microscopy.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

On day 3 post-infection, the number of moderately hyperchromic neurons in neocortex increased, while by the day 7 the number of apoptotic cells significantly increased. Simultaneously, an increased signs of neuronophagy and representation of atypical glia were observed. Increased number of altered oligodendrocytes was observed on day 28 post-infection. Viral invasion was accompanied by changes in neocortical cells since day 3 post-infection, such as transformation of their nucleus, the rough endoplasmic reticulum and the Golgi vesicles as well as microvascular spasm with perivascular edema.

CONCLUSION

As a result of electron microscopic study, the ultrastructural alterations in neocortex were described in an experimental model of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The findings can be used to identify the mechanisms of infection pathogenesis and to search for the new directions in development of medicines.

Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in rapid development of diagnostic test methods for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection. Serology tests to detect the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 enable detection of past infection and may detect cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection that were missed by earlier diagnostic tests. Understanding the diagnostic accuracy of serology tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection may enable development of effective diagnostic and management pathways, inform public health management decisions and understanding of SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the accuracy of antibody tests, firstly, to determine if a person presenting in the community, or in primary or secondary care has current SARS-CoV-2 infection according to time after onset of infection and, secondly, to determine if a person has previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Sources of heterogeneity investigated included: timing of test, test method, SARS-CoV-2 antigen used, test brand, and reference standard for non-SARS-CoV-2 cases.

SEARCH METHODS

The COVID-19 Open Access Project living evidence database from the University of Bern (which includes daily updates from PubMed and Embase and preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv) was searched on 30 September 2020. We included additional publications from the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre) 'COVID-19: Living map of the evidence' and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health 'NIPH systematic and living map on COVID-19 evidence'. We did not apply language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated commercially produced serology tests, targeting IgG, IgM, IgA alone, or in combination. Studies must have provided data for sensitivity, that could be allocated to a predefined time period after onset of symptoms, or after a positive RT-PCR test. Small studies with fewer than 25 SARS-CoV-2 infection cases were excluded. We included any reference standard to define the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tests (RT-PCR), clinical diagnostic criteria, and pre-pandemic samples).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We use standard screening procedures with three reviewers. Quality assessment (using the QUADAS-2 tool) and numeric study results were extracted independently by two people. Other study characteristics were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. We present sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each test and, for meta-analysis, we fitted univariate random-effects logistic regression models for sensitivity by eligible time period and for specificity by reference standard group. Heterogeneity was investigated by including indicator variables in the random-effects logistic regression models. We tabulated results by test manufacturer and summarised results for tests that were evaluated in 200 or more samples and that met a modification of UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) target performance criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 178 separate studies (described in 177 study reports, with 45 as pre-prints) providing 527 test evaluations. The studies included 64,688 samples including 25,724 from people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2; most compared the accuracy of two or more assays (102/178, 57%). Participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were most commonly hospital inpatients (78/178, 44%), and pre-pandemic samples were used by 45% (81/178) to estimate specificity. Over two-thirds of studies recruited participants based on known SARS-CoV-2 infection status (123/178, 69%). All studies were conducted prior to the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and present data for naturally acquired antibody responses. Seventy-nine percent (141/178) of studies reported sensitivity by week after symptom onset and 66% (117/178) for convalescent phase infection. Studies evaluated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) (165/527; 31%), chemiluminescent assays (CLIA) (167/527; 32%) or lateral flow assays (LFA) (188/527; 36%). Risk of bias was high because of participant selection (172, 97%); application and interpretation of the index test (35, 20%); weaknesses in the reference standard (38, 21%); and issues related to participant flow and timing (148, 82%). We judged that there were high concerns about the applicability of the evidence related to participants in 170 (96%) studies, and about the applicability of the reference standard in 162 (91%) studies. Average sensitivities for current SARS-CoV-2 infection increased by week after onset for all target antibodies. Average sensitivity for the combination of either IgG or IgM was 41.1% in week one (95% CI 38.1 to 44.2; 103 evaluations; 3881 samples, 1593 cases), 74.9% in week two (95% CI 72.4 to 77.3; 96 evaluations, 3948 samples, 2904 cases) and 88.0% by week three after onset of symptoms (95% CI 86.3 to 89.5; 103 evaluations, 2929 samples, 2571 cases). Average sensitivity during the convalescent phase of infection (up to a maximum of 100 days since onset of symptoms, where reported) was 89.8% for IgG (95% CI 88.5 to 90.9; 253 evaluations, 16,846 samples, 14,183 cases), 92.9% for IgG or IgM combined (95% CI 91.0 to 94.4; 108 evaluations, 3571 samples, 3206 cases) and 94.3% for total antibodies (95% CI 92.8 to 95.5; 58 evaluations, 7063 samples, 6652 cases). Average sensitivities for IgM alone followed a similar pattern but were of a lower test accuracy in every time slot. Average specificities were consistently high and precise, particularly for pre-pandemic samples which provide the least biased estimates of specificity (ranging from 98.6% for IgM to 99.8% for total antibodies). Subgroup analyses suggested small differences in sensitivity and specificity by test technology however heterogeneity in study results, timing of sample collection, and smaller sample numbers in some groups made comparisons difficult. For IgG, CLIAs were the most sensitive (convalescent-phase infection) and specific (pre-pandemic samples) compared to both ELISAs and LFAs (P < 0.001 for differences across test methods). The antigen(s) used (whether from the Spike-protein or nucleocapsid) appeared to have some effect on average sensitivity in the first weeks after onset but there was no clear evidence of an effect during convalescent-phase infection. Investigations of test performance by brand showed considerable variation in sensitivity between tests, and in results between studies evaluating the same test. For tests that were evaluated in 200 or more samples, the lower bound of the 95% CI for sensitivity was 90% or more for only a small number of tests (IgG, n = 5; IgG or IgM, n = 1; total antibodies, n = 4). More test brands met the MHRA minimum criteria for specificity of 98% or above (IgG, n = 16; IgG or IgM, n = 5; total antibodies, n = 7). Seven assays met the specified criteria for both sensitivity and specificity. In a low-prevalence (2%) setting, where antibody testing is used to diagnose COVID-19 in people with symptoms but who have had a negative PCR test, we would anticipate that 1 (1 to 2) case would be missed and 8 (5 to 15) would be falsely positive in 1000 people undergoing IgG or IgM testing in week three after onset of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a seroprevalence survey, where prevalence of prior infection is 50%, we would anticipate that 51 (46 to 58) cases would be missed and 6 (5 to 7) would be falsely positive in 1000 people having IgG tests during the convalescent phase (21 to 100 days post-symptom onset or post-positive PCR) of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some antibody tests could be a useful diagnostic tool for those in whom molecular- or antigen-based tests have failed to detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus, including in those with ongoing symptoms of acute infection (from week three onwards) or those presenting with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19. However, antibody tests have an increasing likelihood of detecting an immune response to infection as time since onset of infection progresses and have demonstrated adequate performance for detection of prior infection for sero-epidemiological purposes. The applicability of results for detection of vaccination-induced antibodies is uncertain.

Biomarkers of sequela in adult patients convalescing from COVID-19

Different biomarkers for SARS-CoV-2 have been linked to detection, diagnosis, treatment, disease progression, and development of new drugs and vaccines. The objective of this research was to evaluate various hematological, biochemicals, immunological, radiological and spirometric parameters in 20 adult patients convalescing from COVID-19 and their possible relationship with the clinical course of the disease. The frequencies of categorical variables were compared using the chi-square and Fisher's exact test. The levels of statistical significance were denoted in each figure legend. Two-dimensional clustering analysis was performed using MeV software from TIGR. The tests with P value of ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Most of the patients studied presented alterations in dissimilar laboratory, radiological and spirometric parameters, which were related to the clinical evolution of the disease. The results obtained show that certain hematological, biochemical, immunological and radiological parameters can be considered as biomarkers of sequela in adult COVID-19 patients, which allows their stratification, according to the degree of involvement or sequela, into three groups: I (mild degree of involvement or sequela), without lung lesions on computerized axial tomography (CT scan) and high values of IgG, C3 and hemoglobin, II (moderate degree of involvement or sequel), without lung lesions on CT scan, characterized by high levels of CD3+/CD4+ T lymphocytes and the rest of the variables with low values and III (severe degree of involvement or sequela), with lung lesions on CT scan and high values of erythrocyte sedimentation rate, monocytes and neutrophils, associated with lymphopenia and decreased concentrations of IgG and C3.

Clinical significance of anti-nucleocapsid-IgG sero-positivity in SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients in North Dakota

BACKGROUND

During the peak of the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinicians actively studied the utility of various epidemiologic-clinical parameters to determine the prognosis for patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Serum IgG antibody level, D-Dimer, C-reactive protein and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, etc. were studied to assess their association with the clinical course in hospitalized patients and predict who may be at increased risk for poor clinical outcome. However, the influence of SARS-CoV-2-anti-nucleocapsid-IgG antibody (IgG-N) sero-positivity on the clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19 is largely unknown.

AIM

To study the influence of SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid-IgG seropositivity on clinical course and diseases severity in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of adults admitted to a tertiary care community hospital in North Dakota with COVID-19. Included patients had severe COVID-19 disease or worse and so required supplemental oxygen on admission. They were serologically tested for SARS-CoV-2-anti-nuceocapsid-IgG (IgG-N). The IgG-N positive group were 26 patients and the IgG-N negative group had 33 patients. The groups received similar treatment for COVID-19 as approved by our healthcare system from Day 1 of admission until discharge or death. Measurable parameters for monitoring the patients’ clinical course included the following: Length of hospitalization (LOS), use of high flow nasal canula (HFNC), use of noninvasive bilevel positive pressure ventilation (BiPAP), admission into the intensive care unit, need for mechanical ventilation (VENT); and the patient outcome/discharge or death. Other variables included were age, gender and body-mass-index, and duration of symptoms before presentation. For each variable, the outcome was modeled as a function of SARS-CoV-2-IgG-N status (positive or negative) using a generalized linear model. For LOS-days, a negative binomial distribution was used as it had a better fit than a Poisson or Gaussian distribution as evidenced by a Pearson chi-square/df value closer to 1.0. All other outcomes utilized a binary logistic regression model.

RESULTS

After a thorough examination of patient data, it was found that admission rates to the Intensive Care Unit, as well as the usage of BiPAP, HFNC and VENT support, in conjunction with patient outcomes, were not significantly different across IgG-N status. However, the LOS variable when assessed by IgG-N status was found to be significant (t value = 2.16, P value = 0.0349). IgG-N negative patients had higher than average LOS in comparison to IgG-N positive patients (15.12 vs 9.35 d). Even when removing the extreme value (an LOS of 158 d), IgG-N negative patients still had slightly higher than average stays (10.66 vs 9.35 d) but the relationship was no longer significant. For patient outcome/death, only age (numerical) was a significant predictor (F value = 4.66, P value = 0.0352). No other variables for any of the outcomes were significant predictors of clinical course or disease severity.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that IgG-N seroconversion had no significant association with clinical outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Establishment of hospital resilience framework in urban China: insight from Wuhan City

Since the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) swept the world, many countries face a problem that is a shortage of medical resources. The role of emergency medical facilities in response to the epidemic is beginning to arouse public attention, and the construction of the urban resilient emergency response framework has become the critical way to resist the epidemic. Today, China has controlled the domestically transmitted COVID-19 cases through multiple emergency medical facilities and inclusive patient admission criteria. Most of the existing literature focuses on case studies or characterizations of individual facilities. This paper constructs an evaluation system to measure urban hospital resilience from the spatial perspective and deciphered the layout patterns and regularities of emergency medical facilities in Wuhan, the city most affected by the epidemic in China. Findings indicate that the pattern of one center and two circles are a more compelling layout structure for urban emergency medical facilities in terms of accessibility and service coverage for residents. Meanwhile, the Fangcang shelter hospital has an extraordinary performance in terms of emergency response time, and it is a sustainable facility utilization approach in the post-epidemic era. This study bolsters areas of the research on the urban resilient emergency response framework. Moreover, the paper summarizes new medical facilities’ planning and location characteristics and hopes to provide policy-makers and urban planners with valuable empirical evidence.

Coronavirus Vaccination: Spike Antibody Levels in Health Workers after Six Months-A Cross-Sectional Study

Healthcare workers bear a high risk of infection during epidemics and pandemics such as the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Various new vaccines have been approved. We investigated the influence of the time elapsed since vaccination, as well as of vaccination schema, on health workers' spike antibody levels following their second vaccination. Blood samples were obtained from employees working at a German hospital between August 2021 and December 2021 on average half a year (range 130-280 days) after their second vaccination. Levels of SARS-CoV-2-IgG antibodies (spike and nucleocapsid protein) were qualitatively detected via chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs). A previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 was an exclusion criterion. In total, 545 persons were included in this cross-sectional study. Most participants (97.8%) showed elevated anti-spike concentrations. Anti-spike levels differed significantly among vaccination schemas. Repeated vector vaccinations resulted in lower protective antibody levels. Higher age levels, immunosuppression and a longer time period since the second vaccination resulted in lower anti-spike levels. Women's antibody levels were higher, but not significantly. Since anti-spike levels drop after vaccination, further boosters are required to increase immunoreactivity. If two vector vaccines have been administered, it is possible that an mRNA booster might increase the anti-spike level.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody progression and neutralizing potential in mild symptomatic COVID-19 patients – a comparative long term post-infection study

Background

Since December 2019, SARS-CoV-2 has been keeping the world in suspense. Rapid tests, molecular diagnosis of acute infections, and vaccination campaigns with vaccines are building blocks of strategic pandemic control worldwide. For laboratory diagnostics, the quantification of the antibody titer of convalescents and vaccinated patients is thus increasingly coming to the fore.

Methods

Here we present an evaluation on the comparability of five serological tests on a cohort of 13 patients with mild COVID-19 disease. Also participants who were vaccinated after recovery were included in this study. All common immune methods (ELISA, CLIA, PETIA) and SARS-CoV-2 specific antigens (N-, S1- and RBD-) were specifically tracked and directly compared for up to 455 days. The titer of recovered participants was also set to the degree of symptoms during infection and the occurrence of Long-COVID. In addition, relative comparability of different serological tests, all standardized to WHO, was set in reference to the neutralizing potential of the corresponding participants.

Findings

The individual immune responses over 455 days after a mild SARS-CoV-2 infection remain stable, in contrast to vaccinated participants. All sero-tests reveal comparable performance and dynamics during the study and compared well to a surrogate neutralization test.

Conclusion

The information presented here will help clinicians in the daily laboratory work in the selection and evaluation of different serological tests offered. The data also will support in respect of a sero-test-based neutralization cutoff.

Two-years antibody responses following SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans: A study protocol

The long-term antibody response to the novel SARS-CoV-2 in infected patients and their residential neighborhood remains unknown in Indonesia. This information will provide insights into the antibody kinetics over a relatively long period as well as transmission risk factors in the community. We aim to prospectively observe and determine the kinetics of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody for 2 years after infection in relation to disease severity and to determine the risk and protective factors of SARS CoV-2 infections in the community. A cohort of RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients (case) will be prospectively followed for 2 years and will be compared to a control population. The control group comprises SARS-CoV-2 non-infected people who live within a one-kilometer radius from the corresponding case (location matching). This study will recruit at least 165 patients and 495 controls. Demographics, community variables, behavioral characteristics, and relevant clinical data will be collected. Serum samples taken at various time points will be tested for IgM anti-Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 and IgG anti-Spike RBD of SARS-CoV-2 by using Chemiluminescent Microparticle Immunoassay (CMIA) method. The Kaplan-Meier method will be used to calculate cumulative seroconversion rates, and their association with disease severity will be estimated by logistic regression. The risk and protective factors associated with the SARS-CoV-2 infection will be determined using conditional (matched) logistic regression and presented as an odds ratio and 95% confidence interval.

Comparison of the Performance of 24 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibody Assays in the Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients

Background

The accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the key to control Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). The performance of different antibody detection methods for diagnosis of COVID-19 is inconclusive.

Methods

Between 16 February and 28 February 2020, 384 confirmed COVID-19 patients and 142 healthy controls were recruited. 24 different serological tests, including 4 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (EIAs), 10 chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs), and 10 lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs), were simultaneously performed.

Results

The sensitivities of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies with different reagents ranged from 75 to 95.83% and 46.09 to 92.45%, respectively. The specificities of both anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM were relatively high and comparable among different reagents, ranged from 88.03 to 100%. The area under the curves (AUCs) of different tests ranged from 0.733 to 0.984, and the AUCs of EIAs or CLIAs were significantly higher than those of LFIAs. The sensitivities of both IgG and IgM gradually increased with increase of onset time. After 3–4 weeks, the sensitivities of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG were maintained at a certain level but the sensitivities of IgM were gradually decreased. Six COVID-19 patients who displayed negative anti-SARS-CoV-2 results were associated with the factors such as older age, having underlying diseases, and using immunosuppressant.

Conclusion

Besides the purpose of assessing the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the population, SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays may have an adjunct role in the diagnosis and exclusion of COVID-19, especially by using high-throughput technologies (EIAs or CLIAs).

SARS-CoV-2 Viral Shedding and Associated Factors among COVID-19 Inpatients and Outpatients

Background

According to the contagious ability of the new virus, SARS-CoV-2, characterization of viral shedding duration in the period of infection is highly valuable in terms of providing quarantine guidelines and isolation policies. Therefore, we aimed at viral shedding determination in 58 COVID-19 confirmed Iranian subjects in different stages.

Methods

58 COVID-19 confirmed Iranian subjects including 21 outpatients and 37 inpatients were investigated. The analytical data and clinical properties were documented in the standard questionnaire. The RT-PCR tests were done two and three weeks after the symptoms initiation.

Results

Viral eradication occurred in 44.8% two weeks after illness initiation whereas in 71% who achieved a negative PCR test in the third week. Moreover, prolonged viral shedding was observed in hospitalized cases in comparison to outpatients. Almost 30% of patients continued viral shedding three weeks after disease initiation.

Conclusion

A longer duration of viral shedding in hospitalized cases rather than outpatients was observed in this study. The results similar to other investigations call into question if the current policies are enough to prevent the viral spread or not. This study should be done on a larger sample to provide an appropriate time in isolation policy.

Heterologous prime-boost strategies for COVID-19 vaccines

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Heterologous prime-boost doses of COVID-19 vaccines ('mix-and-match' approach) are being studied to test for the effectiveness of Oxford (AZD1222), Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) and Novavax (NVX-CoV2373) vaccines for COVID in 'Com-Cov2 trial' in UK, and that of Oxford and Pfizer vaccines in 'CombivacS trial' in Spain. Later, other heterologous combinations of CoronaVac (DB15806), Janssen (JNJ-78436735), CanSino (AD5-nCOV) and other were also being trialled to explore their effectiveness. Previously, such a strategy was deployed for HIV, Ebola virus, malaria, tuberculosis, influenza and hepatitis B to develop the artificial acquired active immunity. The present review explores the science behind such an approach for candidate COVID-19 vaccines developed using 11 different platforms approved by the World Health Organization.

METHODS

The candidate vaccines' pharmaceutical parameters (e.g. platforms, number needed to vaccinate and intervals, adjuvanted status, excipients and preservatives added, efficacy and effectiveness, vaccine adverse events, and boosters), and clinical aspects must be analysed for the mix-and-match approach. Results prime-boost trials showed safety, effectiveness, higher systemic reactogenicity, well tolerability with improved immunogenicity, and flexibility profiles for future vaccinations, especially during acute and global shortages, compared to the homologous counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Still, large controlled trials are warranted to address challenging variants of concerns including Omicron and other, and to generalize the effectiveness of the approach in regular as well as emergency use during vaccine scarcity.

Increased ACE2, sRAGE, and Immune Activation, but Lowered Calcium and Magnesium in COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The characterization of new biomarkers that could help externally validate the diagnosis of COVID-19 and optimize treatments is extremely important. Many studies have established changes in immune-inflammatory and antibody levels, but few studies measured the soluble receptor for the advanced glycation end product (sRAGE), angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), calcium, and magnesium in COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate serum advanced glycation end-product receptor (sRAGE) and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE)2 and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) and chest CT scan abnormalities (CCTA) in COVID-19.

METHODS

sRAGE, ACE2, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, C-reactive protein (CRP), calcium, magnesium, and albumin were measured in 60 COVID-19 patients and 30 healthy controls.

RESULTS

COVID-19 is characterized by significantly increased IL-6, CRP, IL-10, sRAGE, ACE2, and lowered SpO2, albumin, magnesium, and calcium. COVID-19 with CCTAs showed lower SpO₂ and albumin. SpO2 was significantly inversely correlated with IL-6, IL-10, CRP, sRAGE, and ACE2, and positively with albumin, magnesium, and calcium. Neural networks showed that a combination of calcium, IL-6, CRP, and sRAGE yielded an accuracy of 100% in detecting COVID-19 patients, with calcium being the most important predictor followed by IL-6 and CRP. Patients with positive IgG results showed a significant elevation in the serum level of IL-6, sRAGE, and ACE2 compared to the negatively IgG patient subgroup.

CONCLUSION

The results show that immune-inflammatory and RAGE pathways biomarkers may be used as an external validating criterion for the diagnosis of COVID-19. Those pathways coupled with lowered SpO2, calcium, and magnesium are drug targets that may help reduce the consequences of COVID-19.

Immune escape facilitation by mutations of epitope residues in RdRp of SARS-CoV-2

Mutations drive viral evolution and genome variability that causes viruses to escape host immunity and to develop drug resistance. SARS-CoV-2 has considerably higher mutation rate. SARS-CoV-2 possesses a RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) which helps to replicate its genome. The mutation P323L in RdRp is associated with the loss of a particular epitope (321-327) from this protein. We consider the effects of mutations in some of the epitope region including the naturally occurring mutation P323L on the structure of the epitope and their interface with paratope using all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulation studies. We observe that the mutations cause conformational changes in the epitope region by opening up the region associated with increase in the radius of gyration and intramolecular hydrogen bonds, making the region less accessible. Moreover, we study the conformational stability of the epitope region and epitope:paratope interface under the mutation from the fluctuations in the dihedral angles. We observe that the mutation renders the epitope and the epitope:paratope interface unstable compared to the corresponding wild type ones. Thus, the mutations may help in escaping antibody mediated immunity of the hostCommunicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.

Clinical course impacts early kinetics,magnitude, and amplitude of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies beyond 1 year after infection

To understand the determinants of long-term immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the concurrent impact of vaccination and emerging variants, we follow a prospective cohort of 332 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) over more than a year after symptom onset. We evaluate plasma-neutralizing activity using HIV-based pseudoviruses expressing the spike of different SARS-CoV-2 variants and analyze them longitudinally using mixed-effects models. Long-term neutralizing activity is stable beyond 1 year after infection in mild/asymptomatic and hospitalized participants. However, longitudinal models suggest that hospitalized individuals generate both short- and long-lived memory B cells, while the responses of non-hospitalized individuals are dominated by long-lived B cells. In both groups, vaccination boosts responses to natural infection. Long-term (>300 days from infection) responses in unvaccinated participants show a reduced efficacy against beta, but not alpha nor delta, variants. Multivariate analysis identifies the severity of primary infection as an independent determinant of higher magnitude and lower relative cross-neutralization activity of long-term neutralizing responses.

•

Long-term persistence (>12 months) of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2

•

Severity of infection determines the magnitude and quality of neutralizing response

•

Vaccination boosts neutralizing response to natural infection

Geographic disparities in COVID-19 case rates are not reflected in seropositivity rates using a neighborhood survey in Chicago

To date, COVID-19 case rates are disproportionately higher in Black and Latinx communities across the US, leading to more hospitalizations, and deaths in those communities. These differences in case rates are evident in comparisons of Chicago neighborhoods with differing race and/or ethnicities of their residents. Disparities could be due to neighborhoods with more adverse health outcomes associated with poverty and other social determinants of health experiencing higher prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or due to greater morbidity and mortality resulting from equivalent SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence. We surveyed five pairs of adjacent ZIP codes in Chicago with disparate COVID-19 case rates for highly specific and quantitative serologic evidence of any prior infection by SARS-CoV-2 to compare with their disparate COVID-19 case rates. Dried blood spot samples were self-collected at home by internet-recruited participants in summer 2020, shortly after Chicago's first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Pairs of neighboring ZIP codes with very different COVID-19 case rates had similar seropositivity rates for anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain IgG antibodies. Overall, these findings of comparable exposure to SARS-CoV-2 across neighborhoods with very disparate COVID-19 case rates are consistent with social determinants of health, and the co-morbidities related to them, driving differences in COVID-19 rates across neighborhoods.

Examining the relationship between nurses' fear levels and insomnia during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey

PURPOSE

This study was conducted to examine the relationship between nurses' fear levels and their insomnia, influencing sociodemographic factors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This study utilized cross-sectional methods and the data were collected between July 15 and August 15, 2020. In the data collection, "Socio-demographic question form," "Covid-19 Fear Scale," and "Bergen Insomnia Scale" tools were used. Descriptive statistics, numbers, percentages, independent samples t test, analysis of variance test, and correlation were used on the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) 22.0 package program in evaluating the research data. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Batman University.

FINDINGS

A positive correlation was found between COVID-19 Fear Scale and the Bergen Insomnia Scale (r = .392; p = .001). The relationship between COVID-19 Fear and Bergen Insomnia Scale score averages and nurses' educational status, income level, shift working status, the status of their relatives being diagnosed with COVID-19, the state of being satisfied with the management of the pandemic process by the Ministry of Health, the situation of having resources in the settings where they work, the status of being in quarantine was statistically significant (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

The relationship between the nurses' fear levels of COVID-19 and their insomnia levels was moderate.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The results of this study are important in terms of understanding the nurses' fear and insomnia during the pandemic and provide data support for the proper interventions. Also, nurses working in Turkey may call for more attention and support from policymakers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of vaccinated COVID-19 patients: A meta-analysis and systematic review

Objective: With the global epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), vaccination rates are increasing globally. This study evaluated the relevant clinical manifestations of vaccinated COVID-19 patients. Methods: We searched carefully in 11 databases such as PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Ovid, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Wan Fang Data, Sinomed, VIP Database, and Reading Showing Database up to 26 March 2022. To search for articles that have described the characteristics of vaccinated patients including epidemiological and clinical symptoms. Statistical analysis of the extracted data using STATA 14.0. Results: A total of 58 articles and 263,708 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients were included. Most of the patients in the vaccinated group had more asymptomatic infection and fewer severe illnesses. There were significant differences in ethnicity, and strain infected with COVID-19, and comorbidities (hyperlipidemia, diabetes, obesity, kidney disease, immunocompromised, cardiovascular disease, and tumor) and symptoms (fever, cough, gastrointestinal symptoms, neurological symptoms, and dysgeusia/anosmia) between vaccinated group and unvaccinated group. Oxygen support, use of steroid, days in hospital, hospital treatment, ICU treatment, death, and poor prognosis were also significantly different. Conclusion: Compared with the vaccinated group, patients in the unvaccinated group had a more severe clinical manifestations. Vaccines are also protective for infected people.

Review: Development of SARS-CoV-2 immuno-enhanced COVID-19 vaccines with nano-platform

Vaccination is the most effective way to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Vaccine development approaches consist of viral vector vaccines, DNA vaccine, RNA vaccine, live attenuated virus, and recombinant proteins, which elicit a specific immune response. The use of nanoparticles displaying antigen is one of the alternative approaches to conventional vaccines. This is due to the fact that nano-based vaccines are stable, able to target, form images, and offer an opportunity to enhance the immune responses. The diameters of ultrafine nanoparticles are in the range of 1-100 nm. The application of nanotechnology on vaccine design provides precise fabrication of nanomaterials with desirable properties and ability to eliminate undesirable features. To be successful, nanomaterials must be uptaken into the cell, especially into the target and able to modulate cellular functions at the subcellular levels. The advantages of nano-based vaccines are the ability to protect a cargo such as RNA, DNA, protein, or synthesis substance and have enhanced stability in a broad range of pH, ambient temperatures, and humidity for long-term storage. Moreover, nano-based vaccines can be engineered to overcome biological barriers such as nonspecific distribution in order to elicit functions in antigen presenting cells. In this review, we will summarize on the developing COVID-19 vaccine strategies and how the nanotechnology can enhance antigen presentation and strong immunogenicity using advanced technology in nanocarrier to deliver antigens. The discussion about their safe, effective, and affordable vaccines to immunize against COVID-19 will be highlighted.

COVID-19 vaccination strategies depend on the underlying network of social interactions

Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, different mitigation and management strategies limiting economic and social activities have been implemented across many countries. Despite these strategies, the virus continues to spread and mutate. As a result, vaccinations are now administered to suppress the pandemic. Current COVID-19 epidemic models need to be expanded to account for the change in behaviour of new strains, such as an increased virulence and higher transmission rate. Furthermore, models need to account for an increasingly vaccinated population. We present a network model of COVID-19 transmission accounting for different immunity and vaccination scenarios. We conduct a parameter sensitivity analysis and find the average immunity length after an infection to be one of the most critical parameters that define the spread of the disease. Furthermore, we simulate different vaccination strategies and show that vaccinating highly connected individuals first is the quickest strategy for controlling the disease.

Does infection with or vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 lead to lasting immunity?

Many nations are pursuing the rollout of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines as an exit strategy from unprecedented COVID-19-related restrictions. However, the success of this strategy relies critically on the duration of protective immunity resulting from both natural infection and vaccination. SARS-CoV-2 infection elicits an adaptive immune response against a large breadth of viral epitopes, although the duration of the response varies with age and disease severity. Current evidence from case studies and large observational studies suggests that, consistent with research on other common respiratory viruses, a protective immunological response lasts for approximately 5-12 months from primary infection, with reinfection being more likely given an insufficiently robust primary humoral response. Markers of humoral and cell-mediated immune memory can persist over many months, and might help to mitigate against severe disease upon reinfection. Emerging data, including evidence of breakthrough infections, suggest that vaccine effectiveness might be reduced significantly against emerging variants of concern, and hence secondary vaccines will need to be developed to maintain population-level protective immunity. Nonetheless, other interventions will also be required, with further outbreaks likely to occur due to antigenic drift, selective pressures for novel variants, and global population mobility.

SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody responses in rt-PCR-positive cases: first report from India

Introduction

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody responses remain poorly understood and the clinical utility of serological testing is still unclear.

Aim

To understand the relationship between the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and the demographics and cycle threshold (C_t) values of confirmed RT-PCR patients.

Methodology

A total of 384 serum samples were collected from individuals between 4–6 weeks after confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and tested for the development of immunoglobulin class G (IgG) against SARS-CoV-2. The C_t values, age, gender and symptoms of the patients were correlated with the development of antibodies.

Results

IgG positivity was found to be 80.2 % (95 % CI, 76.2–84.2). Positivity increased with a decrease in the C_t value, with the highest (87.6 %) positivity observed in individuals with C_t values <20. The mean (±sd) C_t values for IgG positives and negatives were 23.34 (±6.09) and 26.72 (±7.031), respectively. No significant difference was found for demographic characteristics such as age and sex and symptoms and antibody response. The current study is the first of its kind wherein we have assessed the correlation of the RT-PCR C_t with the development of IgG against SARS-CoV-2.

Conclusion

Although C_t values might not have any relation with the development of symptoms, they are associated with the antibody response among SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals.

Detection and predictors of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in COVID-19 patients at 8 months after symptom onset

Aim: To determine SARS-CoV-2 specific IgM and IgG levels of patients with COVID-19 at 8 months after symptom onset and to explore the predictors of antibody levels. Materials & methods: The magnetic chemiluminescence method was used to measure the antibody levels. Clinical data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Results: A total of 54 patients were enrolled in this study, of whom 59.3% were IgM positive and 96.4% were IgG positive. The multiple linear regression analysis revealed that the duration of RNA shedding, C-reactive protein level and disease severity were independent predictors of IgG levels. Conclusion: COVID-19 patients retained long-term viral-specific protective immunity. Disease severity, C-reactive protein level and duration of RNA shedding were related to antibody levels 8 months after symptom onset.

This study aimed to detect the levels of antibodies made by the body in response to COVID-19, 8 months after infection. We reviewed the characteristics of 54 patients with a history COVID-19 to find factors that may influence antibody levels. The results showed that 8 months after infection, almost all the patients had sufficient antibody levels to protect them from another episode of COVID-19 and that antibody levels were especially well maintained in those with a history of severe COVID-19.

Persistence of SARS-CoV-2-Specific Antibodies for 13 Months after Infection

BACKGROUND

Dynamics of antibody responses were investigated after a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in a private company during the first wave of the pandemic.

METHODS

Workers of a sewing company (Lithuania) with known SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR result during the outbreak (April 2020) were invited to participate in the study. Virus-specific IgG and IgM were monitored 2, 6 and 13 months after the outbreak via rapid IgG/IgM serological test and SARS-CoV-2 S protein-specific IgG ELISA.

RESULTS

Six months after the outbreak, 95% (CI 86-99%) of 59 previously infected individuals had virus-specific antibodies irrespective of the severity of infection. One-third of seropositive individuals had virus-specific IgM along with IgG indicating that IgM may persist for 6 months. Serological testing 13 months after the outbreak included 47 recovered individuals that remained non-vaccinated despite a wide accessibility of COVID-19 vaccines. The seropositivity rate was 83% (CI 69-91%) excluding one case of confirmed asymptomatic reinfection in this group. Between months 6 and 13, IgG levels either declined or remained stable in 31 individual and increased in 7 individuals possibly indicating an exposure to SARS-CoV-2 during the second wave of the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Detectable levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies persist up to 13 months after infection for the majority of the cases.

Evaluation of the performance of 25 SARS-CoV-2 serological rapid diagnostic tests using a reference panel of plasma specimens at the Uganda Virus Research Institute

INTRODUCTION

Serological testing is needed to better understand the epidemiology of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have been developed to detect specific antibodies, IgM and IgG, to the virus. The performance of 25 of these RDTs was evaluated.

METHODS

A serological reference panel of 50 positive and 100 negative plasma specimens was developed from SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody positive patients and pre-pandemic SARS-CoV-2-negative specimens collected in 2016. Test performance of the 25 RDTs was evaluated against this panel.

RESULTS

A total of 10 RDTs had a sensitivity ≥98%, while 13 RDTs had a specificity ≥98% to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Four RDTs (Boson, MultiG, Standard Q, and VivaDiag) had both sensitivity and specificity ≥98% to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Only three RDTs had a sensitivity ≥98%, while 10 RDTs had a specificity ≥98% to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM antibodies. Three RDTs (Autobio, MultiG, and Standard Q) had sensitivity and specificity ≥98% to combined IgG/IgM. The RDTs that performed well also had perfect or almost perfect inter-reader agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

This evaluation identified three RDTs with a sensitivity and specificity to IgM/IgG antibodies of ≥98% with the potential for widespread antibody testing in Uganda.

Advances and insights in the diagnosis of viral infections

Viral infections are the most common among diseases that globally require around 60 percent of medical care. However, in the heat of the pandemic, there was a lack of medical equipment and inpatient facilities to provide all patients with viral infections. The detection of viral infections is possible in three general ways such as (i) direct virus detection, which is performed immediately 1-3 days after the infection, (ii) determination of antibodies against some virus proteins mainly observed during/after virus incubation period, (iii) detection of virus-induced disease when specific tissue changes in the organism. This review surveys some global pandemics from 1889 to 2020, virus types, which induced these pandemics, and symptoms of some viral diseases. Non-analytical methods such as radiology and microscopy also are overviewed. This review overlooks molecular analysis methods such as nucleic acid amplification, antibody-antigen complex determination, CRISPR-Cas system-based viral genome determination methods. Methods widely used in the certificated diagnostic laboratory for SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A, B, C, HIV, and other viruses during a viral pandemic are outlined. A comprehensive overview of molecular analytical methods has shown that the assay's sensitivity, accuracy, and suitability for virus detection depends on the choice of the number of regions in the viral open reading frame (ORF) genome sequence and the validity of the selected analytical method.

Evaluation of five widely used serologic assays for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2

Reliable diagnostic technologies are pivotal to the fight against COVID-19. While real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) remains the gold standard, commercial assays for antibodies against (SARS-CoV-2) have emerged. We sought to examine 5 widely used commercial methods. We measured antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 with assays, Abbott-IgG, Roche-IgT (total antibodies, isotype-unspecific), EUROIMMUN-IgG, EUROIMMUN-IgA, DiaSorin-IgG, in 191 serum samples from patients with rRT-PCR proven COVID-19 between days 0 and 47 after the onset of clinical symptoms and in biobank samples collected in 2018. The assays were calibrated using the manufacturers’ instructions; results are in multiples of the assay specific cut-offs (Abbott, Roche, EUROIMMUN) or in arbitrary units (AU/mL, DiaSorin). The assays for IgG and IgT have approximately the same sensitivity and specificity for detecting seroconversion which starts at approximately day 3 after symptom onset, sensitivity reached 93% on day 16 and was 100% for each assay on day 20. The assay for IgA antibodies was superior in sensitivity and had a lower specificity than the others. Bivariate non–parametric correlation coefficients ranged between 0.738 and 0.991. Commercial assays for IgG or total antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are largely equivalent for establishing seroconversion but differ at high antibody titres. Increased sensitivity to detect seroconversion is afforded by including IgA antibodies. Further international efforts to harmonise assays for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are urgently needed.

Quantitative Detection of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies Using Indirect ELISA

Objective

Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction is the gold standard for the diagnosis of COVID-19, but it is necessary to utilize other tests to determine the burden of the disease and the spread of the outbreak such as IgG-, IgM-, and IgA-based antibody detection using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

Materials and Methods

We developed an indirect ELISA assay to quantitatively measure the amount of COVID-19 IgG, IgM, and IgA antibodies present in patient serum, dried blood, and plasma.

Results

The population cutoff values for positivity were determined by receiver operating characteristic curves to be 1.23 U/mL, 23.09 U/mL, and 6.36 U/mL for IgG, IgM, and IgA, respectively. After albumin subtraction, the specificity remained >98% and the sensitivity was 95.72%, 83.47%, and 82.60%, respectively, for IgG, IgM, and IgA antibodies to the combined spike subunit 1 receptor binding domain and N proteins in serum. Plasma and dried blood spot specimens were also validated on this assay.

Conclusion

This assay may be used for determining the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in a population exposed to the virus or in vaccinated individuals.

Long-Term Monitoring of the Antibody Response to a SARS-CoV-2 Infection

A group of 110 patients from the West Bohemian region who had been infected with COVID-19 was monitored for the purposes of this study. We focused on cases of mild or moderate COVID-19; statistically the most likely to occur. Day zero was defined as the day on which a positive PCR test was first established. The mean length of observation was 6.5 months, the maximum length 12 months. The first blood samples were taken from a smaller cohort during the 1–3 months following the first positive PCR test. We assumed that SARS-CoV-2 antibodies would be present during this period and therefore a limited number of samples were taken for the purpose of detecting antibodies. More samples were collected, starting 4 months after the first positive PCR test. A subsequent set of blood samples were drawn, mostly 6 months after the first ones. Our study confirmed the presence of total IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 1 year after the onset of the disease. The peak of antibody production was observed in the third month after the first positive PCR test. A mathematical estimate of the median duration of antibody positivity was calculated to be 18 months from the onset of the COVID-19 infection.

Pre-vaccination immune response to COVID-19 in a population in Northeast Portugal

Purpose

To study the immunization status and IgM and IgG antibody behavior against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in an unvaccinated population of Northeast Portugal (including RT-PCR diagnosed and undiagnosed individuals).

Methods

Application of a clinical-epidemiological survey, and analysis of IgM and IgG SARS-COV-2 antibodies (against N core protein) in 362 participants that voluntarily sought the laboratory for testing.

Results

At the time of the analysis, 31.7% (n = 114) of the study population had a previous SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, 48.3% of which were asymptomatic, and 71.9% IgG seropositive. Of these, 83.3% and 60% were, respectively, IgM and IgG seropositive within 2 weeks after the initial diagnosis. Both antibodies peaked in the 3rd week post diagnosis, with titers decreasing over the following weeks, until a state of seronegativity was achieved after the 6th week for IgM, and the 21st for IgG. Symptomatic patients showed higher IgM and IgG values, when compared to asymptomatic ones. Fever, the most reported symptom, was found to be positively associated with IgM values. Ages of ≤ 18-year-old and ≥ 65-year-old exhibited the highest median values for both IgM and IgG, with the former being statistically significant. In the undiagnosed group, 13.9% and 11.1% were seropositive for IgM and IgG, respectively.

Conclusion

IgM and IgG displayed a similar initial increase (within 1/2 weeks), with IgG having a significant decrease after the 21st week post-diagnosis, translating a loss of immunity at this point. The youngest and oldest symptomatic age groups were found to be the highest responders. Antibody assays enabled the identification of previously undiagnosed participants.

Rapid antibody diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 adaptive immune response

The emergence of a pandemic scale respiratory illness (COVID-19: coronavirus disease 2019) and the lack of the world's readiness to prevent its spread resulted in an unprecedented rise of biomedical diagnostic industries, as they took lead to provide efficient diagnostic solutions for COVID-19. However, these circumstances also led to numerous emergency use authorizations without appropriate evaluation that compromised standards, which could result in a larger than usual number of false-positive or false-negative results, leading to unwanted ambiguity in already confusing realities of the pandemic-hit closures of the world economy. This review is aimed at comparing the claimed or reported clinical sensitivity and clinical specificity of commercially available rapid antibody diagnostics with independently evaluated clinical performance results of the tests. Thereby, we not only present the types of modern antibody diagnostics and their working principles but summarize their experimental evaluations and observed clinical efficiencies to highlight the research, development, and commercialization issues with future challenges. Still, it must be emphasized that the serological or antibody tests do not serve the purpose of early diagnosis but are more suitable for epidemiology and screening populaces with an active immune response, recognizing convalescent plasma donors, and determining vaccine efficacy.

Lymphopenia Caused by Virus Infections and the Mechanisms Beyond

Viral infections can give rise to a systemic decrease in the total number of lymphocytes in the blood, referred to as lymphopenia. Lymphopenia may affect the host adaptive immune responses and impact the clinical course of acute viral infections. Detailed knowledge on how viruses induce lymphopenia would provide valuable information into the pathogenesis of viral infections and potential therapeutic targeting. In this review, the current progress of viruses-induced lymphopenia is summarized and the potential mechanisms and factors involved are discussed.

Immunologic memory to SARS-CoV-2 in convalescent COVID-19 patients at 1 year postinfection

Background

Understanding the complexities of immune memory to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is key to gain insights into the durability of protective immunity against reinfection.

Objective

We sought to evaluate the immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 in convalescent patients with longer follow-up time.

Methods

SARS-CoV-2–specific humoral and cellular responses were assessed in convalescent patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at 1 year postinfection.

Results

A total of 78 convalescent patients with COVID-19 (26 moderate, 43 severe, and 9 critical) were recruited after 1 year of recovery. The positive rates of both anti–receptor-binding domain and antinucleocapsid antibodies were 100%, whereas we did not observe a statistical difference in antibody levels among different severity groups. Accordingly, the prevalence of neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) reached 93.59% in convalescent patients. Although nAb titers displayed an increasing trend in convalescent patients with increased severity, the difference failed to achieve statistical significance. Notably, there was a significant correlation between nAb titers and anti–receptor-binding domain levels. Interestingly, SARS-CoV-2–specific T cells could be robustly maintained in convalescent patients, and their number was positively correlated with both nAb titers and anti–receptor-binding domain levels. Amplified SARS-CoV-2–specific CD4⁺ T cells mainly produced a single cytokine, accompanying with increased expression of exhaustion markers including PD-1, Tim-3, TIGIT, CTLA-4, and CD39, while the proportion of multifunctional cells was low.

Conclusions

Robust SARS-CoV-2–specific humoral and cellular responses are maintained in convalescent patients with COVID-19 at 1 year postinfection. However, the dysfunction of SARS-CoV-2–specific CD4⁺ T cells supports the notion that vaccination is needed in convalescent patients for preventing reinfection.

Development of a Smartphone-Based Nanozyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay for Quantitative Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Phosphoprotein in Blood

Since December 2019, a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in a global pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Although viral nucleic acid test (NAT) has been applied predominantly to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA for confirmation diagnosis of COVID-19, an urgent need for alternative, rapid, and sensitive immunoassays is required for primary screening of virus. In this study, we developed a smartphone-based nanozyme-linked immunosorbent assay (SP-NLISA) for detecting the specific nucleocapsid phosphoprotein (NP) of SARS-CoV-2 in 37 serum samples from 20 COVID-19 patients who were diagnosed by NAT previously. By using SP-NLISA, 28/37 (75.7%) serum samples were detected for NP antigens and no cross-reactivity with blood donors' control samples collected from different areas of China. In a control assay using the conventional enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), only 7/37 (18.91%) serum samples were detected for NP antigens and no cross-reactivity with control samples. SP-NLISA could be used for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 NP antigen in primary screening of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals.

Physical health complaints among healthcare workers engaged in the care of critically ill COVID-19 patients: A single tertiary-care center prospective study from Japan

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers (HCWs) who manage patients with the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at an increased risk and fear of contracting the infection themselves. Hospitals must reduce both the physical and mental burden of HCWs on the front lines and ensure their safety. No prospective study has focused on the physical health complaints among HCWs engaged in the care of critically ill COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of various physical symptoms experienced by HCWs following their exposure to COVID-19 patients and investigate the association between occupation and the manifestation of physical symptoms among HCWs at a tertiary hospital in Japan during the current ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A twice-weekly questionnaire targeting HCWs who care for COVID-19 patients was performed at Osaka City University Hospital from April 30 to May 31, 2020. The demographic characteristics of the participants, frequency of exposure to at-risk care, and physical complaints were evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventy-six HCWs participated in this study, of whom 24 (31.6%) were doctors, 43 (56.6%) were nurses, and 9 (11.8%) were technicians. The frequency of experiencing any physical symptom was 25.0% among HCWs. Exposure to at-risk care was significantly higher among nurses than among doctors (p < 0.001). Notably, the frequency of physical symptoms among the nurses was very high at 39.5% and obviously higher than that of physical symptoms among the doctors (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that hospital occupational health care must be provided to HCWs who are engaged in the care of COVID-19 patients and are thus highly exposed to at-risk care.

Antibody profile in symptomatic/asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected Saudi persons

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected persons could be symptomatic or asymptomatic. Asymptomatic and symptomatic patients can transmit SARS-CoV-2. This study aimed to study the humoral immune response in Saudis who are Covid-19 symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. We created three types of enzyme-linked immunosorbant assays (ELISAs) to reveal IgG and IgM antibodies (Abs) against SARS-CoV-2. The developed ELISAs were designed to detect Abs against SARS-CoV-2 N, S and N + S proteins. A number of Covid-19 symptomatic (1 5 3) and asymptomatic (84) RT-PCR-confirmed patient sera were used to evaluate the ELISAs and to determine the IgG and IgM antibody profile in those patients. The sensitivity and specificity of these ELISAs were evaluated using pre-Covid-19 pandemic serum samples. The results revealed the existence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM Abs in Covid-19 symptomatic and asymptomatic Saudi persons. The use of SARS-CoV-2 N and S proteins in the same ELISA greatly increased the detectability of infection. In conclusion, the Covid-19 symptomatic and asymptomatic Saudi persons demonstrated both IgG and IgM antibody profile with higher titer in symptomatic patients. The use of N + S proteins as antibody capture antigens greatly increased the ELISA sensitivity.

Key Considerations for the Development of Safe and Effective SARS-CoV-2 Subunit Vaccine: A Peptide-Based Vaccine Alternative

COVID-19 is disastrous to global health and the economy. SARS-CoV-2 infection exhibits similar clinical symptoms and immunopathological sequelae to SARS-CoV infection. Therefore, much of the developmental progress on SARS-CoV vaccines can be utilized for the development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Careful antigen selection during development is always of utmost importance for the production of effective vaccines that do not compromise recipient safety. This holds especially true for SARS-CoV vaccines, as several immunopathological disorders are associated with the activity of structural and nonstructural proteins encoded in the virus's genetic material. Whole viral protein and RNA-encoding full-length proteins contain both protective and "dangerous" sequences, unless pathological fragments are deleted. In light of recent advances, peptide vaccines may present a very safe and effective alternative. Peptide vaccines can avoid immunopathological pro-inflammatory sequences, focus immune responses on neutralizing immunogenic epitopes, avoid off-target antigen loss, combine antigens with different protective roles or mechanisms, even from different viral proteins, and avoid mutant escape by employing highly conserved cryptic epitopes. In this review, an attempt is made to exploit the similarities between SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 in vaccine antigen screening, with particular attention to the pathological and immunogenic properties of SARS proteins.

Longitudinal Follow-up of Antibody Responses in Pediatric Patients With COVID-19 up to 9 Months After Infection

INTRODUCTION

Antibody response developed within 2-3 weeks after exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been shown to decrease over time; however, there is limited data about antibody levels at 6 months or later postinfection, particularly in children.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

A prospective multicenter study was performed using 315 samples of 74 confirmed and 10 probable coronavirus disease 2019 pediatric cases. About 20% of these cases were classified as asymptomatic, 74% as mild/moderate and 6% as severe/critical. Patients were included if at least 2 samples were available. The antibody response was classified as either early-period or late-period (14 days-3 months and after 6 months, respectively) for IgG response whereas IgA response was tested on various time intervals, including as early as 4 days up to 3 months. Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA and Genscript SARS-CoV-2 Surrogate Virus Neutralization Kits were used for antibody detection.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the early-period and late-period IgG positivity (P = 0.1). However, the median IgG levels were 11.98 in the early periods and 4.05 in the late periods, with a significance of P < 0.001. Although the decrease in IgG levels was significant in asymptomatic and mild/moderate cases (P < 0.008 and P < 0.001, respectively), the decrease in severe/critical cases was moderate (P = 0.285). The sensitivity of the IgG after 15 days was higher than 94%, and the sensitivity of IgA was 88% on days 8-15.

CONCLUSION

SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels decreased after 6 months. The decrease was moderate in severe/critical cases. Overall, 95.8% of the patients remained positive up to 9 months after infection. Although the IgA response may be useful early on, the IgG response is useful after 14 days.

Segmentation and shielding of the most vulnerable members of the population as elements of an exit strategy from COVID-19 lockdown

This study demonstrates that an adoption of a segmenting and shielding strategy could increase the scope to partially exit COVID-19 lockdown while limiting the risk of an overwhelming second wave of infection. We illustrate this using a mathematical model that segments the vulnerable population and their closest contacts, the 'shielders'. Effects of extending the duration of lockdown and faster or slower transition to post-lockdown conditions and, most importantly, the trade-off between increased protection of the vulnerable segment and fewer restrictions on the general population are explored. Our study shows that the most important determinants of outcome are: (i) post-lockdown transmission rates within the general and between the general and vulnerable segments; (ii) fractions of the population in the vulnerable and shielder segments; (iii) adherence to protective measures; and (iv) build-up of population immunity. Additionally, we found that effective measures in the shielder segment, e.g. intensive routine screening, allow further relaxations in the general population. We find that the outcome of any future policy is strongly influenced by the contact matrix between segments and the relationships between physical distancing measures and transmission rates. This strategy has potential applications for any infectious disease for which there are defined proportions of the population who cannot be treated or who are at risk of severe outcomes. This article is part of the theme issue 'Modelling that shaped the early COVID-19 pandemic response in the UK'.

Sero-surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare providers in four hospitals in Thailand one year after the first community outbreak

BACKGROUND

Thailand was the first country outside China to report SARS-CoV-2 infected cases. Since the detection of the first imported case on January 12th, 2020 to the time this report was written, Thailand experienced two waves of community outbreaks (March-April 2020 and December 2020-March 2021). We examined prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare providers (HCPs) in four hospitals approximately one year after SARS-CoV-2 first detected in Thailand. By March 2021, these hospitals have treated a total of 709 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.

METHODS

Blood specimens, collected from COVID-19 unvaccinated HCPs during January-March 2021, were tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to nucleocapsid (IgG-nucleocapsid) and spike (IgG-spike) proteins using Euroimmune® enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.

RESULTS

Of 600 HCPs enrolled, 1 (0.2%) tested positive for the SARS-CoV-2 IgG-spike antibodies, but not the IgG-nucleocapsid.

CONCLUSION

The presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies was rare in this sample of HCPs, suggesting that this population remains susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Rapid immunoassay and clinical evaluation of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody assay on the real express-6 analyzer

We developed a rapid and simple magnetic chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay on the Real Express‐6 analyzer, which could simultaneously detect immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M antibodies against SARS‐CoV‐2 virus in human blood within 18 min, and which could be used to detect clinical studies to verify its clinical efficacy. We selected blood samples from 185 COVID‐19 patients confirmed by polymerase chain reaction and 271 negative patients to determine the clinical detection sensitivity, specificity, stability, and precision of this method. Meanwhile, we also surveyed the dynamic variance of viral antibodies during SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. This rapid immunoassay test has huge potential benefits for rapid screening of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and may help clinical drug and vaccine development.

We have developed an immunoluminescencemethod that can detect immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M antibodies againstSARS‐CoV‐2 virus.

This detection method cansimultaneously detect IgG and IgM against SARS‐CoV‐2 virus within 18 minutes.

This detection method has highsensitivity, stability and precision, and its specificity is higher than thatof colloidal gold. The dynamic variance of antibodiesdetected by this detection method can be consistent with the clinical CTresults, and can be used as a reference.

Recovery scenario and immunity in COVID-19 disease: A new strategy to predict the potential of reinfection

Background

The recent ongoing outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), still is an unsolved problem with a growing rate of infected cases and mortality worldwide. The novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is targeting the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor and mostly causes a respiratory illness. Although acquired and resistance immunity is one of the most important aspects of alleviating the trend of the current pandemic; however, there is still a big gap of knowledge regarding the infection process, immunopathogenesis, recovery, and reinfection.

Aim of Review

To answer the questions regarding "the potential and probability of reinfection in COVID-19 infected cases" or "the efficiency and duration of SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced immunity against reinfection" we critically evaluated the current reports on SARS-CoV-2 immunity and reinfection with special emphasis on comparative studies using animal models that generalize their finding about protection and reinfection. Also, the contribution of humoral immunity in the process of COVID-19 recovery and the role of ACE2 in virus infectivity and pathogenesis has been discussed. Furthermore, innate and cellular immunity and inflammatory responses in the disease and recovery conditions are reviewed and an overall outline of immunologic aspects of COVID-19 progression and recovery in three different stages are presented. Finally, we categorized the infected cases into four different groups based on the acquired immunity and the potential for reinfection.

Key Scientific Concepts of Review

In this review paper, we proposed a new strategy to predict the potential of reinfection in each identified category. This classification may help to distribute resources more meticulously to determine: who needs to be serologically tested for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies, what percentage of the population is immune to the virus, and who needs to be vaccinated.

Comparison of three serological chemiluminescence immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2, and clinical significance of antibody index with disease severity

Background

The clinical significance of the quantitative value of antibodies in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains mostly unidentified. We investigated the dynamics and clinical implications of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody over time using three automated chemiluminescence immunoassays targeting either nucleocapsids or spikes.

Methods

A total of 126 specimens were collected from 23 patients with confirmed and indeterminate COVID-19 identified by molecular tests. SARS-CoV-2 antibody index was measured using SARS-CoV2 IgG reagent from Alinity (Abbott) and Access (Beckman Coulter) and SARS-CoV2 Total (IgG + IgM) from Atellica (Siemens).

Results

Three immunoassays showed strong correlations with each other (range of Pearson’ s correlation coefficient (r) = 0.700–0.854, P < 0.001). Eleven (8.7%) specimens showed inconsistencies. SARS-CoV-2 IgG showed a statistically significantly higher value in patients with severe disease than that in non-severe disease patients (P < 0.001) and was significantly associated with clinical markers of disease severity.

Conclusion

The quantitative value of the SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody measured using automated immunoassays is a significant indicator of clinical severity in patients with COVID-19.