SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and subsequent infection risk in healthy young adults: a prospective cohort study

Abstract

SummaryBackgroundThe risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) subsequent infection among seropositive young adults was studied prospectively.MethodsThe study population comprised 3,249 predominantly male, 18-20-year-old Marine recruits. Upon arrival at a Marine-supervised two-week quarantine, participants were assessed for baseline SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity, defined as a 1:150 dilution or greater on receptor binding domain and full-length spike protein enzyme-linked immunosorbent (ELISA) assays. SARS-CoV-2 infection was assessed by PCR at initiation, middle and end of the quarantine. After appropriate exclusions, including participants with a positive PCR during quarantine, we performed three biweekly PCR tests in both seropositive and in seronegative groups once recruits left quarantine and entered basic training and baseline neutralizing antibody titers on all subsequently infected seropositive and selected seropositive uninfected participants.FindingsAmong 189 seropositive participants, 19 (10.1%) had at least one positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 during the six-week follow-up (1.1 cases per person-year). In contrast, 1,079 (48.0%) of the 2,247 seronegative participants tested positive (6.2 cases per person-year). The incidence rate ratio was 0.18 (95% CI 0.11-0.28, p<0.00001). Among seropositive recruits, infection was associated with lower baseline full-length spike protein IgG titers (p<0.0001). Compared with seronegative recruits, seropositive recruits had about 10-fold lower viral loads (ORF1ab gene, p<0.005), and trended towards shorter duration of PCR positivity (p=0.18) and more frequent asymptomatic infections (p=0.13). Among seropositive participants, baseline neutralizing titers were detected in 45 of 54 (83.3%) uninfected and in 6 of 19 (31.6%) infected participants during the 6 weeks of observation (ID50 difference p<.0001).InterpretationSeropositive young adults had about one-fifth the risk of subsequent infection compared with seronegative individuals. Although antibodies induced by initial infection are largely protective, they do not guarantee effective SARS-CoV-2 neutralization activity or immunity against subsequent infection. These findings may be relevant for optimization of mass vaccination strategies.FundingDefense Health Agency and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

SPICE-19: a 3-Month Prospective Cohort Study of 640 Medical Students and Foundation Doctors

“…Alternatively, it may suggest that many individuals working in healthcare have already been affected by COVID-19 [52], and therefore believe they are protected from getting infected again. If it is due to the latter reason, it will be important for medical schools and employers to emphasise that there is a risk of reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 [53,54]. Therefore, it remains important for individuals to be vigilant and continue following IPC protocols even if they have previously been infected.…”

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in people with HIV

“…Frater and colleagues' results support that people with HIV who are on effective ART with suppressed viral loads and high CD4 cell counts (>350 cells per μL) do not have diminished humoral and cell-mediated responses to the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 prime-boost vaccine, although longer term follow-up is needed to examine the durability of these responses. Increasing data suggest that SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity after natural infection is correlated with later protection, 10 although prospectively following up people with HIV after vaccination will be important. However, we should not attempt to extrapolate these data to people with HIV with lower CD4 counts or CD4/CD8 ratios than the population studied here, or without suppressed HIV viral loads.…”

Temporal Variations in Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Infections by Race and Ethnicity in Arkansas

“…In the trend of adjusted effect for race/ethnicity (Table 5), the likelihood of antibody positivity for the Hispanic group decreased compared to White population in the later time period (OR 0.49, 95%CI 0.3-0.78). While the overall seroprevalence for our study was low compared to high population centers or high-risk groups [16][17][18][19], indicating that most Arkansans were immune naïve to the virus during the study time period, seroprevalence did increase over time in all subpopulations.…”