Determinants of pre-vaccination antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2: a population-based longitudinal study (COVIDENCE UK)

Long-term air pollution exposure and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection: A UK-wide cohort study

BACKGROUND

The association between air quality and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection is poorly understood. We investigated this association using serological individual-level data adjusting for a wide range of confounders, in a large population-based cohort (COVIDENCE UK).

METHODS

We assessed the associations between long-term (2015-19) nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of ≤2.5 μm (PM2.5), exposures with SARS-CoV-2 infection, level of antibody response among those infected, and COVID-19 disease severity. We used serological data from 10,489 participants in the COVIDENCE UK cohort, and estimated annual average air pollution exposure at each participant's home postcode.

RESULTS

After controlling for potential confounders, we found a positive association between 5-year NO2 and PM2.5 exposures and the risk of seropositivity: 10 unit increase in NO2 (μg/m3) was associated with an increasing risk of seropositivity by 1.092 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.17; p-for-trend 0.012). For PM2.5, 10 unit increase (μg/m3) was associated with an increasing risk of seropositivity by 1.65 (95% CI 1.015-2.68; p-for-trend 0·049). In addition, we found that NO2 was positively associated with higher antibody titres (p-for-trend 0·013) among seropositive participants, with no evidence of an association for PM2.5.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that the long-term burden of air pollution increased the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and has important implications for future pandemic preparedness. This evidence strengthens the case for reducing long-term air pollution exposures to reduce the vulnerability of individuals to respiratory viruses.

Serological surveillance reveals a high exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and altered immune response among COVID-19 unvaccinated Cameroonian individuals

Surveillance of COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 dynamics is crucial to understanding natural history and providing insights into the population's exposure risk and specific susceptibilities. This study investigated the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, its predictors, and immunological status among unvaccinated patients in Cameroon. A multicentre cross-sectional study was conducted between January and September 2022 in the town of Douala. Patients were consecutively recruited, and data of interest were collected using a questionnaire. Blood samples were collected to determine Immunoglobin titres (IgM and IgG), interferon gamma (IFN- γ) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) by ELISA, and CD4+ cells by flow cytometry. A total of 342 patients aged 41.5 ± 13.9 years were included. Most participants (75.8%) were asymptomatic. The overall crude prevalence of IgM and IgG was 49.1% and 88.9%, respectively. After adjustment, the seroprevalence values were 51% for IgM and 93% for IgM. Ageusia and anosmia have displayed the highest positive predictive values (90.9% and 82.4%) and specificity (98.9% and 98.3%). The predictors of IgM seropositivity were being diabetic (aOR = 0.23, p = 0.01), frequently seeking healthcare (aOR = 1.97, p = 0.03), and diagnosed with ageusia (aOR = 20.63, p = 0.005), whereas those of IgG seropositivity included health facility (aOR = 0.15, p = 0.01), age of 40-50 years (aOR = 8.78, p = 0.01), married (aOR = 0.21, p = 0.02), fever (aOR = 0.08, p = 0.01), and ageusia (aOR = 0.08, p = 0.01). CD4+, IFN-γ, and IL-6 were impaired in seropositive individuals, with a confounding role of socio-demographic factors or comorbidities. Although the WHO declared the end of COVID-19 as a public health emergency, the findings of this study indicate the need for continuous surveillance to adequately control the disease in Cameroon.

Salivary IgA and vimentin differentiate in vitro SARS-CoV-2 infection: A study of 290 convalescent COVID-19 patients

SARS-CoV-2 initially infects cells in the nasopharynx and oral cavity. The immune system at these mucosal sites plays a crucial role in minimizing viral transmission and infection. To develop new strategies for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection, this study aimed to identify proteins that protect against viral infection in saliva. We collected 551 saliva samples from 290 healthcare workers who had tested positive for COVID-19, before vaccination, between June and December 2020. The samples were categorized based on their ability to block or enhance infection using in vitro assays. Mass spectrometry and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay experiments were used to identify and measure the abundance of proteins that specifically bind to SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Immunoglobulin (Ig)A specific to SARS-CoV-2 antigens was detectable in over 83% of the convalescent saliva samples. We found that concentrations of anti-receptor-binding domain IgA >500 pg/µg total protein in saliva correlate with reduced viral infectivity in vitro. However, there is a dissociation between the salivary IgA response to SARS-CoV-2, and systemic IgG titers in convalescent COVID-19 patients. Then, using an innovative technique known as spike-baited mass spectrometry, we identified novel spike-binding proteins in saliva, most notably vimentin, which correlated with increased viral infectivity in vitro and could serve as a therapeutic target against COVID-19.

Applications of SARS-CoV-2 serological testing: impact of test performance, sample matrices, and patient characteristics

Laboratory testing has been a key tool in managing the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic. While rapid antigen and PCR testing has proven useful for diagnosing acute SARS-CoV-2 infections, additional testing methods are required to understand the long-term impact of SARS-CoV-2 infections on immune response. Serological testing, a well-documented laboratory practice, measures the presence of antibodies in a sample to uncover information about host immunity. Although proposed applications of serological testing for clinical use have previously been limited, current research into SARS-CoV-2 has shown growing utility for serological methods in these settings. To name a few, serological testing has been used to identify patients with past infections and long-term active disease and to monitor vaccine efficacy. Test utility and result interpretation, however, are often complicated by factors that include poor test sensitivity early in infection, lack of immune response in some individuals, overlying infection and vaccination responses, lack of standardization of antibody titers/levels between instruments, unknown titers that confer immune protection, and large between-individual biological variation following infection or vaccination. Thus, the three major components of this review will examine (1) factors that affect serological test utility: test performance, testing matrices, seroprevalence concerns and viral variants, (2) patient factors that affect serological response: timing of sampling, age, sex, body mass index, immunosuppression and vaccination, and (3) informative applications of serological testing: identifying past infection, immune surveillance to guide health practices, and examination of protective immunity. SARS-CoV-2 serological testing should be beneficial for clinical care if it is implemented appropriately. However, as with other laboratory developed tests, use of SARS-CoV-2 serology as a testing modality warrants careful consideration of testing limitations and evaluation of its clinical utility.

Anti-A and anti-B titers, age, gender, biochemical parameters, and body mass index in Japanese blood donors

It has been reported that anti-A and anti-B (ABO antibody) titers decrease with age, but little is known about the association between ABO antibody titers and physiologic/biochemical parameters such as body mass index (BMI), gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), and total cholesterol (T-Cho). We investigated the present situation of ABO antibody titers among healthy blood donors in Japan and the physiologic/biochemical factors that may be associated with changes in ABO antibody titers. Plasma from 7450 Japanese blood donors was tested for ABO antibody titers using ABO reverse typing reagents by an automated microplate system; donor samples were classified into low, middle, and high titers according to the agglutination results obtained with diluted plasma samples. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to analyze the association between ABO antibody titers and age, gender, biochemical parameters (alanine transaminase [ALT], GGT, globulin, T-Cho, and glycosylated albumin [GA]), and BMI according to the ABO blood groups. A significant correlation between ABO antibody titers and age/gender, except for gender in anti-A of blood group B donors, was observed. BMI showed significant but negative correlations with anti-A and anti-B (β = -0.085 and -0.062, respectively; p < 0.01) in blood group O donors. In addition, significant but negative correlations between GGT and T-Cho with anti-B of blood group A donors (β = -0.055 and -0.047, respectively; p < 0.05) were observed. Although differences existed among the ABO blood groups, ABO antibody titers seem to be associated with physiologic and biochemical parameters of healthy individuals.

Long-term symptom profiles after COVID-19 vs other acute respiratory infections: an analysis of data from the COVIDENCE UK study

Background

Long COVID is a well recognised, if heterogeneous, entity. Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) due to other pathogens may cause long-term symptoms, but few studies compare post-acute sequelae between SARS-CoV-2 and other ARIs. We aimed to compare symptom profiles between people with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, people with previous non-COVID-19 ARIs, and contemporaneous controls, and to identify clusters of long-term symptoms.

Methods

COVIDENCE UK is a prospective, population-based UK study of ARIs in adults. We analysed data for 16 potential long COVID symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), reported between January 21 and February 15, 2021, by participants unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. We classified participants as having previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or previous non-COVID-19 ARI (≥4 weeks prior) or no reported ARI. We compared symptoms by infection status using logistic and fractional regression, and identified symptom clusters using latent class analysis (LCA). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04330599.

Findings

We included 10,171 participants (1311 [12.9%] with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 472 [4.6%] with non-COVID-19 ARI). Both types of infection were associated with increased prevalence/severity of most symptoms and decreased HRQoL compared with no infection. Participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection had increased odds of problems with taste/smell (odds ratio 19.74, 95% CI 10.53-37.00) and lightheadedness or dizziness (1.74, 1.18-2.56) compared with participants with non-COVID-19 ARIs. Separate LCA models identified three symptom severity groups for each infection type. In the most severe groups (representing 22% of participants for both SARS-CoV-2 and non-COVID-19 ARI), SARS-CoV-2 infection presented with a higher probability of problems with taste/smell (probability 0.41 vs 0.04), hair loss (0.25 vs 0.16), unusual sweating (0.38 vs 0.25), unusual racing of the heart (0.43 vs 0.33), and memory problems (0.70 vs 0.55) than non-COVID-19 ARI.

Interpretation

Both SARS-CoV-2 and non-COVID-19 ARIs are associated with a wide range of symptoms more than 4 weeks after the acute infection. Research on post-acute sequelae of ARIs should extend from SARS-CoV-2 to include other pathogens.

Funding

Barts Charity.

Rebound in asthma exacerbations following relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions: a longitudinal population-based study (COVIDENCE UK)

BACKGROUND

The imposition of restrictions on social mixing early in the COVID-19 pandemic was followed by a reduction in asthma exacerbations in multiple settings internationally. Temporal trends in social mixing, incident acute respiratory infections (ARI) and asthma exacerbations following relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions have not yet been described.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based longitudinal study in 2312 UK adults with asthma between November 2020 and April 2022. Details of face covering use, social mixing, incident ARI and severe asthma exacerbations were collected via monthly online questionnaires. Temporal changes in these parameters were visualised using Poisson generalised additive models. Multilevel logistic regression was used to test for associations between incident ARI and risk of asthma exacerbations, adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions from April 2021 coincided with reduced face covering use (p<0.001), increased frequency of indoor visits to public places and other households (p<0.001) and rising incidence of COVID-19 (p<0.001), non-COVID-19 ARI (p<0.001) and severe asthma exacerbations (p=0.007). Incident non-COVID-19 ARI associated independently with increased risk of asthma exacerbation (adjusted OR 5.75, 95% CI 4.75 to 6.97) as did incident COVID-19, both prior to emergence of the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (5.89, 3.45 to 10.04) and subsequently (5.69, 3.89 to 8.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions coincided with decreased face covering use, increased social mixing and a rebound in ARI and asthma exacerbations. Associations between incident ARI and risk of severe asthma exacerbation were similar for non-COVID-19 ARI and COVID-19, both before and after emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant.

STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04330599.

Predictors of high SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G titers in COVID-19 convalescent whole-blood donors: a cross-sectional study in China

Background

Demographic information has been shown to help predict high antibody titers of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) in CCP donors. However, there is no research on the Chinese population and little evidence on whole-blood donors. Therefore, we aimed to investigate these associations among Chinese blood donors after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, 5,064 qualified blood donors with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection completed a self-reported questionnaire and underwent tests of SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody and ABO blood type. Logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for high SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers according to each factor.

Results

Totally, 1,799 participants (with SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers≥1:160) had high-titer CCPs. Multivariable analysis showed that a 10-year increment in age and earlier donation were associated with higher odds of high-titer CCP, while medical personnel was associated with lower odds. The ORs (95% CIs) of high-titer CCP were 1.17 (1.10-1.23, p< 0.001) and 1.41 (1.25-1.58, p< 0.001) for each 10-year increment in age and earlier donation, respectively. The OR of high-titer CCP was 0.75 (0.60-0.95, p = 0.02) for medical personnel. Female early donors were associated with increased odds of high-titer CCP, but this association was insignificant for later donors. Donating after 8 weeks from the onset was associated with decreased odds of having high-titer CCP compared to donating within 8 weeks from the onset, and the HR was 0.38 (95% CI: 0.22-0.64, p <0.001). There was no significant association between ABO blood type or race and the odds of high-titer CCP.

Discussion

Older age, earlier donation, female early donors, and non-medical-related occupations are promising predictors of high-titer CCP in Chinese blood donors. Our findings highlight the importance of CCP screening at the early stage of the pandemic.

Validation of dried blood spot sampling for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and total immunoglobulins in a large cohort of asymptomatic young adults

BACKGROUND

Detecting antibody responses following infection with SARS-CoV-2 is necessary for sero-epidemiological studies and assessing the role of specific antibodies in disease, but serum or plasma sampling is not always viable due to logistical challenges. Dried blood spot sampling (DBS) is a cheaper, simpler alternative and samples can be self-collected and returned by post, reducing risk for SARS-CoV-2 exposure from direct patient contact. The value of large-scale DBS sampling for the assessment of serological responses to SARS-CoV-2 has not been assessed in depth and provides a model for examining the logistics of using this approach to other infectious diseases. The ability to measure specific antigens is attractive for remote outbreak situations where testing may be limited or for patients who require sampling after remote consultation.

METHODS

We compared the performance of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid antibody detection from DBS samples with matched serum collected by venepuncture in a large population of asymptomatic young adults (N = 1070) living and working in congregate settings (military recruits, N = 625); university students, N = 445). We also compared the effect of self-sampling (ssDBS) with investigator-collected samples (labDBS) on assay performance, and the quantitative measurement of total IgA, IgG and IgM between DBS eluates and serum.

RESULTS

Baseline seropositivity for anti-Spike IgGAM antibody was significantly higher among university students than military recruits. Strong correlations were observed between matched DBS and serum samples in both university students and recruits for the anti-spike IgGAM assay. Minimal differences were found in results by ssDBS and labDBS and serum by Bland Altman and Cohen kappa analyses. LabDBS achieved 82.0% sensitivity and 98.2% specificity and ssDBS samples 86.1% sensitivity and 96.7% specificity for detecting anti-Spike IgGAM antibodies relative to serum samples. For anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid IgG there was qualitatively 100% agreement between serum and DBS samples and weak correlation in ratio measurements. Strong correlations were observed between serum and DBS-derived total IgG, IgA, and IgM.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest validation of DBS against paired serum for SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody measurement and we have shown that DBS retains performance from prior smaller studies. There were no significant differences regarding DBS collection methods, suggesting that self-collected samples are a viable sampling collection method. These data offer confidence that DBS can be employed more widely as an alternative to classical serology.

Ethnic differences in cellular and humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in UK healthcare workers: a cross-sectional analysis

Background

Few studies have compared SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity by ethnic group. We sought to establish whether cellular and humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination differ according to ethnicity in UK Healthcare workers (HCWs).

Methods

In this cross-sectional analysis, we used baseline data from two immunological cohort studies conducted in HCWs in Leicester, UK. Blood samples were collected between March 3, and September 16, 2021. We excluded HCW who had not received two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine at the time of sampling and those who had serological evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcome measures were SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific total antibody titre, neutralising antibody titre and ELISpot count. We compared our outcome measures by ethnic group using univariable (t tests and rank-sum tests depending on distribution) and multivariable (linear regression for antibody titres and negative binomial regression for ELISpot counts) tests. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for age, sex, vaccine type, length of interval between vaccine doses and time between vaccine administration and sample collection and expressed as adjusted geometric mean ratios (aGMRs) or adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs). To assess differences in the early immune response to vaccination we also conducted analyses in a subcohort who provided samples between 14 and 50 days after their second dose of vaccine.

Findings

The total number of HCWs in each analysis were 401 for anti-spike antibody titres, 345 for neutralising antibody titres and 191 for ELISpot. Overall, 25.4% (19.7% South Asian and 5.7% Black/Mixed/Other) were from ethnic minority groups. In analyses including the whole cohort, neutralising antibody titres were higher in South Asian HCWs than White HCWs (aGMR 1.47, 95% CI [1.06-2.06], P = 0.02) as were T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 S1 peptides (aIRR 1.75, 95% CI [1.05-2.89], P = 0.03). In a subcohort sampled between 14 and 50 days after second vaccine dose, SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibody and neutralising antibody geometric mean titre (GMT) was higher in South Asian HCWs compared to White HCWs (9616 binding antibody units (BAU)/ml, 95% CI [7178-12,852] vs 5888 BAU/ml [5023-6902], P = 0.008 and 2851 95% CI [1811-4487] vs 1199 [984-1462], P < 0.001 respectively), increments which persisted after adjustment (aGMR 1.26, 95% CI [1.01-1.58], P = 0.04 and aGMR 2.01, 95% CI [1.34-3.01], P = 0.001). SARS-CoV-2 ELISpot responses to S1 and whole spike peptides (S1 + S2 response) were higher in HCWs from South Asian ethnic groups than those from White groups (S1: aIRR 2.33, 95% CI [1.09-4.94], P = 0.03; spike: aIRR, 2.04, 95% CI [1.02-4.08]).

Interpretation

This study provides evidence that, in an infection naïve cohort, humoral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are stronger in South Asian HCWs than White HCWs. These differences are most clearly seen in the early period following vaccination. Further research is required to understand the underlying mechanisms, whether differences persist with further exposure to vaccine or virus, and the potential impact on vaccine effectiveness.

Funding

DIRECT and BELIEVE have received funding from UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) through the COVID-19 National Core Studies Immunity (NCSi) programme (MC_PC_20060).

Ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, intensive care admission, and death: a global systematic review and meta-analysis of over 200 million study participants

Background

COVID-19 has exacerbated existing ethnic inequalities in health. Little is known about whether inequalities in severe disease and deaths, observed globally among minoritised ethnic groups, relates to greater infection risk, poorer prognosis, or both. We analysed global data on COVID-19 clinical outcomes examining inequalities between people from minoritised ethnic groups compared to the ethnic majority group.

Methods

Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) were searched from 1st December 2019 to 3rd October 2022, for studies reporting original clinical data for COVID-19 outcomes disaggregated by ethnicity: infection, hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality. We assessed inequalities in incidence and prognosis using random-effects meta-analyses, with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) use to assess certainty of findings. Meta-regressions explored the impact of region and time-frame (vaccine roll-out) on heterogeneity. PROSPERO: CRD42021284981.

Findings

77 studies comprising over 200,000,000 participants were included. Compared with White majority populations, we observed an increased risk of testing positive for infection for people from Black (adjusted Risk Ratio [aRR]:1.78, 95% CI:1.59-1.99, I2 = 99.1), South Asian (aRR:3.00, 95% CI:1.59-5.66, I2 = 99.1), Mixed (aRR:1.64, 95% CI:1.02-1.67, I2 = 93.2) and Other ethnic groups (aRR:1.36, 95% CI:1.01-1.82, I2 = 85.6). Black, Hispanic, and South Asian people were more likely to be seropositive. Among population-based studies, Black and Hispanic ethnic groups and Indigenous peoples had an increased risk of hospitalisation; Black, Hispanic, South Asian, East Asian and Mixed ethnic groups and Indigenous peoples had an increased risk of ICU admission. Mortality risk was increased for Hispanic, Mixed, and Indigenous groups. Smaller differences were seen for prognosis following infection. Following hospitalisation, South Asian, East Asian, Black and Mixed ethnic groups had an increased risk of ICU admission, and mortality risk was greater in Mixed ethnic groups. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate.

Interpretation

Our study suggests that systematic ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 health outcomes exist, with large differences in exposure risk and some differences in prognosis following hospitalisation. Response and recovery interventions must focus on tackling drivers of ethnic inequalities which increase exposure risk and vulnerabilities to severe disease, including structural racism and racial discrimination.

Funding

ESRC:ES/W000849/1.

Incidence determinants and serological correlates of reactive symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

Prospective population-based studies investigating associations between reactive symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and serologic responses to vaccination are lacking. We therefore conducted a study in 9003 adults from the UK general population receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccines as part of the national vaccination programme. Titres of combined IgG/IgA/IgM responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) glycoprotein were determined in eluates of dried blood spots collected from all participants before and after vaccination. 4262 (47.3%) participants experienced systemic reactive symptoms after a first vaccine dose. Factors associating with lower risk of such symptoms included older age (aOR per additional 10 years of age 0.85, 95% CI: 0.81-0.90), male vs. female sex (0.59, 0.53-0.65) and receipt of an mRNA vaccine vs. ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (0.29, 0.26-0.32 for BNT162b2; 0.06, 0.01-0.26 for mRNA-1273). Higher risk of such symptoms was associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and COVID-19 symptoms prior to vaccination (2.23, 1.78-2.81), but not with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in the absence of COVID-19 symptoms (0.94, 0.81-1.09). Presence vs. absence of self-reported anxiety or depression at enrolment associated with higher risk of such symptoms (1.24, 1.12-1.39). Post-vaccination anti-S titres were higher among participants who experienced reactive symptoms after vaccination vs. those who did not (P < 0.001). We conclude that factors influencing risk of systemic symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination include demographic characteristics, pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 serostatus and vaccine type. Participants experiencing reactive symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination had higher post-vaccination titres of IgG/A/M anti-S antibodies. Improved public understanding of the frequency of reactogenic symptoms and their positive association with vaccine immunogenicity could potentially increase vaccine uptake.

Association of Obesity and Diabetes with SARS-Cov-2 Infection and Symptoms in the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership

OBJECTIVE

Obesity and diabetes are established risk factors for severe SARS-CoV-2 outcomes, but less is known about their impact on susceptibility to COVID-19 infection and general symptom severity. We hypothesized that those with obesity or diabetes would be more likely to self-report a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and among those with a positive test, have greater symptom severity and duration.

METHODS

Among 44,430 COVID-19 Community Research Partnership participants, we evaluated the association of self-reported and electronic health record obesity and diabetes with a self-reported positive COVID-19 test at any time. Among the 2,663 participants with a self-reported positive COVID-19 test during the study, we evaluated the association of obesity and diabetes with self-report of symptom severity, duration, and hospitalization. Logistic regression models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and healthcare worker status.

RESULTS

We found a positive graded association between Body Mass Index (BMI) category and positive COVID-19 test (Overweight OR = 1.14 [1.05-1.25]; Obesity I OR = 1.29 [1.17-2.42]; Obesity II OR = 1.34 [1.19-1.50]; Obesity III OR = 1.53 [1.35-1.73]), and a similar but weaker association with COVID-19 symptoms and severity among those with a positive test. Diabetes was associated with COVID-19 infection but not symptoms after adjustment, with some evidence of an interaction between obesity and diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

While the limitations of this health system convenience sample include generalizability and selection around test-seeking, the strong graded association of BMI and diabetes with self-reported COVID-19 infection suggests that obesity and diabetes may play a role in risk for symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 beyond co-occurrence with socioeconomic factors.

Consensus and Controversial Aspects of Vitamin D and COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

This work aims to review and discuss controversial topics in the field of vitamin D, SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19.

PARTICIPANTS

The International Conferences "Controversies in Vitamin D" are a series of workshops that started in 2017 featuring international experts and leaders in vitamin D research and clinical practice. The 5th annual conference was held in Stresa, Italy, from 15 to 18 September 2021.

EVIDENCE

Before the event, participants reviewed available studies on their assigned topic, drafted a related abstract, and presented their findings at the time of the conference. Relevant literature that became available since was also discussed within the panel and updated accordingly.

CONSENSUS

Before the event, the drafted abstracts had been merged to prepare a preliminary document. After the conference presentations, in-depth discussions in open sessions led to consensus. The document was subsequently modified according to discussions and up-to-date literature inclusion.

CONCLUSIONS

There is quite consistent evidence for an association between low 25 OH vitamin D (25(OH)D) levels and poor COVID-19 outcomes, despite heterogeneous publications of variable quality. However, the low vitamin D status in COVID-19 patients might also reflect reverse causality. Vitamin D supplementation might have a positive role in COVID-19 prevention. The evidence supporting a beneficial effect of vitamin D treatment in decreasing the risk of COVID-19 complications is conflicting. Conclusive statement regarding the beneficial effect of vitamin D in this context await high-quality randomized controlled trials.

Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection after primary vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and after booster vaccination with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273: A population-based cohort study (COVIDENCE UK)

Background

Little is known about how demographic, behavioural, and vaccine-related factors affect risk of post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to identify risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection after primary and booster vaccinations.

Methods

This prospective, population-based, UK study in adults (≥16 years) vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 assessed risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection up to February, 2022, for participants who completed a primary vaccination course (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2) and those who received a booster dose (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273). Cox regression models explored associations between sociodemographic, behavioural, clinical, pharmacological, and nutritional factors and test-positive breakthrough infection, adjusted for local weekly SARS-CoV-2 incidence.

Findings

1051 (7·1%) of 14 713 post-primary participants and 1009 (9·5%) of 10 665 post-booster participants reported breakthrough infection, over a median follow-up of 203 days (IQR 195–216) and 85 days (66–103), respectively. Primary vaccination with ChAdOx1 (vs BNT162b2) was associated with higher risk of infection in both post-primary analysis (adjusted hazard ratio 1·63, 95% CI 1·41–1·88) and after an mRNA-1273 booster (1·26 [1·00–1·57] vs BNT162b2 primary and booster). Lower risk of infection was associated with older age (post-primary: 0·97 [0·96–0·97] per year; post-booster: 0·97 [0·97–0·98]), whereas higher risk of infection was associated with lower educational attainment (post-primary: 1·78 [1·44–2·20] for primary/secondary vs postgraduate; post-booster: 1·46 [1·16–1·83]) and at least three weekly visits to indoor public places (post-primary: 1·36 [1·13–1·63] vs none; post-booster: 1·29 [1·07–1·56]).

Interpretation

Vaccine type, socioeconomic status, age, and behaviours affect risk of breakthrough infection after primary and booster vaccinations.

Funding

Barts Charity, UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund.

Determinants of Antibody Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: Population-Based Longitudinal Study (COVIDENCE UK)

Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines vary for reasons that remain poorly understood. A range of sociodemographic, behavioural, clinical, pharmacologic and nutritional factors could explain these differences. To investigate this hypothesis, we tested for presence of combined IgG, IgA and IgM (IgGAM) anti-Spike antibodies before and after 2 doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (ChAdOx1, AstraZeneca) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) in UK adults participating in a population-based longitudinal study who received their first dose of vaccine between December 2020 and July 2021. Information on sixty-six potential sociodemographic, behavioural, clinical, pharmacologic and nutritional determinants of serological response to vaccination was captured using serial online questionnaires. We used logistic regression to estimate multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for associations between independent variables and risk of seronegativity following two vaccine doses. Additionally, percentage differences in antibody titres between groups were estimated in the sub-set of participants who were seropositive post-vaccination using linear regression. Anti-spike antibodies were undetectable in 378/9101 (4.2%) participants at a median of 8.6 weeks post second vaccine dose. Increased risk of post-vaccination seronegativity associated with administration of ChAdOx1 vs. BNT162b2 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 6.6, 95% CI 4.2−10.4), shorter interval between vaccine doses (aOR 1.6, 1.2−2.1, 6−10 vs. >10 weeks), poor vs. excellent general health (aOR 3.1, 1.4−7.0), immunodeficiency (aOR 6.5, 2.5−16.6) and immunosuppressant use (aOR 3.7, 2.4−5.7). Odds of seronegativity were lower for participants who were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive pre-vaccination (aOR 0.2, 0.0−0.6) and for those taking vitamin D supplements (aOR 0.7, 0.5−0.9). Serologic responses to vaccination did not associate with time of day of vaccine administration, lifestyle factors including tobacco smoking, alcohol intake and sleep, or use of anti-pyretics for management of reactive symptoms after vaccination. In a sub-set of 8727 individuals who were seropositive post-vaccination, lower antibody titres associated with administration of ChAdOx1 vs. BNT162b2 (43.4% lower, 41.8−44.8), longer duration between second vaccine dose and sampling (12.7% lower, 8.2−16.9, for 9−16 weeks vs. 2−4 weeks), shorter interval between vaccine doses (10.4% lower, 3.7−16.7, for <6 weeks vs. >10 weeks), receiving a second vaccine dose in October−December vs. April−June (47.7% lower, 11.4−69.1), older age (3.3% lower per 10-year increase in age, 2.1−4.6), and hypertension (4.1% lower, 1.1−6.9). Higher antibody titres associated with South Asian ethnicity (16.2% higher, 3.0−31.1, vs. White ethnicity) or Mixed/Multiple/Other ethnicity (11.8% higher, 2.9−21.6, vs. White ethnicity), higher body mass index (BMI; 2.9% higher, 0.2−5.7, for BMI 25−30 vs. <25 kg/m2) and pre-vaccination seropositivity for SARS-CoV-2 (105.1% higher, 94.1−116.6, for those seropositive and experienced COVID-19 symptoms vs. those who were seronegative pre-vaccination). In conclusion, we identify multiple determinants of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, many of which are modifiable.

Vitamin D Supplementation Does Not Influence SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Efficacy or Immunogenicity: Sub-Studies Nested within the CORONAVIT Randomised Controlled Trial

Vitamin D deficiency has been reported to associate with the impaired development of antigen-specific responses following vaccination. We aimed to determine whether vitamin D supplements might boost the immunogenicity and efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination by conducting three sub-studies nested within the CORONAVIT randomised controlled trial, which investigated the effects of offering vitamin D supplements at a dose of 800 IU/day or 3200 IU/day vs. no offer on risk of acute respiratory infections in UK adults with circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations <75 nmol/L. Sub-study 1 (n = 2808) investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on the risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection following two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Sub-study 2 (n = 1853) investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on titres of combined IgG, IgA and IgM (IgGAM) anti-Spike antibodies in eluates of dried blood spots collected after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Sub-study 3 (n = 100) investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on neutralising antibody and cellular responses in venous blood samples collected after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. In total, 1945/2808 (69.3%) sub-study 1 participants received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford−AstraZeneca); the remainder received two doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer). Mean follow-up 25(OH)D concentrations were significantly elevated in the 800 IU/day vs. no-offer group (82.5 vs. 53.6 nmol/L; mean difference 28.8 nmol/L, 95% CI 22.8−34.8) and in the 3200 IU/day vs. no offer group (105.4 vs. 53.6 nmol/L; mean difference 51.7 nmol/L, 45.1−58.4). Vitamin D supplementation did not influence the risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection in vaccinated participants (800 IU/day vs. no offer: adjusted hazard ratio 1.28, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.84; 3200 IU/day vs. no offer: 1.17, 0.81 to 1.70). Neither did it influence IgGAM anti-Spike titres, neutralising antibody titres or IFN-γ concentrations in the supernatants of S peptide-stimulated whole blood. In conclusion, vitamin D replacement at a dose of 800 or 3200 IU/day effectively elevated 25(OH)D concentrations, but it did not influence the protective efficacy or immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination when given to adults who had a sub-optimal vitamin D status at baseline.

Prevention of covid-19 and other acute respiratory infections with cod liver oil supplementation, a low dose vitamin D supplement: quadruple blinded, randomised placebo controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine if daily supplementation with cod liver oil, a low dose vitamin D supplement, in winter, prevents SARS-CoV-2 infection, serious covid-19, or other acute respiratory infections in adults in Norway.

DESIGN

Quadruple blinded, randomised placebo controlled trial.

SETTING

Norway, 10 November 2020 to 2 June 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

34 601 adults (aged 18-75 years), not taking daily vitamin D supplements.

INTERVENTION

5 mL/day of cod liver oil (10 µg of vitamin D, n=17 278) or placebo (n=17 323) for up to six months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Four co-primary endpoints were predefined: the first was a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result determined by reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction and the second was serious covid-19, defined as self-reported dyspnoea, admission to hospital, or death. Other acute respiratory infections were indicated by the third and fourth co-primary endpoints: a negative SARS-CoV-2 test result and self-reported symptoms. Side effects related to the supplementation were self-reported. The fallback method was used to handle multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

Supplementation with cod liver oil was not associated with a reduced risk of any of the co-primary endpoints. Participants took the supplement (cod liver oil or placebo) for a median of 164 days, and 227 (1.31%) participants in the cod liver oil group and 228 (1.32%) participants in the placebo group had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result (relative risk 1.00, multiple comparison adjusted confidence interval 0.82 to 1.22). Serious covid-19 was identified in 121 (0.70%) participants in the cod liver oil group and in 101 (0.58%) participants in the placebo group (1.20, 0.87 to 1.65). 8546 (49.46%) and 8565 (49.44%) participants in the cod liver oil and placebo groups, respectively, had ≥1 negative SARS-CoV-2 test results (1.00, 0.97 to 1.04). 3964 (22.94%) and 3834 (22.13%) participants in the cod liver oil and placebo groups, respectively, reported ≥1 acute respiratory infections (1.04, 0.97 to 1.11). Only low grade side effects were reported in the cod liver oil and placebo groups.

CONCLUSION

Supplementation with cod liver oil in the winter did not reduce the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, serious covid-19, or other acute respiratory infections compared with placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04609423.

Effect of a test-and-treat approach to vitamin D supplementation on risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection and covid-19: phase 3 randomised controlled trial (CORONAVIT)

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of population level implementation of a test-and-treat approach to correction of suboptimal vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) <75 nmol/L) on risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection and covid 19.

DESIGN

Phase 3 open label randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

6200 people aged ≥16 years who were not taking vitamin D supplements at baseline.

INTERVENTIONS

Offer of a postal finger prick test of blood 25(OH)D concentration with provision of a six month supply of lower dose vitamin D (800 IU/day, n=1550) or higher dose vitamin D (3200 IU/day, n=1550) to those with blood 25(OH)D concentration <75 nmol/L, compared with no offer of testing or supplementation (n=3100). Follow-up was for six months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with at least one swab test or doctor confirmed acute respiratory tract infection of any cause. A secondary outcome was the proportion of participants with swab test confirmed covid-19. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and associated 95% confidence intervals. The primary analysis was conducted by intention to treat.

RESULTS

Of 3100 participants offered a vitamin D test, 2958 (95.4%) accepted and 2674 (86.3%) had 25(OH)D concentrations <75 nmol/L and received vitamin D supplements (n=1328 lower dose, n=1346 higher dose). Compared with 136/2949 (4.6%) participants in the no offer group, at least one acute respiratory tract infection of any cause occurred in 87/1515 (5.7%) in the lower dose group (odds ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.66) and 76/1515 (5.0%) in the higher dose group (1.09, 0.82 to 1.46). Compared with 78/2949 (2.6%) participants in the no offer group, 55/1515 (3.6%) developed covid-19 in the lower dose group (1.39, 0.98 to 1.97) and 45/1515 (3.0%) in the higher dose group (1.13, 0.78 to 1.63).

CONCLUSIONS

Among people aged 16 years and older with a high baseline prevalence of suboptimal vitamin D status, implementation of a population level test-and-treat approach to vitamin D supplementation was not associated with a reduction in risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection or covid-19.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04579640.

Short-term and long-term impacts of COVID-19 on economic vulnerability: a population-based longitudinal study (COVIDENCE UK)

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether COVID-19 has a significant impact on adequacy of household income to meet basic needs (primary outcome) and work absence due to sickness (secondary outcome), both at the onset of illness (short term) and subsequently (long term).

DESIGN

Multilevel mixed regression analysis of self-reported data from monthly online questionnaires, completed 1 May 2020 to 28 October 2021, adjusting for baseline characteristics including age, sex, socioeconomic status and self-rated health.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Participants (n=16 910) were UK residents aged 16 years or over participating in a national longitudinal study of COVID-19 (COVIDENCE UK).

RESULTS

Incident COVID-19 was independently associated with increased odds of participants reporting household income as being inadequate to meet their basic needs in the short term (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.39, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.73) though this did not persist in the long term (aOR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.16). Exploratory analysis revealed a stronger short-term association among those who reported long COVID, defined as the presence of symptoms lasting more than 4 weeks after disease onset, than those reporting COVID-19 without long COVID (p for trend 0.002). Incident COVID-19 associated with increased odds of reporting sickness absence from work in the long term (aOR 4.73, 95% CI 2.47 to 9.06) but not in the short term (aOR 1.34, 95% CI 0.52 to 3.49).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate an independent association between COVID-19 and increased risk of economic vulnerability among COVIDENCE participants, measured by both household income sufficiency and sickness absence from work. Taking these findings together with pre-existing research showing that socioeconomic disadvantage increases the risk of developing COVID-19, this may suggest a 'vicious cycle' of impaired health and poor economic outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04330599.

Correlation Between Postvaccination Anti-Spike Antibody Titers and Protection Against Breakthrough Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection: A Population-Based Longitudinal Study

In this population-based cohort of 7538 adults, combined immunoglobulin (Ig) G, IgA, and IgM (IgG/A/M) anti-spike titers measured after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination were predictive of protection against breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection. Discrimination was significantly improved by adjustment for factors influencing risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure, including household overcrowding, public transport use, and visits to indoor public places. Anti-spike IgG/A/M titers showed positive correlation with neutralizing antibody titers (rs = 0.80 [95% confidence interval, .72-.86]; P < .001) and S peptide-stimulated interferon-γ concentrations (rs = 0.31 [.13-.47]; P < .001).

Micronutrients to Support Vaccine Immunogenicity and Efficacy

The world has entered the third year of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Vaccination is the primary public health strategy to protect against infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in addition to other measures, such as mask wearing and social distancing. Vaccination has reduced COVID-19 severity and mortality dramatically. Nevertheless, incidence globally remains high, and certain populations are still at risk for severe outcomes. Additional strategies to support immunity, including potentially enhancing the response to vaccination, are needed. Many vitamins and trace minerals have recognized immunomodulatory actions, and their status and/or supplementation have been reported to correspond to the incidence and severity of infection. Furthermore, a variety of observational and some interventional studies report that adequate micronutrient status or micronutrient supplementation is associated with enhanced vaccine responses, including to COVID-19 vaccination. Such data suggest that micronutrient supplementation may hold the potential to improve vaccine immunogenicity and effectiveness, although additional interventional studies to further strengthen the existing evidence are needed. Positive findings from such research could have important implications for global public health, since deficiencies in several micronutrients that support immune function are prevalent in numerous settings, and supplementation can be implemented safely and inexpensively.