Immune histories and natural infection protection during the omicron era.

IF 5.4 Q1 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Hiam Chemaitelly, Houssein H Ayoub, Niklas Bobrovitz, Peter Coyle, Patrick Tang, Mohammad R Hasan, Hadi M Yassine, Asmaa A Al Thani, Zaina Al-Kanaani, Einas Al-Kuwari, Andrew Jeremijenko, Anvar Hassan Kaleeckal, Ali Nizar Latif, Riyazuddin Mohammad Shaik, Hanan F Abdul-Rahim, Gheyath K Nasrallah, Mohamed Ghaith Al-Kuwari, Hamad Eid Al-Romaihi, Mohamed H Al-Thani, Abdullatif Al-Khal, Roberto Bertollini, Adeel A Butt, Laith J Abu-Raddad
{"title":"Immune histories and natural infection protection during the omicron era.","authors":"Hiam Chemaitelly, Houssein H Ayoub, Niklas Bobrovitz, Peter Coyle, Patrick Tang, Mohammad R Hasan, Hadi M Yassine, Asmaa A Al Thani, Zaina Al-Kanaani, Einas Al-Kuwari, Andrew Jeremijenko, Anvar Hassan Kaleeckal, Ali Nizar Latif, Riyazuddin Mohammad Shaik, Hanan F Abdul-Rahim, Gheyath K Nasrallah, Mohamed Ghaith Al-Kuwari, Hamad Eid Al-Romaihi, Mohamed H Al-Thani, Abdullatif Al-Khal, Roberto Bertollini, Adeel A Butt, Laith J Abu-Raddad","doi":"10.1038/s43856-025-00974-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Past immunological events can either enhance or compromise an individual's future immune protection. This study investigated how different severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) natural infection histories before an omicron infection, with or without vaccination, influence protection against subsequent omicron reinfection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three national, matched, retrospective cohort studies were conducted in Qatar from February 28, 2020, to August 12, 2024 to compare incidence of omicron reinfection between individuals with two omicron infections (omicron double-infection cohort) and those with one (omicron single-infection cohort); the omicron double-infection cohort with individuals who had a pre-omicron infection followed by an omicron reinfection (pre-omicron-omicron double-infection cohort); and the pre-omicron-omicron double-infection cohort with the omicron single-infection cohort.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Here we show that, in the first study, comparing the omicron double-infection cohort to the omicron single-infection cohort, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) is 1.27 (95% CI: 1.13-1.43); 0.93 (95% CI: 0.68-1.28) for the unvaccinated and 1.34 (95% CI: 1.18-1.52) for the vaccinated. In the second study, comparing the omicron double-infection cohort to the pre-omicron-omicron double-infection cohort, the aHR is 1.37 (95% CI: 1.13-1.65); 1.12 (95% CI: 0.63-1.97) for the unvaccinated and 1.42 (95% CI: 1.16-1.74) for the vaccinated. In the third study, comparing the pre-omicron-omicron double-infection cohort to the omicron single-infection cohort, the aHR is 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92-1.03); 0.75 (95% CI: 0.66-0.85) for the unvaccinated and 1.03 (95% CI: 0.97-1.09) for the vaccinated.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Immune history shapes protection against omicron reinfection, with pre-omicron-omicron immunity enhancing protection, while repeated similar exposures reduce protection against new variants.</p>","PeriodicalId":72646,"journal":{"name":"Communications medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":"262"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12215862/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communications medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-025-00974-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Past immunological events can either enhance or compromise an individual's future immune protection. This study investigated how different severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) natural infection histories before an omicron infection, with or without vaccination, influence protection against subsequent omicron reinfection.

Methods: Three national, matched, retrospective cohort studies were conducted in Qatar from February 28, 2020, to August 12, 2024 to compare incidence of omicron reinfection between individuals with two omicron infections (omicron double-infection cohort) and those with one (omicron single-infection cohort); the omicron double-infection cohort with individuals who had a pre-omicron infection followed by an omicron reinfection (pre-omicron-omicron double-infection cohort); and the pre-omicron-omicron double-infection cohort with the omicron single-infection cohort.

Results: Here we show that, in the first study, comparing the omicron double-infection cohort to the omicron single-infection cohort, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) is 1.27 (95% CI: 1.13-1.43); 0.93 (95% CI: 0.68-1.28) for the unvaccinated and 1.34 (95% CI: 1.18-1.52) for the vaccinated. In the second study, comparing the omicron double-infection cohort to the pre-omicron-omicron double-infection cohort, the aHR is 1.37 (95% CI: 1.13-1.65); 1.12 (95% CI: 0.63-1.97) for the unvaccinated and 1.42 (95% CI: 1.16-1.74) for the vaccinated. In the third study, comparing the pre-omicron-omicron double-infection cohort to the omicron single-infection cohort, the aHR is 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92-1.03); 0.75 (95% CI: 0.66-0.85) for the unvaccinated and 1.03 (95% CI: 0.97-1.09) for the vaccinated.

Conclusions: Immune history shapes protection against omicron reinfection, with pre-omicron-omicron immunity enhancing protection, while repeated similar exposures reduce protection against new variants.

微米时代的免疫史和自然感染保护。
背景:过去的免疫事件可以增强或损害个体未来的免疫保护。本研究调查了不同的严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2 (SARS-CoV-2)在组粒感染前的自然感染史,是否接种疫苗,如何影响对随后组粒再次感染的保护。方法:从2020年2月28日至2024年8月12日,在卡塔尔进行了三项全国性、匹配的回顾性队列研究,比较两次组粒感染(双组粒感染队列)和一次组粒感染(单组粒感染队列)的组粒再感染发生率;组粒双重感染队列:组粒前感染后再感染的个体(组粒前-组粒双重感染队列);前组粒-组粒双感染组和组粒单感染组。结果:我们发现,在第一项研究中,组粒双感染队列与组粒单感染队列的校正风险比(aHR)为1.27 (95% CI: 1.13-1.43);未接种者为0.93 (95% CI: 0.68-1.28),接种者为1.34 (95% CI: 1.18-1.52)。在第二项研究中,将组粒双重感染队列与前组粒-组粒双重感染队列进行比较,aHR为1.37 (95% CI: 1.13-1.65);未接种者为1.12 (95% CI: 0.63-1.97),接种者为1.42 (95% CI: 1.16-1.74)。在第三项研究中,将前组粒-组粒双重感染组与单组粒感染组进行比较,aHR为0.97 (95% CI: 0.92-1.03);未接种者为0.75 (95% CI: 0.66-0.85),接种者为1.03 (95% CI: 0.97-1.09)。结论:免疫史形成了对组粒再感染的保护,组粒前免疫增强了保护,而重复的类似暴露降低了对新变异的保护。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信