Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 N-Antibody Response in Healthcare Workers, London, UK.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Shrotri M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8007325 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe durability of the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination remains unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate a rapid SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibody detection kit as a qualitative screen for the humoral response to vaccination.MethodsStudy participants (n = 125) included pediatric healthcare workers (HCWs) who had received two doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. Participants were tested on study entry (March 12, 2021 to April 9, 2021). The mean number of days post second dose was 22 (range 17-36). Participants were tested for IgM/IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein with the RightSign COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette. ELISA/competitive inhibition ELISA (CI-ELISA) were subsequently run to assess for the neutralization effect and SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid IgM/IgG antibodies.ResultsOverall, 98.4% of participants were IgG-positive and 0.8% were IgM-positive on rapid RightSign testing. Of those with IgG-positive results, 100% were anti-spike protein IgG-positive on CI-ELISA; none of those who tested IgG-negative via the rapid test were IgG-positive on CI-ELISA. All HCWs who tested RightSign positive demonstrated neutralizing capability on CI-ELISA. Overall, 1.6% demonstrated anti-nucleocapsid IgM antibodies and 5.6% demonstrated anti-nucleocapsid IgG antibodies.ConclusionsThe strong agreement between the rapid RightSign IgG results and confirmatory CI-ELISA testing suggests that this test may be used to assess for positive, and neutralizing, antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination.
| S-EPMC8482557 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient-facing (frontline) health-care workers (HCWs) are at high risk of repeated exposure to SARS-CoV-2.AimWe sought to determine the association between levels of frontline exposure and likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity amongst HCW.MethodsA cross-sectional study was undertaken using purposefully collected data from HCWs at two hospitals in London, United Kingdom (UK) over eight weeks in May-June 2020. Information on sociodemographic, clinical and occupational characteristics was collected using an anonymised questionnaire. Serology was performed using split SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG lateral flow immunoassays. Exposure risk was categorised into five pre-defined ordered grades. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between being frontline and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity after controlling for other risks of infection.Findings615 HCWs participated in the study. 250/615 (40.7%) were SARS-CoV-2 IgM and/or IgG positive. After controlling for other exposures, there was non-significant evidence of a modest association between being a frontline HCW (any level) and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity compared to non-frontline status (OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.84-2.30, P=0.200). There was 15% increase in the odds of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity for each step along the frontline exposure gradient (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.00-1.32, P=0.043).ConclusionWe found a high SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG seropositivity with modest evidence for a dose-response association between increasing levels of frontline exposure risk and seropositivity. Even in well-resourced hospital settings, appropriate use of personal protective equipment, in addition to other transmission-based precautions for inpatient care of SARS-CoV-2 patients could reduce the risk of hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection among frontline HCW.
| S-EPMC8217738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Healthcare workers (HCWs) have a theoretically increased risk of contracting severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) given their occupational exposure. We tested 2,167 HCWs in a London Acute Integrated Care Organisation for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in May and June 2020 to evaluate seroprevalence. We found a seropositivity rate of 31.6% among HCWs.
| S-EPMC7438618 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8091905 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveNeutralizing antibodies are among the factors used to measure an individual's immune status for the control of infectious diseases. We aimed to confirm the persistence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) neutralizing antibody levels in patients who had recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsPlasma donors in South Korea who had completely recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection had follow-up testing to determine the persistence of neutralizing antibodies using a plaque-reduction neutralization test and ELISA.ResultsOf the 111 participants-aged 20-29 years, 37/111 (33.3%); 30-39 years, 17/111 (15.3%); 40-49 years, 23/111 (20.7%); 50-59 years, 21/111 (18.9%); 60-65 years, 13/111 (11.7%); male, 43/111 (38.7%); female, 68/111 (61.3%)-66.1% still had neutralizing antibodies approximately 9 months (range 255-302 days) after confirmation of the diagnosis.ConclusionsIn this study we analysed the titre of neutralizing antibodies associated with predicting immune status in individuals with natural infection. Information about the persistence and change in levels of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 can be utilized to provide evidence for developing vaccination schedules for individuals with previous infection.
| S-EPMC8695319 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 virus responsible for severe respiratory infection associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first confirmed in Florida on March 1, 2020. Responding to the pandemic, multi-agency collaborative partnerships put in place actions integrating point-of-care antibody testing at established large-scale COVID-19 testing sites where the baseline seropositivity of COVID-19 in health care workers and first responders in Florida at the start of the pandemic was established.PurposeDetermine the seropositivity of healthcare workers and first responders at five drive thru testing sites using a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test in Florida from May 6 through June 3, 2020.MethodsThe first drive-thru SARS-CoV-2 antibody test site was opened at Miami Hard Rock Stadium, May 6, 2020. Testing expanded to three additional sites on May 9, 2020: Jacksonville, Orlando, and Palm Beach. The fifth and final site, Miami Beach, began testing on May 21, 2020. Healthcare workers and first responder's self-seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing were designated for antibody testing and completed a laboratory collection form onsite for the point-of-care test. All testing was performed on whole blood specimens (obtained by venipuncture) using the Cellex Inc. qSARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM Rapid Test. Seropositivity was assessed by univariate analysis and by logistic regression including the covariates age, sex, race/ethnicity, and testing location.Results and discussionAs of June 3, 2020, of 5,779 healthcare workers and first responders tested, 4.1% were seropositive (range 2.6-8.2%). SARS-COV-2 antibody tests had higher odds of being positive for persons testing at the Miami Hard Rock Stadium (aOR 2.24 [95% C.I. 1.48-3.39]), persons of Haitian/Creole ethnicity (aOR 3.28 [95% C.I. 1.23-8.72]), Hispanic/Latino(a) ethnicity (aOR 2.17 [95% C.I. 1.50-3.13], and Black non-Hispanic persons (aOR 1.63 [95% C.I. 1.08-2.46]). SARS-COV-2 antibody prevalence among first responders and healthcare workers in five sites in Florida varied by race and ethnicity and by testing location.
| S-EPMC8040388 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8131184 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 has caused a global health disaster with millions of death worldwide, and the substantial proportion of asymptomatic carriers poses a huge threat to public health. The long-term antibody responses and neutralization activity during natural asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection are unknown. In this study, we used enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) and neutralization assay with purified SARS-CoV-2S and N proteins to study the antibody responses of 156 individuals with natural asymptomatic infection. We found robust antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in 156 patients from 6 to 12 months. Although the antibody responses gradually decreased, S-IgG was more stable than N-IgG. S-IgG was still detected in 79% of naturally infected individuals after 12 months of infection. Moderate to potent neutralization activities were also observed in 98.74% of patients 6 months after infection. However, this proportion decreased at 8-month (46.15%) and 10-month (39.11%) after infection, respectively. Only 23.72% of patients displayed potent neutralization activity at 12 months. This study strongly supports the long-term presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in individuals with natural asymptomatic infection, although the magnitude of the antibody responses started to cripple 6 months after infection.
| S-EPMC8631518 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections are transmitted from a minority of infected subjects, some of which may be symptomatic or pre-symptomatic. We aimed to quantify potential infectiousness among asymptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) in relation to prior or later symptomatic disease. We previously (at the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic) performed a cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infections among 27,000 healthcare workers (HCWs) at work in the capital region of Sweden. We performed both SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and serology. Furthermore, the cohort was comprehensively followed for sick leave, both before and after sampling. In the present report, we used the cohort database to quantify potential infectiousness among HCWs at work. Those who had sick leave either before or after sampling were classified as post-symptomatic or pre-symptomatic, whereas the virus-positive subjects with no sick leave were considered asymptomatic. About 0.2% (19/9449) of HCW at work were potentially infectious and pre-symptomatic (later had disease) and 0.17% (16/9449) were potentially infectious and asymptomatic (never had sick leave either before nor after sampling). Thus, 33% and 28% of all the 57 potentially infectious subjects were pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic, respectively. When a questionnaire was administered to HCWs with past infection, only 10,5% of HCWs had had no indication at all of having had SARS-CoV-2 infection ("truly asymptomatic"). Our findings provide a unique quantification of the different groups of asymptomatic, potentially infectious HCWs.
| S-EPMC8682911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundScreening for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is under way in some key worker groups; how this adds to self-reported COVID-19 illness is unclear. In this study, we investigate the association between self-reported belief of COVID-19 illness and seropositivity.MethodsCross-sectional study of three key worker streams comprising (A) Police and Fire & Rescue (2 sites) (B) healthcare workers (1 site) and (C) healthcare workers with previously positive PCR result (5 sites). We collected self-reported signs and symptoms of COVID-19 and compared this with serology results from two SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays (Roche Elecsys® and EUROIMMUN).ResultsBetween 01 and 26 June, we recruited 2847 individuals (Stream A: 1,247, Stream B: 1,546 and Stream C: 154). Amongst those without previous positive PCR tests, 687/2,579 (26%) reported belief they had COVID-19, having experienced compatible symptoms; however, only 208 (30.3%) of these were seropositive on both immunoassays. Both immunoassays had high sensitivities relative to previous PCR positivity (>93%); there was also limited decline in antibody titres up to 110 days post symptom onset. Symptomatic but seronegative individuals had differing symptom profiles and shorter illnesses than seropositive individuals.ConclusionNon-COVID-19 respiratory illness may have been mistaken for COVID-19 during the outbreak; laboratory testing is more specific than self-reported key worker beliefs in ascertaining past COVID-19 disease.
| S-EPMC7997203 | biostudies-literature