Persistence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Non-Hospitalized COVID-19 Convalescent Health Care Workers

Bruni, Margherita; Cecatiello, Valentina; Díaz‐Basabe, Angélica; Lattanzi, Georgia; Mileti, Erika; Monzani, Silvia; Pirovano, Laura; Rizzelli, Francesca; Visintin, Clara; Bonizzi, Giuseppina; Giani, Marco; Lavitrano, Marialuisa; Faravelli, Silvia; Forneris, Federico; Caprioli, Flavio; Pelicci, Pier Giuseppe; Natoli, Gioacchino; Pasqualato, Sebastiano; Mapelli, Marina; Facciotti, Federica

doi:10.3390/jcm9103188

Cited by 70 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The patterns we observed showed a stable antibody titer after 14 days and up to 8 weeks after positive PCR, in 4 out of 7 kits (Abbott, VIDAS IgG, ELISA and Beckman) while in 3 out of 7 kits, the Roche, Siemens, and Diasorin we observed an increase in titers up to 8 weeks post infection. These results contradict previous reports that suggested a short half-life of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies [27] and support long-term immunity after infection as was shown in other studies [28]. In addition, we observed strong correlation between antibody titers and disease severity.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 82%

“…We then analyzed the factors that correlated with antibody titers among different patients. A few groups suggested that the half-life time of antibodies to certain SARS-CoV-2 proteins might be as low as 8 weeks, and might reflect a risk to lose protective immunity [27] and to potentially underestimate the number of infected individuals. We therefore analyzed the average antibody titer levels among individuals that were sampled at different time points after positive PCR results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multi-center nationwide comparison of seven serology assays reveals a SARS-CoV-2 non-responding seronegative subpopulation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: An Israeli national taskforce performed a multi-center clinical and analytical validation of seven serology assays to determine their utility and limitations for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Methods: Serology assays from Roche, Abbott, Diasorin, BioMerieux, Beckman-Coulter, Siemens, and Mt.-Sinai ELISA were included. Negative samples from 2391 individuals representative of the Israeli population, and 698 SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients, collected between March and May 2020, were analyzed Findings: Immunoassays sensitivities between 81.5%-89.4% and specificities between 97.7%-100% resulted in a profound impact on the expected Positive Predictive Value (PPV) in low (<15%) prevalence scenarios. No meaningful increase was detected in the false positive rate in children compared to adults. A positive correlation between disease severity and antibody titers, and no decrease in antibody titers in the first 8 weeks after PCR positivity was observed. We identified a subgroup of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive patients (~5% of patients), who remained seronegative across a wide range of antigens, isotypes, and technologies. Interpretation: wThe commercially available automated immunoassays exhibit significant differences in performance and expected PPV in low prevalence scenarios. The low false-positivity rate in under 20 0 s suggests that cross-reactive immunity from previous CoV strains is unlikely to explain the milder disease course in children. Finding no decrease in antibody titers in the first 8 weeks is in contrast to some reports of short half-life for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The~5% who were seronegative non-responders, using multiple

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 82%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-center nationwide comparison of seven serology assays reveals a SARS-CoV-2 non-responding seronegative subpopulation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Spike glycoprotein (S-protein) and the Nucleocapsid (N protein) as antigens based on the recently published protocol [17][18][19]. Briefly, after binding the proteins (RBD and N proteins) to a Nunc Maxisorp ELISA plate, and blocking aspecific bindings with PBS-BSA 3%, patients' sera to be analysed were applied to the plate to allow antibody binding at a final dilution of 1:200, revealed A sex aged match group of 164 non-CD subjects, tested in the same time frame of CD patients, has been used as the control.…”

Section: Detection Of Anti-sars-cov-2 Antibodies By Elisamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The copyright holder for this this version posted December 16, 2020. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.15.20248039 doi: medRxiv preprint [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. No demographic difference was observed between CD patients who were or not suffering from stress related illness.…”

Section: Patients and Symptomsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of a Sars-Cov-2 Infection in Patients With Celiac Disease

Elli

Facciotti

Lombardo

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has spread across the world causing a dramatic number of infections and deaths. No data are available about the effects of an infection in patients affected by celiac disease (CD) in terms of the development of related symptoms and antibodies. We aimed to investigate the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in celiac patients. Design. During a lockdown, the celiac patients living in the Milan area were contacted and interviewed about the development of COVID-19 symptoms as well as adherence to an anti-virus lifestyle and a gluten-free diet (GFD). They were also given a stress questionnaire to fill in. The development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA (anti-RBD and N proteins) and the expression of the duodenal ACE2 receptor were investigated. When available, duodenal histology, anti-tissue transglutaminase IgA (tTGA), presence of immunologic comorbidities and adherence to the GFD were analysed as possible risk factors. Results. 362 celiac patients have been interviewed and 42 (11%) presented with COVID-19 symptoms. The presence of symptoms was not influenced by tTGA positivity, presence of duodenal atrophy or adherence to GFD. 37% of the symptomatic patients presented anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulins (Ig). Globally, 18% of celiac patients showed anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ig vs 25% of the non-celiac control (p=0.18). The values of anti-RBD IgG/IgA and anti-N IgG did not differ from the non-celiac controls. Celiac patients had a significant lower level of anti-N IgA. The ACE2 receptor was detected in the non-atrophic duodenal mucosa of celiac patients; atrophy was associated with a lower expression of the ACE2 receptor. Conclusion. CD patients have an anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ig positiveness and profile similar to non-celiac controls, except for anti-N IgA. The main celiac parameters and adherence to the GFD do not influence the development of a different Ig profile.

show abstract

“…This difference may be due to the fact that infected individuals may not have comparable antigen loads and uniform antibody responses over the time of the disease, as suggested by a study conducted on asymptomatic and symptomatic cases [6]. Interestingly, the kinetics of the humoral response was recently described in symptomatic (non-severe) and convalescent COVID-19 individuals and revealed that antibody levels against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 decline over time [7][8][9][10]. Despite these findings, long-term antibody responses remain to be fully characterized, particularly in hospitalized patients, and for instance, for those transferred to ICU and with very poor prognosis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serological Surveillance of COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients in Réunion Island (France) Revealed that Specific Immunoglobulin G Are Rapidly Vanishing in Severe Cases

Dobi

Seteyen

Rakoto

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humoral immunity is critically important to control COVID-19. Long-term antibody responses remain to be fully characterized in hospitalized patients who have a high risk of death. We compared specific Immunoglobulin responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between two groups, intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU hospitalized patients over several weeks. Plasma specific IgG, IgM, and IgA levels were assessed using a commercial ELISA and compared to an in-house cell-based ELISA. Among the patients analyzed (mean (SD) of age, 64.4 (15.9) years, 19.2% female), 12 (46.2%) were hospitalized in ICU. IgG levels increased in non-ICU cases from the second to the eighth week after symptom onset. By contrast, IgG response was blunted in ICU patients over the same period. ICU patients with hematological malignancies had very weak or even undetectable IgG levels. While both groups had comparable levels of specific IgM antibodies, we found much lower levels of specific IgA in ICU versus non-ICU patients. In conclusion, COVID-19 ICU patients may be at risk of reinfection as their specific IgG response is declining in a matter of weeks. Antibody neutralizing assays and studies on specific cellular immunity will have to be performed.

show abstract

Persistence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Non-Hospitalized COVID-19 Convalescent Health Care Workers

Cited by 70 publications

References 39 publications

Multi-center nationwide comparison of seven serology assays reveals a SARS-CoV-2 non-responding seronegative subpopulation

Multi-center nationwide comparison of seven serology assays reveals a SARS-CoV-2 non-responding seronegative subpopulation

Impact of a Sars-Cov-2 Infection in Patients With Celiac Disease

Serological Surveillance of COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients in Réunion Island (France) Revealed that Specific Immunoglobulin G Are Rapidly Vanishing in Severe Cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About