Dataset Information

Antibody Status and Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Health Care Workers.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The relationship between the presence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the risk of subsequent reinfection remains unclear.

Methods

We investigated the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in seropositive and seronegative health care workers attending testing of asymptomatic and symptomatic staff at Oxford University Hospitals in the United Kingdom. Baseline antibody status was determined by anti-spike (primary analysis) and anti-nucleocapsid IgG assays, and staff members were followed for up to 31 weeks. We estimated the relative incidence of PCR-positive test results and new symptomatic infection according to antibody status, adjusting for age, participant-reported gender, and changes in incidence over time.

Results

A total of 12,541 health care workers participated and had anti-spike IgG measured; 11,364 were followed up after negative antibody results and 1265 after positive results, including 88 in whom seroconversion occurred during follow-up. A total of 223 anti-spike-seronegative health care workers had a positive PCR test (1.09 per 10,000 days at risk), 100 during screening while they were asymptomatic and 123 while symptomatic, whereas 2 anti-spike-seropositive health care workers had a positive PCR test (0.13 per 10,000 days at risk), and both workers were asymptomatic when tested (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.03 to 0.44; P?=?0.002). There were no symptomatic infections in workers with anti-spike antibodies. Rate ratios were similar when the anti-nucleocapsid IgG assay was used alone or in combination with the anti-spike IgG assay to determine baseline status.

Conclusions

The presence of positive anti-spike or anti-nucleocapsid IgG antibodies was associated with a substantially reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in the ensuing 6 months. (Funded by the U.K. Government Department of Health and Social Care and others.).

SUBMITTER: Lumley SF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7781098 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Antibody Status and Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Health Care Workers.

Lumley Sheila F SF O'Donnell Denise D Stoesser Nicole E NE Matthews Philippa C PC Howarth Alison A Hatch Stephanie B SB Marsden Brian D BD Cox Stuart S James Tim T Warren Fiona F Peck Liam J LJ Ritter Thomas G TG de Toledo Zoe Z Warren Laura L Axten David D Cornall Richard J RJ Jones E Yvonne EY Stuart David I DI Screaton Gavin G Ebner Daniel D Hoosdally Sarah S Chand Meera M Crook Derrick W DW O'Donnell Anne-Marie AM Conlon Christopher P CP Pouwels Koen B KB Walker A Sarah AS Peto Tim E A TEA Hopkins Susan S Walker Timothy M TM Jeffery Katie K Eyre David W DW

The New England journal of medicine 20201223 6

<h4>Background</h4>The relationship between the presence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the risk of subsequent reinfection remains unclear.<h4>Methods</h4>We investigated the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in seropositive and seronegative health care workers attending testing of asymptomatic and symptomatic staff at Oxford University Hospitals in the United Kingdom. Baseline antibody status was det ...[more]

PMID: 33369366

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAdministration of a BNT162b2 booster dose (Pfizer-BioNTech) to fully vaccinated individuals aged 60 years and older was significantly associated with lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe illness. Data are lacking on the effectiveness of booster doses for younger individuals and health care workers.ObjectiveTo estimate the association of a BNT162b2 booster dose with SARS-CoV-2 infections among health care workers who were previously vaccinated with a 2-dose series of BNT162b2.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a prospective cohort study conducted at a tertiary medical center in Tel Aviv, Israel. The study cohort included 1928 immunocompetent health care workers who were previously vaccinated with a 2-dose series of BNT162b2, and had enrolled between August 8 and 19, 2021, with final follow-up reported through September 20, 2021. Screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection was performed every 14 days. Anti-spike protein receptor binding domain IgG titers were determined at baseline and 1 month after enrollment. Cox regression with time-dependent analysis was used to estimate hazard ratios of SARS-CoV-2 infection between booster-immunized status and 2-dose vaccinated (booster-nonimmunized) status.ExposuresVaccination with a booster dose of BNT162b2 vaccine.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction.ResultsAmong 1928 participants, the median age was 44 years (IQR, 36-52 years) and 1381 were women (71.6%). Participants completed the 2-dose vaccination series a median of 210 days (IQR, 205-213 days) before study enrollment. A total of 1650 participants (85.6%) received the booster dose. During a median follow-up of 39 days (IQR, 35-41 days), SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred in 44 participants (incidence rate, 60.2 per 100 000 person-days); 31 (70.5%) were symptomatic. Five SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred in booster-immunized participants and 39 in booster-nonimmunized participants (incidence rate, 12.8 vs 116 per 100 000 person-days, respectively). In a time-dependent Cox regression analysis, the adjusted hazard ratio of SARS-CoV-2 infection for booster-immunized vs booster-nonimmunized participants was 0.07 (95% CI, 0.02-0.20).Conclusions and relevanceAmong health care workers at a single center in Israel who were previously vaccinated with a 2-dose series of BNT162b2, administration of a booster dose compared with not receiving one was associated with a significantly lower rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection over a median of 39 days of follow-up. Ongoing surveillance is required to assess durability of the findings.

Project description:ImportancePatients with cancer and health care workers (HCWs) are at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Assessing the antibody status of patients with cancer and HCWs can help understand the spread of COVID-19 in cancer care.ObjectiveTo evaluate serum SARS-CoV-2 antibody status in patients with cancer and HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan.Design, setting, and participantsParticipants were enrolled for this prospective cross-sectional study between August 3 and October 30, 2020, from 2 comprehensive cancer centers in the epidemic area around Tokyo, Japan. Patients with cancer aged 16 years or older and employees were enrolled. Participants with suspected COVID-19 infection at the time of enrollment were excluded.ExposuresCancer of any type and cancer treatment, including chemotherapy, surgery, immune checkpoint inhibitors, radiotherapy, and targeted molecular therapy.Main outcomes and measuresSeroprevalence and antibody levels in patients with cancer and HCWs. Seropositivity was defined as positivity to nucleocapsid IgG (N-IgG) and/or spike IgG (S-IgG). Serum levels of SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies against the nucleocapsid and spike proteins were measured by chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay.ResultsA total of 500 patients with cancer (median age, 62.5 years [range, 21-88 years]; 265 men [55.4%]) and 1190 HCWs (median age, 40 years [range, 20-70 years]; 382 men [25.4%]) were enrolled. In patients with cancer, 489 (97.8%) had solid tumors, and 355 (71.0%) had received anticancer treatment within 1 month. Among HCWs, 385 (32.3%) were nurses or assistant nurses, 266 (22.4%) were administrative officers, 197 (16.6%) were researchers, 179 (15.0%) were physicians, 113 (9.5%) were technicians, and 50 (4.2%) were pharmacists. The seroprevalence was 1.0% (95% CI, 0.33%-2.32%) in patients and 0.67% (95% CI, 0.29%-1.32%) in HCWs (P = .48). However, the N-IgG and S-IgG antibody levels were significantly lower in patients than in HCWs (N-IgG: β, -0.38; 95% CI, -0.55 to -0.21; P < .001; and S-IgG: β, -0.39; 95% CI, -0.54 to -0.23; P < .001). Additionally, among patients, N-IgG levels were significantly lower in those who received chemotherapy than in those who did not (median N-IgG levels, 0.1 [interquartile range (IQR), 0-0.3] vs 0.1 [IQR, 0-0.4], P = .04). In contrast, N-IgG and S-IgG levels were significantly higher in patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors than in those who did not (median N-IgG levels: 0.2 [IQR, 0.1-0.5] vs 0.1 [IQR, 0-0.3], P = .02; S-IgG levels: 0.15 [IQR, 0-0.3] vs 0.1[IQR, 0-0.2], P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of Japanese patients with cancer and HCWs, the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies did not differ between the 2 groups; however, findings suggest that comorbid cancer and treatment with systemic therapy, including chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors, may influence the immune response to SARS-CoV-2.

Project description:BackgroundIncreased 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.MethodsA 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.FindingsFrom 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.InterpretationA 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.FundingDepartment 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.

Dataset Information

Antibody Status and Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Health Care Workers.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Antibody Status and Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Health Care Workers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets