Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 and Failure of Humoral Immunity: a case report

Mouse models in COVID-19 research: analyzing the adaptive immune response

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 causing the COVID-19 pandemic, resulted in a major necessity for scientific countermeasures. Investigations revealing the exact mechanisms of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis provide the basis for the development of therapeutic measures and protective vaccines against COVID-19. Animal models are inevitable for infection and pre-clinical vaccination studies as well as therapeutic testing. A well-suited animal model, mimicking the pathology seen in human COVID-19 patients, is an important basis for these investigations. Several animal models were already used during SARS-CoV-2 studies with different clinical outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here, we give an overview of different animal models used in SARS-CoV-2 infection studies with a focus on the mouse model. Mice provide a well-established animal model for laboratory use and several different mouse models have been generated and are being used in SARS-CoV-2 studies. Furthermore, the analysis of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells during infection and in vaccination studies in mice is highlighted.

Refocus on Immunogenic Characteristics of Convalescent COVID-19 Challenged by Prototype SARS-CoV-2

Background: Mass basic and booster immunization programs effectively contained the spread of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, also known as COVID-19. However, the emerging Variants of Concern (VOCs) of COVID-19 evade the immune protection of the vaccine and increase the risk of reinfection. Methods: Serum antibodies of 384 COVID-19 cases recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection were examined. Correlations between clinical symptoms and antibodies against VOCs were analyzed. Result: All 384 cases (aged 43, range 1−90) were from 15 cities of Guangdong, China. The specific IgA, IgG, and IgM antibodies could be detected within 4−6 weeks after infection. A broad cross-reaction between SARS-CoV-2 and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus, but not with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus was found. The titers of neutralization antibodies (NAbs) were significantly correlated with IgG (r = 0.667, p < 0.001), but showed poor neutralizing effects against VOCs. Age, fever, and hormone therapy were independent risk factors for NAbs titers reduction against VOCs. Conclusion: Humoral immunity antibodies from the original strain of COVID-19 showed weak neutralization effects against VOCs, and decreased neutralizing ability was associated with initial age, fever, and hormone therapy, which hindered the effects of the COVID-19 vaccine developed from the SARS-CoV-2 prototype virus.

Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 and Waning Humoral Immunity: A Case Report

Recovery from COVID-19 is associated with production of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, but it is uncertain whether these confer immunity. We describe viral RNA shedding duration in hospitalized patients and identify patients with recurrent shedding. We sequenced viruses from two distinct episodes of symptomatic COVID-19 separated by 144 days in a single patient, to conclusively describe reinfection with a different strain harboring the spike variant D614G. This case of reinfection was one of the first cases of reinfection reported in 2020. With antibody, B cell and T cell analytics, we show correlates of adaptive immunity at reinfection, including a differential response in neutralizing antibodies to a D614G pseudovirus. Finally, we discuss implications for vaccine programs and begin to define benchmarks for protection against reinfection from SARS-CoV-2.

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aims to synthesize global evidence on the risk of reinfection among people previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science as of April 5, 2021. We conducted: (1) meta-analysis of cohort studies containing data sufficient for calculating the incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection; (2) systematic review of case reports with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases. The reinfection incidence was pooled by zero-inflated beta distribution. The hazard ratio (HR) between reinfection incidence among previously infected individuals and new infection incidence among infection-naïve individuals was calculated using random-effects models. Of 906 records retrieved and reviewed, 11 studies and 11 case reports were included in the meta-analysis and the systematic review, respectively. The pooled SARS-CoV-2 reinfection incidence rate was 0.70 (standard deviation [SD] 0.33) per 10,000 person-days. The incidence of reinfection was lower than the incidence of new infection (HR = 0.12, 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.17). Our meta-analysis of studies conducted prior to the emergency of the more transmissible Omicron variant showed that people with a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection could be re-infected, and they have a lower risk of infection than those without prior infection. Continuing reviews are needed as the reinfection risk may change due to the rapid evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants.

A retrospective cross-sectional observational study of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in La Ribera Health Department, Valencia, Spain

Introduction. The possibility of reinfection by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a widely proven fact and may have clinical implications.

Hypothesis /Gap Statement. It is not known whether there have been cases of reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 in La Ribera Health Department.

Aim. To determine whether there have been cases of reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 in La Ribera Health Department and to identify their characteristics.

Methodology. Retrospective cross-sectional observational study of cases of reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 in the population of La Ribera Department between March 2020 and February 2021. The positive baseline cohort includes all cases positive by RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2, with reinfection cases being those that, after resolution of the first episode according to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, presented a new positive RT-PCR result.

Results. Out of a total of 15 687 cases with positive RT-PCR, 40 were considered to be reinfections, which meant a cumulative incidence of 0.255 % and an incidence density of 5.05 cases per 100 000 person-days. Most of the cases occurred during the highest incidence peaks of the pandemic in the department. Seventy-five per cent of the patients in these cases were older than 40 years, 42.5 % were healthcare professionals or nursing home residents and 12.5 % had an immunosuppressive comorbidity. There were no severe, critical or death cases. In the reinfection episodes, with respect to the first episode, there was a tendency to be milder, they required fewer days of hospitalization, their RT-PCR became negative earlier, they developed a greater humoral response and the sick leave period was shorter. The median period between the RT-PCR in the first episode and the RT-PCR in the second episode was 127.5 days (range: 48–301; IQR: 89.5–256.25)

Conclusions. SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases are rare, tend to be mild and can occur within a median period of 127.5 days.

Does potential antibody-dependent enhancement occur during SARS-CoV-2 infection after natural infection or vaccination? A meta-analysis

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to constitute an international public health emergency. Vaccination is a prospective approach to control this pandemic. However, apprehension about the safety of vaccines is a major obstacle to vaccination. Amongst health professionals, one evident concern is the risk of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), which may increase the severity of COVID-19. To explore whether ADE occurs in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and increase confidence in the safety of vaccination, we conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the relationship between post-immune infection and disease severity from a population perspective. Databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, SinoMed, Scopus, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library, were searched for articles on SARS-CoV-2 reinfection published until 25 October 2021. The papers were reviewed for methodological quality, and a random effects model was used to analyse the results. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Publication bias was evaluated using a funnel plot and Egger's test. Eleven studies were included in the final meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated that initial infection and vaccination were protective factors against severe COVID-19 during post-immune infection (OR = 0.55, 95%CI = 0.31-0.98). A subgroup (post-immune infection after natural infection or vaccination) analysis showed similar results. Primary SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination provide adequate protection against severe clinical symptoms after post-immune infection. This finding demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2 may not trigger ADE at the population level.

A comparison between SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV2: an update on current COVID-19 vaccines

Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China, many health care systems have been heavily engaged in treating and preventing the disease, and the year 2020 may be called as “historic COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough”. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many companies have initiated investigations on developing an efficient and safe vaccine against the virus. From Moderna and Pfizer in the United States to PastocoVac in Pasteur Institute of Iran and the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom, different candidates have been introduced to the market. COVID-19 vaccine research has been facilitated based on genome and structural information, bioinformatics predictions, epitope mapping, and data obtained from the previous developments of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-1) and middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) vaccine candidates. SARS-CoV genome sequence is highly homologous to the one in COVID-19 and both viruses use the same receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Moreover, the immune system responds to these viruses, partially in the same way. Considering the on-going COVID-19 pandemic and previous attempts to manufacture SARS-CoV vaccines, this paper is going to discuss clinical cases as well as vaccine challenges, including those related to infrastructures, transportation, possible adverse reactions, utilized delivery systems (e.g., nanotechnology and electroporation) and probable vaccine-induced mutations.

Clinical and epidemiological features of patients with COVID-19 reinfection: a systematic review

Recurrent positivity in a patient with COVID-19 may be due to various reasons, not necessarily reinfection. There is concern about the occurrence frequency of reinfection. Five databases and a preprint/preprint repository were searched. All case reports, case series, and observational studies were included. Bias was assessed for each study with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tool and reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA-2020). After eligibility, 77 studies were included for qualitative synthesis (52 case reports, 21 case series, and four case-controls; 1131 patients included). Of these, 16 studies described a second contact with the SARS-CoV-2 positive case, five studies described healthcare profession-related infection, ten studies described that the source of reinfection was likely to be from the community, one study described travel-related infection, nine studies described vulnerability-related infection due to comorbidity. The mean number of days from discharge or negative test to reinfection ranged from 23.3 to 57.6 days across the different included studies. The risk of bias for all case report/series studies was moderate/high. For observational studies, the risk of bias was low. Reinfection of patients with COVID-19 occurs between the first and second month after the first infection, but beyond, and 90 days have been proposed as a point to begin to consider it. The main factor for reinfection is contact with COVID-19 positive cases.

An Update on Protective Effectiveness of Immune Responses After Recovery From COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exhibits variable immunity responses among hosts based on symptom severity. Whether immunity in recovered individuals is effective for avoiding reinfection is poorly understood. Determination of immune memory status against SARS-CoV-2 helps identify reinfection risk and vaccine efficacy. Hence, after recovery from COVID-19, evaluation of protective effectiveness and durable immunity of prior disease could be significant. Recent reports described the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 -specific humoral and cellular responses for more than six months in convalescent SARS-CoV-2 individuals. Given the current evidence, NK cell subpopulations, especially the memory-like NK cell subset, indicate a significant role in determining COVID-19 severity. Still, the information on the long-term NK cell immunity conferred by SARS-CoV-2 infection is scant. The evidence from vaccine clinical trials and observational studies indicates that hybrid natural/vaccine immunity to SARS-CoV-2 seems to be notably potent protection. We suggested the combination of plasma therapy from recovered donors and vaccination could be effective. This focused review aims to update the current information regarding immune correlates of COVID-19 recovery to understand better the probability of reinfection in COVID-19 infected cases that may serve as guides for ongoing vaccine strategy improvement.

Reinfection in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

With the continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic, some COVID-19 patients have become reinfected with the virus. Viral gene sequencing has found that some of these patients were reinfected by the different and others by same strains. This has raised concerns about the effectiveness of immunity after infection and the reliability of vaccines. To this end, we conducted a systematic review to assess the characteristics of patients with reinfection and possible causes.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across eight databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VIP and SinoMed from December 1, 2019 to September 1, 2021. The quality of included studies were assessed using JBI critical appraisal tools and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

This study included 50 studies from 20 countries. There were 118 cases of reinfection. Twenty-five patients were reported to have at least one complication. The shortest duration between the first infection and reinfection was 19 days and the longest was 293 days. During the first infection and reinfection, cough (51.6% and 43.9%) and fever (50% and 30.3%) were the most common symptoms respectively. Nine patients recovered, seven patients died, and five patients were hospitalized, but 97 patients' prognosis were unknown. B.1 is the most common variant strain at the first infection. B.1.1.7, B.1.128 and B.1.351 were the most common variant strains at reinfection. Thirty-three patients were infected by different strains and 9 patients were reported as being infected with the same strain.

CONCLUSIONS

Our research shows that it is possible for rehabilitated patients to be reinfected by SARS-COV-2. To date, the causes and risk factors of COVID-19 reinfection are not fully understood. For patients with reinfection, the diagnosis and management should be consistent with the treatment of the first infection. The public, including rehabilitated patients, should be fully vaccinated, wear masks in public places, and pay attention to maintaining social distance to avoid reinfection with the virus.

Progress and Challenges Toward Generation and Maintenance of Long-Lived Memory T Lymphocyte Responses During COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a serious global threat until we identify the effective preventive and therapeutic strategies. SARS-CoV-2 infection is characterized by various immunopathological consequences including lymphocyte activation and dysfunction, lymphopenia, cytokine storm, increased level of neutrophils, and depletion and exhaustion of lymphocytes. Considering the low level of antibody-mediated protection during coronavirus infection, understanding the role of T cell for long-term protection is decisive. Both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cell response is imperative for cell-mediated immune response during COVID-19. However, the level of CD8⁺ T cell response reduced to almost half as compared to CD4⁺ after 6 months of infection. The long-term protection is mediated via generation of immunological memory response during COVID-19. The presence of memory CD4⁺ T cells in all the severely infected and recovered individuals shows that the memory response is predominated by CD4⁺ T cells. Prominently, the antigen-specific CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells are specifically observed during day 0 to day 28 in COVID-19-vaccinated individuals. However, level of antigen-specific T memory cells in COVID-19-vaccinated individuals defines the long-term protection against forthcoming outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2.

COVID-19 reinfections among naturally infected and vaccinated individuals

The protection against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants by pre-existing antibodies elicited due to the current vaccination or natural infection is a global concern. We aimed to investigate the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection and its clinical features among infection-naïve, infected, vaccinated, and post-infection-vaccinated individuals. A cohort was designed among icddr,b staff registered for COVID-19 testing by real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). Reinfection cases were confirmed by whole-genome sequencing. From 19 March 2020 to 31 March 2021, 1644 (mean age, 38.4 years and 57% male) participants were enrolled; where 1080 (65.7%) were tested negative and added to the negative cohort. The positive cohort included 750 positive patients (564 from baseline and 186 from negative cohort follow-up), of whom 27.6% were hospitalized and 2.5% died. Among hospitalized patients, 45.9% had severe to critical disease and 42.5% required oxygen support. Hypertension and diabetes mellitus were found significantly higher among the hospitalised patients compared to out-patients; risk ratio 1.3 and 1.6 respectively. The risk of infection among positive cohort was 80.2% lower than negative cohort (95% CI 72.6-85.7%; p < 0.001). Genome sequences showed that genetically distinct SARS-CoV-2 strains were responsible for reinfections. Naturally infected populations were less likely to be reinfected by SARS-CoV-2 than the infection-naïve and vaccinated individuals. Although, reinfected individuals did not suffer severe disease, a remarkable proportion of naturally infected or vaccinated individuals were (re)-infected by the emerging variants.

Complete Analysis of the Epidemiological Scenario around a SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection: Previous Infection Events and Subsequent Transmission

The first descriptions of reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 have been recently reported. However, these studies focus exclusively on the reinfected case, without considering the epidemiological context of the event. Our objectives were to perform a complete analysis of the sequential infections and community transmission events around a SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, including the infection events preceding it, the exposure, and subsequent transmissions. Our analysis was supported by host genetics, viral whole-genome sequencing, phylogenomic viral population analysis, and refined epidemiological data obtained from interviews with the involved subjects. The reinfection involved a 53-year-old woman with asthma (Case A), with a first COVID-19 episode in April 2020 and a much more severe second episode 4-1/2 months later, with SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion in August, that required hospital admission. An extended genomic analysis allowed us to demonstrate that the strain involved in Case A's reinfection was circulating in the epidemiological context of Case A and was also transmitted subsequently from Case A to her family context. The reinfection was also supported by a phylogenetic analysis, including 348 strains from Madrid, which revealed that the strain involved in the reinfection was circulating by the time Case A suffered the second episode, August-September 2020, but absent at the time range corresponding to Case A's first episode. IMPORTANCE We present the first complete analysis of the epidemiological scenario around a reinfection by SARS-CoV-2, more severe than the first episode, including three cases preceding the reinfection, the reinfected case per se, and the subsequent transmission to another seven cases.

Complete Analysis of the Epidemiological Scenario around a SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection: Previous Infection Events and Subsequent Transmission

The first descriptions of reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 have been recently reported. However, these studies focus exclusively on the reinfected case, without considering the epidemiological context of the event. Our objectives were to perform a complete analysis of the sequential infections and community transmission events around a SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, including the infection events preceding it, the exposure, and subsequent transmissions. Our analysis was supported by host genetics, viral whole-genome sequencing, phylogenomic viral population analysis, and refined epidemiological data obtained from interviews with the involved subjects. The reinfection involved a 53-year-old woman with asthma (Case A), with a first COVID-19 episode in April 2020 and a much more severe second episode 4-1/2 months later, with SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion in August, that required hospital admission. An extended genomic analysis allowed us to demonstrate that the strain involved in Case A's reinfection was circulating in the epidemiological context of Case A and was also transmitted subsequently from Case A to her family context. The reinfection was also supported by a phylogenetic analysis, including 348 strains from Madrid, which revealed that the strain involved in the reinfection was circulating by the time Case A suffered the second episode, August-September 2020, but absent at the time range corresponding to Case A's first episode. IMPORTANCE We present the first complete analysis of the epidemiological scenario around a reinfection by SARS-CoV-2, more severe than the first episode, including three cases preceding the reinfection, the reinfected case per se, and the subsequent transmission to another seven cases.

SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection Is a New Challenge for the Effectiveness of Global Vaccination Campaign: A Systematic Review of Cases Reported in Literature

Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 seems to be a rare phenomenon. The objective of this study is to carry out a systematic search of literature on the SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in order to understand the success of the global vaccine campaigns. A systematic search was performed. Inclusion criteria included a positive RT-PCR test of more than 90 days after the initial test and the confirmed recovery or a positive RT-PCR test of more than 45 days after the initial test that is accompanied by compatible symptoms or epidemiological exposure, naturally after the confirmed recovery. Only 117 articles were included in the final review with 260 confirmed cases. The severity of the reinfection episode was more severe in 92/260 (35.3%) with death only in 14 cases. The observation that many reinfection cases were less severe than initial cases is interesting because it may suggest partial protection from disease. Another interesting line of data is the detection of different clades or lineages by genome sequencing between initial infection and reinfection in 52/260 cases (20%). The findings are useful and contribute towards the role of vaccination in response to the COVID-19 infections. Due to the reinfection cases with SARS-CoV-2, it is evident that the level of immunity is not 100% for all individuals. These data highlight how it is necessary to continue to observe all the prescriptions recently indicated in the literature in order to avoid new contagion for all people after healing from COVID-19 or becoming asymptomatic positive.

SARS-CoV-2 and approaches for a testing and diagnostic strategy

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented global health challenge, creating sudden, massive demands for diagnostic testing, treatment, therapies, and vaccines. In particular, the development of diagnostic assays for SARS-CoV-2 has been pursued as they are needed for quarantine, disease surveillance, and patient treatment. One of the major lessons the pandemic highlighted was the need for fast, cheap, scalable and reliable diagnostic methods, such as paper-based assays. Furthermore, it has previously been suggested that paper-based tests may be more suitable for settings with lower resource availability and may help alleviate some supply chain challenges which arose during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we explore how such devices may fit in a comprehensive diagnostic strategy and how some of the challenges to the technology, e.g. low sensitivity, may be addressed. We discuss the properties of the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself, the COVID-19 disease pathway, and the immune response. We then describe the different diagnostic strategies that have been pursued, focusing on molecular strategies for viral genetic material, antigen tests, and serological assays, and innovations for improving the diagnostic sensitivity and capabilities. Finally, we discuss pressing issues for the future, and what needs to be addressed for the ongoing pandemic and future outbreaks.

Postinfectious Immunity After COVID-19 and Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2

Early results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are highly effective for the prevention of COVID-19. Unfortunately, until we can safely, rapidly, and affordably vaccinate enough people to achieve collective immunity, we cannot afford to disregard the benefits of naturally acquired immunity in those, whose prior documented infections have already run their course. As long as the vaccine manufacturing, supply, or administration are limited in capacity, vaccination of individuals with naturally acquired immunity at the expense of others without any immune protection is inherently inequitable, and violates the principle of justice in biomedical ethics. Any preventable disease acquired during the period of such unnecessary delay in vaccination should not be overlooked, as it may and will result in some additional morbidity, mortality, related hospitalizations, and expense. Low vaccine production capacity complicated by inefficiencies in vaccine administration suggests, that vaccinating preferentially those without any prior protection will result in fewer natural infections more rapidly.

Complexities in Case Definition of SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection: Clinical Evidence and Implications in COVID-19 Surveillance and Diagnosis

Reinfection cases have been reported in some countries with clinical symptoms ranging from mild to severe. In addition to clinical diagnosis, virus genome sequence from the first and second infection has to be confirmed to either belong to separate clades or had significant mutations for the confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. While phylogenetic analysis with paired specimens offers the strongest evidence for reinfection, there remains concerns on the definition of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, for reasons including accessibility to paired-samples and technical challenges in phylogenetic analysis. In light of the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants that are associated with increased transmissibility and immune-escape further understanding of COVID-19 protective immunity, real-time surveillance directed at identifying COVID-19 transmission patterns, transmissibility of emerging variants and clinical implications of reinfection would be important in addressing the challenges in definition of COVID-19 reinfection and understanding the true disease burden.

Prolonged presence of replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 in mildly symptomatic individuals: A report of two cases

It has been estimated that individuals with COVID-19 can shed replication-competent virus up to a maximum of 20 days after initiation of symptoms. The majority of studies that addressed this situation involved hospitalized individuals and those with severe disease. Studies to address the possible presence of SARS-CoV-2 during the different phases of COVID-19 disease in mildly infected individuals, and utilization of viral culture techniques to identify replication-competent viruses, have been limited. This report describes two patients with mild forms of the disease who shed replication-competent virus for 24 and 37 days, respectively, after symptom onset.

COVID-19 false dichotomies and a comprehensive review of the evidence regarding public health, COVID-19 symptomatology, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, mask wearing, and reinfection

Scientists across disciplines, policymakers, and journalists have voiced frustration at the unprecedented polarization and misinformation around coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Several false dichotomies have been used to polarize debates while oversimplifying complex issues. In this comprehensive narrative review, we deconstruct six common COVID-19 false dichotomies, address the evidence on these topics, identify insights relevant to effective pandemic responses, and highlight knowledge gaps and uncertainties. The topics of this review are: 1) Health and lives vs. economy and livelihoods, 2) Indefinite lockdown vs. unlimited reopening, 3) Symptomatic vs. asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, 4) Droplet vs. aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, 5) Masks for all vs. no masking, and 6) SARS-CoV-2 reinfection vs. no reinfection. We discuss the importance of multidisciplinary integration (health, social, and physical sciences), multilayered approaches to reducing risk ("Emmentaler cheese model"), harm reduction, smart masking, relaxation of interventions, and context-sensitive policymaking for COVID-19 response plans. We also address the challenges in understanding the broad clinical presentation of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. These key issues of science and public health policy have been presented as false dichotomies during the pandemic. However, they are hardly binary, simple, or uniform, and therefore should not be framed as polar extremes. We urge a nuanced understanding of the science and caution against black-or-white messaging, all-or-nothing guidance, and one-size-fits-all approaches. There is a need for meaningful public health communication and science-informed policies that recognize shades of gray, uncertainties, local context, and social determinants of health.

Ct threshold values, a proxy for viral load in community SARS-CoV-2 cases, demonstrate wide variation across populations and over time

Background

Information on SARS-CoV-2 in representative community surveillance is limited, particularly cycle threshold (Ct) values (a proxy for viral load).

Methods

We included all positive nose and throat swabs 26 April 2020 to 13 March 2021 from the UK's national COVID-19 Infection Survey, tested by RT-PCR for the N, S, and ORF1ab genes. We investigated predictors of median Ct value using quantile regression.

Results

Of 3,312,159 nose and throat swabs, 27,902 (0.83%) were RT-PCR-positive, 10,317 (37%), 11,012 (40%), and 6550 (23%) for 3, 2, or 1 of the N, S, and ORF1ab genes, respectively, with median Ct = 29.2 (~215 copies/ml; IQR Ct = 21.9-32.8, 14-56,400 copies/ml). Independent predictors of lower Cts (i.e. higher viral load) included self-reported symptoms and more genes detected, with at most small effects of sex, ethnicity, and age. Single-gene positives almost invariably had Ct > 30, but Cts varied widely in triple-gene positives, including without symptoms. Population-level Cts changed over time, with declining Ct preceding increasing SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Of 6189 participants with IgG S-antibody tests post-first RT-PCR-positive, 4808 (78%) were ever antibody-positive; Cts were significantly higher in those remaining antibody negative.

Conclusions

Marked variation in community SARS-CoV-2 Ct values suggests that they could be a useful epidemiological early-warning indicator.

Funding

Department of Health and Social Care, National Institutes of Health Research, Huo Family Foundation, Medical Research Council UK; Wellcome Trust.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines Based on the Spike Glycoprotein and Implications of New Viral Variants

Coronavirus 19 Disease (COVID-19) originating in the province of Wuhan, China in 2019, is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2), whose infection in humans causes mild or severe clinical manifestations that mainly affect the respiratory system. So far, the COVID-19 has caused more than 2 million deaths worldwide. SARS-CoV-2 contains the Spike (S) glycoprotein on its surface, which is the main target for current vaccine development because antibodies directed against this protein can neutralize the infection. Companies and academic institutions have developed vaccines based on the S glycoprotein, as well as its antigenic domains and epitopes, which have been proven effective in generating neutralizing antibodies. However, the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants could affect the effectiveness of vaccines. Here, we review the different types of vaccines designed and developed against SARS-CoV-2, placing emphasis on whether they are based on the complete S glycoprotein, its antigenic domains such as the receptor-binding domain (RBD) or short epitopes within the S glycoprotein. We also review and discuss the possible effectiveness of these vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Machine Learning and Geo-Based Multi-Criteria Decision Support Systems in Analysis of Complex Problems

Many complex problems require a multi-criteria decision, such as the COVID-19 pandemic that affected nearly all activities in the world. In this regard, this study aims to develop a multi-criteria decision support system considering the sustainability, feasibility, and success rate of possible approaches. Therefore, two models have been developed: Geo-AHP (applying geo-based data) and BN-Geo-AHP using probabilistic techniques (Bayesian network). The ranking method of Geo-APH is generalized, and the equations are provided in a way that adding new elements and variables would be possible by experts. Then, to improve the ranking, the application of the probabilistic technique of a Bayesian network and the role of machine learning for database and weight of each parameter are explained, and the model of BN-Geo-APH has been developed. In the next step, to show the application of the developed Geo-AHP and BN-Geo-AHP models, we selected the new pandemic of COVID-19 that affected nearly all activities, and we used both models for analysis. For this purpose, we first analyzed the available data about COVID-19 and previous studies about similar virus infections, and then we ranked the main approaches and alternatives in confronting the pandemic of COVID-19. The analysis of approaches with the selected alternatives shows the first ranked approach is massive vaccination and the second ranked is massive swabs or other tests. The third is the use of medical masks and gloves, and the last ranked is the lockdown, mostly due to its major negative impact on the economy and individuals.

Insights into SARS-CoV-2 Persistence and Its Relevance

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), continues to wreak havoc, threatening the public health services and imposing economic collapse worldwide. Tailoring public health responses to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic depends on understanding the mechanism of viral replication, disease pathogenesis, accurately identifying acute infections, and mapping the spreading risk of hotspots across the globe. However, effective identification and isolation of persons with asymptomatic and mild SARS-CoV-2 infections remain the major obstacles to efforts in controlling the SARS-CoV-2 spread and hence the pandemic. Understanding the mechanism of persistent viral shedding, reinfection, and the post-acute sequalae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) is crucial in our efforts to combat the pandemic and provide better care and rehabilitation to survivors. Here, we present a living literature review (January 2020 through 15 March 2021) on SARS-CoV-2 viral persistence, reinfection, and PASC. We also highlight potential areas of research to uncover putative links between viral persistence, intra-host evolution, host immune status, and protective immunity to guide and direct future basic science and clinical research priorities.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies Testing in Recipients of COVID-19 Vaccination: Why, When, and How?

Although universal vaccination is one of the most important healthcare strategies for limiting SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) circulation and averting the huge number of hospitalizations and deaths due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), significant inter-individual variability of COVID-19 vaccines' efficacies has been described, mostly due to heterogeneous immune response in recipients. This opinion paper hence aims to discuss aspects related to the opportunity of monitoring anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies before and after COVID-19 vaccination, highlighting the pros and cons of this strategy. In summary, the advantages of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies' testing in recipients of COVID-19 vaccination encompass an assessment of baseline seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in non-vaccinated individuals; early identification of low or non-responders to COVID-19 vaccination; and timely detection of faster decay of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels. In contrast, potential drawbacks to date include an unproven equivalence between anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer, neutralizing activity, and vaccine efficiency; the lack of cost-effective analyses of different testing strategies; the enormous volume of blood drawings and increase of laboratory workload that would be needed to support universal anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing. A potential solution entails the identification of cohorts to be prioritized for testing, including those at higher risk of being infected by variants of concern, those at higher risk of unfavorable disease progression, and subjects in whom vaccine immunogenicity may be expectedly lower and/or shorter.

SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection among Healthcare Workers in Mexico: Case Report and Literature Review

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been multiple questions regarding reinfections associated with SARS-CoV-2. Healthcare workers on duty, due to overexposure in environments where there are more cases of COVID-19, are more prone to become infected by this virus. Here, we report 4 cases that meet the definition of clinical reinfection by SARS-CoV-2, as well as a literature review on this subject; all occurred in healthcare workers in Acapulco Guerrero, Mexico who provide their services in a hospital that cares for patients with COVID-19. The time between the manifestation of the first and second infection for each case was 134, 129, 107 and 82 days, all patients presented symptomatology in both events. The time between remission of the first infection and onset of second infection was 108, 109, 78 and 67 days for each case, while the time to confirmation by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) between infections was 134, 124, 106 and 77 days. In two of the four cases the reinfection resulted in a more severe case, while in the remaining two cases the manifestation of symptoms and complications was similar to that presented in the first infection. Given this scenario, greater care is needed in the management of the pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 to protect healthcare workers and the general public from risks and complications caused by a possible reinfection by SARS-CoV-2.

A systematic review on the recurrence of SARS-CoV-2 virus: frequency, risk factors, and possible explanations

BACKGROUND

Since late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 which leads to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has caused thousands of deaths. There are some pieces of evidence that SARS-CoV-2 genome could be re-detectable in recovered patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review in the PubMed/Medline database to address the risk of SARS-CoV-2 recurrence. The last update was for 20 November 2020. Among the 1178 initially found articles, 66 met the inclusion criteria and were considered.

FINDINGS

In total, 1128 patients with at least one-time recurrence of SARS-CoV-2 were included. Recurrence rate has been reported between 2.3% and 21.4% in cohort studies, within a mean of 20 (ranged 1-98) days after discharge; younger patients are being affected more. Following the second course of disease, the disease severity decreased or remained unchanged in 97.3% while it increased in 2.6%. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM were positive in 11-95% and 58.8-100%, respectively. Based on the literature, three possibilities include reactivation of previous disease, reinfection with the same virus, and false negative, which have been discussed in details.

CONCLUSION

There is a relatively notable risk of disease recurrence in previously recovered patients, even those who are immunised against the virus. More studies are required to clarify the underlying cause of this phenomenon.

SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN)

BACKGROUND

Increased understanding of whether individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 are protected from future SARS-CoV-2 infection is an urgent requirement. We aimed to investigate whether antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were associated with a decreased risk of symptomatic and asymptomatic reinfection.

METHODS

A large, multicentre, prospective cohort study was done, with participants recruited from publicly funded hospitals in all regions of England. All health-care workers, support staff, and administrative staff working at hospitals who could remain engaged in follow-up for 12 months were eligible to join The SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation study. Participants were excluded if they had no PCR tests after enrolment, enrolled after Dec 31, 2020, or had insufficient PCR and antibody data for cohort assignment. Participants attended regular SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing (every 2-4 weeks) and completed questionnaires every 2 weeks on symptoms and exposures. At enrolment, participants were assigned to either the positive cohort (antibody positive, or previous positive PCR or antibody test) or negative cohort (antibody negative, no previous positive PCR or antibody test). The primary outcome was a reinfection in the positive cohort or a primary infection in the negative cohort, determined by PCR tests. Potential reinfections were clinically reviewed and classified according to case definitions (confirmed, probable, or possible) and symptom-status, depending on the hierarchy of evidence. Primary infections in the negative cohort were defined as a first positive PCR test and seroconversions were excluded when not associated with a positive PCR test. A proportional hazards frailty model using a Poisson distribution was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) to compare infection rates in the two cohorts.

FINDINGS

From June 18, 2020, to Dec 31, 2020, 30 625 participants were enrolled into the study. 51 participants withdrew from the study, 4913 were excluded, and 25 661 participants (with linked data on antibody and PCR testing) were included in the analysis. Data were extracted from all sources on Feb 5, 2021, and include data up to and including Jan 11, 2021. 155 infections were detected in the baseline positive cohort of 8278 participants, collectively contributing 2 047 113 person-days of follow-up. This compares with 1704 new PCR positive infections in the negative cohort of 17 383 participants, contributing 2 971 436 person-days of follow-up. The incidence density was 7·6 reinfections per 100 000 person-days in the positive cohort, compared with 57·3 primary infections per 100 000 person-days in the negative cohort, between June, 2020, and January, 2021. The adjusted IRR was 0·159 for all reinfections (95% CI 0·13-0·19) compared with PCR-confirmed primary infections. The median interval between primary infection and reinfection was more than 200 days.

INTERPRETATION

A previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This time period is the minimum probable effect because seroconversions were not included. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals.

FUNDING

Department of Health and Social Care of the UK Government, Public Health England, The National Institute for Health Research, with contributions from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments.

SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN)

BACKGROUND

Increased understanding of whether individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 are protected from future SARS-CoV-2 infection is an urgent requirement. We aimed to investigate whether antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were associated with a decreased risk of symptomatic and asymptomatic reinfection.

METHODS

A large, multicentre, prospective cohort study was done, with participants recruited from publicly funded hospitals in all regions of England. All health-care workers, support staff, and administrative staff working at hospitals who could remain engaged in follow-up for 12 months were eligible to join The SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation study. Participants were excluded if they had no PCR tests after enrolment, enrolled after Dec 31, 2020, or had insufficient PCR and antibody data for cohort assignment. Participants attended regular SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing (every 2-4 weeks) and completed questionnaires every 2 weeks on symptoms and exposures. At enrolment, participants were assigned to either the positive cohort (antibody positive, or previous positive PCR or antibody test) or negative cohort (antibody negative, no previous positive PCR or antibody test). The primary outcome was a reinfection in the positive cohort or a primary infection in the negative cohort, determined by PCR tests. Potential reinfections were clinically reviewed and classified according to case definitions (confirmed, probable, or possible) and symptom-status, depending on the hierarchy of evidence. Primary infections in the negative cohort were defined as a first positive PCR test and seroconversions were excluded when not associated with a positive PCR test. A proportional hazards frailty model using a Poisson distribution was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) to compare infection rates in the two cohorts.

FINDINGS

From June 18, 2020, to Dec 31, 2020, 30 625 participants were enrolled into the study. 51 participants withdrew from the study, 4913 were excluded, and 25 661 participants (with linked data on antibody and PCR testing) were included in the analysis. Data were extracted from all sources on Feb 5, 2021, and include data up to and including Jan 11, 2021. 155 infections were detected in the baseline positive cohort of 8278 participants, collectively contributing 2 047 113 person-days of follow-up. This compares with 1704 new PCR positive infections in the negative cohort of 17 383 participants, contributing 2 971 436 person-days of follow-up. The incidence density was 7·6 reinfections per 100 000 person-days in the positive cohort, compared with 57·3 primary infections per 100 000 person-days in the negative cohort, between June, 2020, and January, 2021. The adjusted IRR was 0·159 for all reinfections (95% CI 0·13-0·19) compared with PCR-confirmed primary infections. The median interval between primary infection and reinfection was more than 200 days.

INTERPRETATION

A previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This time period is the minimum probable effect because seroconversions were not included. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals.

FUNDING

Department of Health and Social Care of the UK Government, Public Health England, The National Institute for Health Research, with contributions from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments.

Reinfection of SARS-CoV-2 - analysis of 23 cases from the literature

INTRODUCTION

The duration of immunity after infection from SARS-CoV-2 conferring protection from subsequent COVID-19 episodes is not yet fully understood. We reviewed the literature for cases of documented reinfection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive computerized search in PubMed, through 15 December 2020, using the following terms in combination: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, reinfection, reactivation, recurrence. To exclude cases due to prolonged viral shedding or protracted infection, only cases occurring at least 12 weeks apart or confirmed as being sustained by genetically different viruses by viral genome analysis were included.

RESULTS

We identified 23 cases globally, for which viral genome analysis was performed in 10 cases and serology in 19 cases. The mean interval between the two episodes was 15 weeks. Mean age of cases was 44.5 years, and 10 (43.5%) were women. In 17/23 cases, no comorbidity was observed. In 10 cases, the first episode was more severe than the ensuing episode, whereas in seven cases the ensuing episode was more severe. In four cases, there was no difference in severity and in two cases both episodes were asymptomatic.

CONCLUSIONS

From this sample of 23 cases, a clear pattern of the second episode being less or more severe did not emerge. A better understanding of immunity to SARS-CoV-2, necessary to assess the probability of a second infection and the durability of protection conferred by vaccination, is warranted.

A Case Series Describing the Recurrence of COVID-19 in Patients Who Recovered from Initial Illness in Bangladesh

To date, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected over 80 million people globally. We report a case series of five clinically and laboratory confirmed COVID-19 patients from Bangladesh who suffered a second episode of COVID-19 illness after 70 symptom-free days. The International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b), is a leading public health research institution in South Asia. icddr, b staff were actively tested, treated and followed-up for COVID-19 by an experienced team of clinicians, epidemiologists, and virologists. From 21 March to 30 September 2020, 1370 icddr,b employees working at either the Dhaka (urban) or Matlab (rural) clinical sites were tested for COVID-19. In total, 522 (38%) were positive; 38% from urban Dhaka (483/1261) and 36% from the rural clinical site Matlab (39/109). Five patients (60% male with a mean age of 41 years) had real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) diagnosed recurrence (reinfection) of SARS-CoV-2. All had mild symptoms except for one who was hospitalized. Though all cases reported fair risk perceptions towards COVID-19, all had potential exposure sources for reinfection. After a second course of treatment and home isolation, all patients fully recovered. Our findings suggest the need for COVID-19 vaccination and continuing other preventive measures to further mitigate the pandemic. An optimal post-recovery follow-up strategy to allow the safe return of COVID-19 patients to the workforce may be considered.

SARS-CoV-2 re-infection: development of an epidemiological definition from India

The current investigation was conducted with the objective to develop an epidemiological case definition of possible severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) re-infection and assess its magnitude in India. The epidemiological case definition for SARS-CoV-2 re-infection was developed from literature review of data on viral kinetics. For achieving second objective, the individuals who satisfied the developed case definition for SARS-CoV-2 re-infection were contacted telephonically. Taking available evidence into consideration, re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 in our study was defined as any individual who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on two separate occasions by either molecular tests or rapid antigen test at an interval of at least 102 days with one negative molecular test in between. In this archive based, telephonic survey, 58 out of 1300 individuals (4.5%) fulfilled the above-mentioned definition; 38 individuals could be contacted with healthcare workers (HCWs) accounting for 31.6% of the cases. A large proportion of participants was asymptomatic and had higher Ct value during the first episode. While SARS-CoV-2 re-infection is still a rare phenomenon, there is a need for epidemiological definition of re-infection for establishing surveillance systems and this study contributes to such a goal.Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) re-infection is an emerging concern and there is a need to define it. Therefore, working epidemiological case definition for re-infection was developed and its magnitude was explored via archive-based, telephonic survey. Re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 was defined as two positive tests at an interval of at least 102 days with one interim negative test. Thirty-eight of the 58 eligible patients could be contacted with 12 (31.6%) being HCWs. Majority of the participants were asymptomatic and had higher Ct value during their first episode. To conclude, a working epidemiological case definition of SARS-CoV-2 re-infection is important to strengthen surveillance. The present investigation contributes to this goal and records reinfection in 4.5% of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals in India.

The Importance and Challenges of Identifying SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections

Reports of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection have raised important questions about the strength and durability of the immune response to primary infection, which are key factors in predicting the course of the pandemic. Identifying reinfection requires detecting the virus at two different time points and using viral genomic data to distinguish reinfection from persistent viral carriage. This process is hindered by challenges of logistics and capacity, such as banking samples from primary infection and performing viral genome sequencing. These challenges may help to explain why very few cases have been described to date. In addition, reinfection may be a rare phenomenon, but detailed prospective studies are needed to rigorously assess its frequency. To provide context for future investigations of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, we review 16 cases that have been published to date or are available in preprint. Reinfection occurred across demographic spectra and in patients whose initial infections were both asymptomatic/mild and moderate/severe. For cases in which severity could be compared between episodes, half of reinfections were less severe, raising the possibility of partial immune protection. Although many patients had a positive total immunoglobulin or IgG result at the time of reinfection, very little examination of their immune response was performed. Further work is needed to elucidate the frequency, determinants, and consequences of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Establishing the necessary frameworks for surveillance and investigation will rely heavily on clinical laboratories and clinical investigators, and we propose several considerations to guide the medical community in identifying and characterizing SARS-CoV-2 reinfections.

Repeated SARS-CoV-2 Positivity: Analysis of 123 Cases

Repeated positivity and reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) is a significant concern. Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical significance of repeatedly positive testing after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) recovery. We performed a systematic literature search following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. With available individual patient data reporting on repeatedly SARS-CoV-2 positive (RSP) patients, case reports, and case series were included in this analysis. We performed a descriptive analysis of baseline characteristics of repeatedly positive cases. We assessed the cases according to the length of their polymerase chain reaction (PCR) negative interval between the two episodes. Risk factors for the severity of second episodes were evaluated. Overall, we included 123 patients with repeated positivity from 56 publications, with a mean repeated positivity length of 47.8 ± 29.9 days. Younger patients were predominant in the delayed (>90 days) recurrent positive group. Furthermore, comparing patients with RSP intervals of below 60 and above 60 days, we found that a more severe disease course can be expected if the repeated positivity interval is shorter. Severe and critical disease courses might predict future repeatedly positive severe and critical COVID-19 episodes. In conclusion, our results show that the second episode of SARS-CoV-2 positivity is more severe if it happens within 60 days after the first positive PCR. On the other hand, the second episode's severity correlates with the first.

Current updates and research on plant-based vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019

The primary outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, causing pneumonia-like symptoms in patients named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had evolved into a global pandemic. COVID-19 has surpassed Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome in terms of rate and scale causing more than one million deaths. Development of an effective vaccine to fight against the spread of COVID-19 is the main goal of many countries around the world and plant-based vaccines are one of the available methods in vaccine developments. Plant-based vaccine has gained its reputation among researchers for its known effective manufacturing process and cost effectiveness. Many companies around the world are participating in the race to develop an effective vaccine by using the plant system. This review discusses different approaches used as well as highlights the challenges faced by various companies and research groups in developing the plant-based COVID-19 vaccine.

Functional importance of the D614G mutation in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an enveloped virus which binds its cellular receptor angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and enters hosts cells through the action of its spike (S) glycoprotein displayed on the surface of the virion. Compared to the reference strain of SARS-CoV-2, the majority of currently circulating isolates possess an S protein variant characterized by an aspartic acid-to-glycine substitution at amino acid position 614 (D614G). Residue 614 lies outside the receptor binding domain (RBD) and the mutation does not alter the affinity of monomeric S protein for ACE2. However, S(G614), compared to S(D614), mediates more efficient ACE2-mediated transduction of cells by S-pseudotyped vectors and more efficient infection of cells and animals by live SARS-CoV-2. This review summarizes and synthesizes the epidemiological and functional observations of the D614G spike mutation, with focus on the biochemical and cell-biological impact of this mutation and its consequences for S protein function. We further discuss the significance of these recent findings in the context of the current global pandemic.

MHC-II constrains the natural neutralizing antibody response to the SARS-CoV-2 spike RBM in humans

SARS-CoV-2 antibodies develop within two weeks of infection, but wane relatively rapidly post-infection, raising concerns about whether antibody responses will provide protection upon re-exposure. Here we revisit T-B cooperation as a prerequisite for effective and durable neutralizing antibody responses centered on a mutationally constrained RBM B cell epitope. T-B cooperation requires co-processing of B and T cell epitopes by the same B cell and is subject to MHC-II restriction. We evaluated MHC-II constraints relevant to the neutralizing antibody response to a mutationally-constrained B cell epitope in the receptor binding motif (RBM) of the spike protein. Examining common MHC-II alleles, we found that peptides surrounding this key B cell epitope are predicted to bind poorly, suggesting a lack MHC-II support in T-B cooperation, impacting generation of high-potency neutralizing antibodies in the general population. Additionally, we found that multiple microbial peptides had potential for RBM cross-reactivity, supporting previous exposures as a possible source of T cell memory.

Will SARS-CoV-2 Infection Elicit Long-Lasting Protective or Sterilising Immunity? Implications for Vaccine Strategies (2020)

In December 2019, an outbreak of a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in Wuhan, China resulted in the current COVID-19 global pandemic. The human immune system has not previously encountered this virus, raising the important question as to whether or not protective immunity is generated by infection. Growing evidence suggests that protective immunity can indeed be acquired post-infection-although a handful of reinfection cases have been reported. However, it is still unknown whether the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 leads to some degree of long-lasting protection against the disease or the infection. This review draws insights from previous knowledge regarding the nature and longevity of immunity to the related virus, SARS-CoV, to fill the gaps in our understanding of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2. Deciphering the immunological characteristics that give rise to protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 is critical to guiding vaccine development and also predicting the course of the pandemic. Here we discuss the recent evidence that characterises the adaptive immune response against SARS-CoV-2 and its potential implications for the generation of memory responses and long-term protection.

Defining the features and duration of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection associated with disease severity and outcome

SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, particularly those preventing viral spike receptor binding domain (RBD) interaction with host angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, can neutralize the virus. It is, however, unknown which features of the serological response may affect clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients. We analyzed 983 longitudinal plasma samples from 79 hospitalized COVID-19 patients and 175 SARS-CoV-2-infected outpatients and asymptomatic individuals. Within this cohort, 25 patients died of their illness. Higher ratios of IgG antibodies targeting S1 or RBD domains of spike compared to nucleocapsid antigen were seen in outpatients who had mild illness versus severely ill patients. Plasma antibody increases correlated with decreases in viral RNAemia, but antibody responses in acute illness were insufficient to predict inpatient outcomes. Pseudovirus neutralization assays and a scalable ELISA measuring antibodies blocking RBD-ACE2 interaction were well correlated with patient IgG titers to RBD. Outpatient and asymptomatic individuals' SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, including IgG, progressively decreased during observation up to five months post-infection.

Persistent Detection and Infectious Potential of SARS-CoV-2 Virus in Clinical Specimens from COVID-19 Patients

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) that emerged in December 2019 as the causative agent of Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) and was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020 has several distinctive features, including extensive multiorgan involvement with a robust systemic inflammatory response, significant associated morbidity and mortality, and prolonged persistence of viral RNA in the clinical specimens of infected individuals as detected by Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) amplification. This review begins with an overview of SARS-CoV-2 morphology and replication and summarizes what is known to date about the detection of the virus in nasal, oropharyngeal, and fecal specimens of patients who have recovered from COVID-19, with a focus on the factors thought to contribute to prolonged detection. This review also provides a discussion on the infective potential of this material from asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, and convalescing individuals, to include a discussion of the relative persistence and infectious potential of virus in clinical specimens recovered from pediatric COVID-19 patients.