Association of infection-induced antibody levels with risk of subsequent SARS-COV-2 reinfection among healthcare professionals, Rhode Island, 1 March 2020-17 February 2021.

IF 3.7 2区 生物学 Q2 MICROBIOLOGY
Microbiology spectrum Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-25 DOI:10.1128/spectrum.02086-24
Jianrong Shi, M Gayle Gabriel, Monica Epperson, Phil A Chan, Jefferson M Jones, Lyle R Petersen, Melissa Briggs Hagen, Natalie J Thornburg, Sharon Saydah, Claire M Midgley
{"title":"Association of infection-induced antibody levels with risk of subsequent SARS-COV-2 reinfection among healthcare professionals, Rhode Island, 1 March 2020-17 February 2021.","authors":"Jianrong Shi, M Gayle Gabriel, Monica Epperson, Phil A Chan, Jefferson M Jones, Lyle R Petersen, Melissa Briggs Hagen, Natalie J Thornburg, Sharon Saydah, Claire M Midgley","doi":"10.1128/spectrum.02086-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Numerous studies have investigated vaccine-induced correlates of protection (CoP) against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, but data on infection-induced CoP are limited. Given differences between vaccine- and infection-induced immune responses, in conjunction with low vaccination in many US populations, a better understanding of infection-induced CoP is needed. We used residual sera from a mid-2020 Rhode Island serosurvey of healthcare professionals (HCP) and corresponding state-collected SARS-CoV-2 testing data through February 2021 to generate an analytic cohort of HCP with a first SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to serosurvey blood collection and multiple viral tests after blood collection to assess for reinfection (defined as a positive viral test ≥90 days after their first positive). We tested sera for levels of IgG and IgA targeting ancestral spike (S), receptor-binding domain (RBD), or nucleocapsid (N). We used adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios to assess the association between categorical antibody level and the risk of subsequent reinfection. Among 170 HCP included in this analysis (median age = 47 years; interquartile range: 35-55 years), 30 were reinfected during the analytic period. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios indicated that higher levels of anti-S or anti-RBD IgG were significantly associated with a lower risk of reinfection. These findings support the use of anti-S or anti-RBD IgG levels as markers of immunologic protection, such as in population serosurveys, or immune-bridging studies in settings of high prevalence of prior infection.  IMPORTANCEThe measurement of antibodies in blood is a relatively simple process and commonly used to estimate overall levels of past infection in populations. But, if someone has antibodies, does this mean that they are protected from being infected again? And are people with higher levels of antibody better protected? There are good data in the literature exploring how antibodies from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination are associated with protection. But, there is still a lot to learn about protection conferred by antibodies that develop after a severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. In our study, we measure the levels of six different antibody types developed after infection and compare levels to the risk of subsequent infection to better understand which antibody types are best associated with protection. Our data are important for improving studies that use antibodies as proxies for protection, such as population immunity estimates, or those assessing new prevention products.</p>","PeriodicalId":18670,"journal":{"name":"Microbiology spectrum","volume":" ","pages":"e0208624"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11960437/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microbiology spectrum","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02086-24","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Numerous studies have investigated vaccine-induced correlates of protection (CoP) against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, but data on infection-induced CoP are limited. Given differences between vaccine- and infection-induced immune responses, in conjunction with low vaccination in many US populations, a better understanding of infection-induced CoP is needed. We used residual sera from a mid-2020 Rhode Island serosurvey of healthcare professionals (HCP) and corresponding state-collected SARS-CoV-2 testing data through February 2021 to generate an analytic cohort of HCP with a first SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to serosurvey blood collection and multiple viral tests after blood collection to assess for reinfection (defined as a positive viral test ≥90 days after their first positive). We tested sera for levels of IgG and IgA targeting ancestral spike (S), receptor-binding domain (RBD), or nucleocapsid (N). We used adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios to assess the association between categorical antibody level and the risk of subsequent reinfection. Among 170 HCP included in this analysis (median age = 47 years; interquartile range: 35-55 years), 30 were reinfected during the analytic period. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios indicated that higher levels of anti-S or anti-RBD IgG were significantly associated with a lower risk of reinfection. These findings support the use of anti-S or anti-RBD IgG levels as markers of immunologic protection, such as in population serosurveys, or immune-bridging studies in settings of high prevalence of prior infection.  IMPORTANCEThe measurement of antibodies in blood is a relatively simple process and commonly used to estimate overall levels of past infection in populations. But, if someone has antibodies, does this mean that they are protected from being infected again? And are people with higher levels of antibody better protected? There are good data in the literature exploring how antibodies from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination are associated with protection. But, there is still a lot to learn about protection conferred by antibodies that develop after a severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. In our study, we measure the levels of six different antibody types developed after infection and compare levels to the risk of subsequent infection to better understand which antibody types are best associated with protection. Our data are important for improving studies that use antibodies as proxies for protection, such as population immunity estimates, or those assessing new prevention products.

2020年3月1日至2021年2月17日,罗德岛州卫生保健专业人员感染诱导抗体水平与随后SARS-COV-2再感染风险的关系
许多研究调查了疫苗诱导的预防严重急性呼吸综合征-冠状病毒2 (SARS-CoV-2)感染的相关保护(CoP),但关于感染诱导的CoP的数据有限。鉴于疫苗和感染诱导的免疫反应之间的差异,再加上许多美国人群的疫苗接种率低,需要更好地了解感染诱导的CoP。我们使用2020年中期罗德岛州卫生保健专业人员(HCP)血清调查的剩余血清和相应的州收集的SARS-CoV-2检测数据,直至2021年2月,生成血清调查采血前首次感染SARS-CoV-2的HCP和采血后多次病毒检测的分析队列,以评估再次感染(定义为首次阳性后≥90天的病毒检测阳性)。我们检测了血清中针对祖先刺突(S)、受体结合域(RBD)或核衣壳(N)的IgG和IgA水平。我们使用调整后的Cox比例风险比来评估分类抗体水平与随后再感染风险之间的关系。 在本分析纳入的170例HCP中(中位年龄= 47岁;四分位数范围:35-55岁),其中30例在分析期间再次感染。调整后的Cox比例风险比显示,较高水平的抗s或抗rbd IgG与较低的再感染风险显著相关。这些发现支持使用抗s或抗rbd IgG水平作为免疫保护的标记,例如在人群血清调查中,或在既往感染高流行的环境中进行免疫桥接研究。  重要性血液中抗体的测量是一个相对简单的过程,通常用于估计人群过去感染的总体水平。但是,如果有人有抗体,这是否意味着他们不会再次被感染呢?抗体水平越高的人是否得到了更好的保护?文献中有很好的数据探讨了2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)疫苗的抗体如何与保护有关。但是,关于严重急性呼吸综合征-冠状病毒2 (SARS-CoV-2)感染后产生的抗体所具有的保护作用,还有很多需要了解的。在我们的研究中,我们测量了感染后产生的六种不同抗体类型的水平,并将其与随后感染的风险进行比较,以更好地了解哪种抗体类型与保护最相关。我们的数据对于改进使用抗体作为保护代理的研究(例如人群免疫估计)或评估新的预防产品的研究具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Microbiology spectrum
Microbiology spectrum Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Genetics
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
1800
期刊介绍: Microbiology Spectrum publishes commissioned review articles on topics in microbiology representing ten content areas: Archaea; Food Microbiology; Bacterial Genetics, Cell Biology, and Physiology; Clinical Microbiology; Environmental Microbiology and Ecology; Eukaryotic Microbes; Genomics, Computational, and Synthetic Microbiology; Immunology; Pathogenesis; and Virology. Reviews are interrelated, with each review linking to other related content. A large board of Microbiology Spectrum editors aids in the development of topics for potential reviews and in the identification of an editor, or editors, who shepherd each collection.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信