Population-Level Relative Effectiveness of the COVID-19 Vaccines and the Contribution of Naturally Acquired Immunity.

BACKGROUND: Immune protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can be induced by natural infection or vaccination or both. Interaction between vaccine-induced immunity and naturally acquired immunity at the population level has been understudied. METHODS: We used regression models to evaluate whether the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines differed across states with different levels of naturally acquired immunity from March 2021 to April 2022 in the United States. Analysis was conducted for 3 evaluation periods separately (Alpha, Delta, and Omicron waves). As a proxy for the proportion of the population with naturally acquired immunity, we used either the reported seroprevalence or the estimated proportion of the population ever infected in each state. RESULTS: COVID-19 mortality decreased as coverage of ≥1 dose increased among people ≥65 years of age, and this effect did not vary by seroprevalence or proportion of the total population ever infected. Seroprevalence and proportion ever infected were not associated with COVID-19 mortality, after controlling for vaccine coverage. These findings were consistent in all evaluation periods. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a sustained reduction in mortality at state level during the Alpha, Delta, and Omicron periods. The effect did not vary by naturally acquired immunity.

Risk factors for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seropositivity among nursing home staff.

Objectives: To estimate prior severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among skilled nursing facility (SNF) staff in the state of Georgia and to identify risk factors for seropositivity as of fall 2020. Design: Baseline survey and seroprevalence of the ongoing longitudinal Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) Prevention in Nursing Homes study. Setting: The study included 14 SNFs in the state of Georgia. Participants: In total, 792 SNF staff employed or contracted with participating SNFs were included in this study. The analysis included 749 participants with SARS-CoV-2 serostatus results who provided age, sex, and complete survey information. Methods: We estimated unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for potential risk factors and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. We estimated adjusted ORs using a logistic regression model including age, sex, community case rate, SNF resident infection rate, working at other facilities, and job role. Results: Staff working in high-infection SNFs were twice as likely (unadjusted OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.45-3.00) to be seropositive as those in low-infection SNFs. Certified nursing assistants and nurses were 3 times more likely to be seropositive than administrative, pharmacy, or nonresident care staff: unadjusted OR, 2.93 (95% CI, 1.58-5.78) and unadjusted OR, 3.08 (95% CI, 1.66-6.07). Logistic regression yielded similar adjusted ORs. Conclusions: Working at high-infection SNFs was a risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Even after accounting for resident infections, certified nursing assistants and nurses had a 3-fold higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity than nonclinical staff. This knowledge can guide prioritized implementation of safer ways for caregivers to provide necessary care to SNF residents.

Safety and immunogenicity of a trivalent virus-like particle vaccine against western, eastern, and Venezuelan equine encephalitis viruses: a phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation, randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Western (WEEV), eastern (EEEV), and Venezuelan (VEEV) equine encephalitis viruses are mosquito-borne pathogens classified as potential biological warfare agents for which there are currently no approved human vaccines or therapies. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an investigational trivalent virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine, western, eastern, and Venezuelan equine encephalitis (WEVEE) VLP, composed of WEEV, EEEV, and VEEV VLPs. METHODS: The WEVEE VLP vaccine was evaluated in a phase 1, randomised, open-label, dose-escalation trial at the Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center at Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. Eligible participants were healthy adults aged 18-50 years with no previous vaccination history with an investigational alphavirus vaccine. Participants were assigned to a dose group of 6 µg, 30 µg, or 60 µg vaccine product and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive the WEVEE VLP vaccine with or without aluminium hydroxide suspension (alum) adjuvant by intramuscular injection at study day 0 and at week 8. The primary outcomes were the safety and tolerability of the vaccine (assessed in all participants who received at least one administration of study product) and the secondary outcome was immune response measured as neutralising titres by plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT) 4 weeks after the second vaccination. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03879603. FINDINGS: Between April 2, 2019, and June 13, 2019, 30 trial participants were enrolled (mean age 32 years, range 21-48; 16 [53%] female participants and 14 [47%] male participants). Six groups of five participants each received 6 µg, 30 µg, or 60 µg vaccine doses with or without adjuvant, and all 30 participants completed study follow-up. Vaccinations were safe and well tolerated. The most frequently reported symptoms were mild injection-site pain and tenderness (22 [73%] of 30) and malaise (15 [50%] of 30). Dose-dependent differences in the frequency of pain and tenderness were found between the 6 µg, 30 µg, and 60 µg groups (p=0·0217). No significant differences were observed between dosing groups for any other reactogenicity symptom. Two adverse events (mild elevated blood pressure and moderate asymptomatic neutropenia) were assessed as possibly related to the study product in one trial participant (60 µg dose with alum); both resolved without clinical sequelae. 4 weeks after second vaccine administration, neutralising antibodies were induced in all study groups with the highest response seen against all three vaccine antigens in the 30 µg plus alum group (PRNT80 geometric mean titre for EEEV 60·8, 95% CI 29·9-124·0; for VEEV 111·5, 49·8-249·8; and for WEEV 187·9, 90·0-392·2). Finally, 4 weeks after second vaccine administration, for all doses, the majority of trial participants developed an immune response to all three vaccine components (24 [83%] of 29 for EEEV; 26 [90%] of 29 for VEEV; 27 [93%] of 29 for WEEV; and 22 [76%] of 29 for EEEV, VEEV, and WEEV combined). INTERPRETATION: The favourable safety profile and neutralising antibody responses, along with pressing public health need, support further evaluation of the WEVEE VLP vaccine in advanced-phase clinical trials. FUNDING: The Vaccine Research Center of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health funded the clinical trial. The US Department of Defense contributed funding for manufacturing of the study product.

Vaccination and vacci-notions: Understanding the barriers and facilitators of COVID-19 vaccine uptake during the 2020-21 COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to place an inordinate burden on U.S. population health, and vaccination is the most powerful tool for curbing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, saving lives, and promoting economic recovery. However, much of the U.S. population remains hesitant to get vaccinated against COVID-19, despite having access to these life-saving vaccines. This study's objective was to examine the demographic characteristics, experiences, and disease- and vaccine-related risk perceptions that influence an individual's decision to adhere to vaccine recommendations for COVID-19. Study design: A telephone survey was performed with a convenience sample of 57 participants. Methods: This mixed-methods study collected quantitative and qualitative responses about seasonal influenza and COVID-19 vaccine intentions to compare vaccine hesitancies between a novel and routine vaccine. Results: The primary facilitators of uptake for the COVID-19 vaccine were personal protection, protecting others, preserving public health, and general vaccine confidence. Concerns about vaccine side effects, concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine trials, misinformation about vaccination, personal aversions to the vaccine, general distrust in vaccination, complacency, and distrust in government were the primary barriers to vaccine uptake. Race was also associated with COVID-19 vaccine intentions. Conclusions: The results of this research have been condensed into four recommendations designed to optimize public health messaging around the COVID-19 vaccine and maximize future vaccine uptake.

Occupational risk factors for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare personnel: A 6-month prospective analysis of the COVID-19 Prevention in Emory Healthcare Personnel (COPE) Study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare personnel (HCP) and to assess occupational risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Prospective cohort of healthcare personnel (HCP) followed for 6 months from May through December 2020. SETTING: Large academic healthcare system including 4 hospitals and affiliated clinics in Atlanta, Georgia. PARTICIPANTS: HCP, including those with and without direct patient-care activities, working during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Incident SARS-CoV-2 infections were determined through serologic testing for SARS-CoV-2 IgG at enrollment, at 3 months, and at 6 months. HCP completed monthly surveys regarding occupational activities. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify occupational factors that increased the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Of the 304 evaluable HCP that were seronegative at enrollment, 26 (9%) seroconverted for SARS-CoV-2 IgG by 6 months. Overall, 219 participants (73%) self-identified as White race, 119 (40%) were nurses, and 121 (40%) worked on inpatient medical-surgical floors. In a multivariable analysis, HCP who identified as Black race were more likely to seroconvert than HCP who identified as White (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-14.2). Increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection was not identified for any occupational activity, including spending >50% of a typical shift at a patient's bedside, working in a COVID-19 unit, or performing or being present for aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). CONCLUSIONS: In our study cohort of HCP working in an academic healthcare system, <10% had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection over 6 months. No specific occupational activities were identified as increasing risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Quantifying Risk for SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Nursing Home Workers for the 2020-2021 Winter Surge of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Georgia, USA.

OBJECTIVES: Estimate incidence of and risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection among nursing home staff in the state of Georgia during the 2020-2021 Winter COVID-19 Surge in the United States. DESIGN: Serial survey and serologic testing at 2 time points with 3-month interval exposure assessment. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen nursing homes in the state of Georgia; 203 contracted or employed staff members from those 14 participating nursing homes who were seronegative at the first time point and provided a serology specimen at second time point, at which time they reported no COVID-19 vaccination or only very recent vaccination (≤4 weeks). METHODS: Interval infection was defined as seroconversion to antibody presence for both nucleocapsid protein and spike protein. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs by job type, using multivariable logistic regression, accounting for community-based risks including interval community incidence and interval change in resident infections per bed. RESULTS: Among 203 eligible staff, 72 (35.5%) had evidence of interval infection. In multivariable analysis among unvaccinated staff, staff SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced seroconversion was significantly higher among nurses and certified nursing assistants accounting for race and interval infection incidence in both the community and facility (aOR 5.3, 95% CI 1.0-28.4). This risk persisted but was attenuated when using the full study cohort including those with very recent vaccination. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Midway through the first year of the pandemic, job type continues to be associated with increased risk for infection despite enhanced infection prevention efforts including routine screening of staff. These results suggest that mitigation strategies prior to vaccination did not eliminate occupational risk for infection and emphasize critical need to maximize vaccine utilization to eliminate excess risk among front-line providers.

Application of SARS-CoV-2 Serology to Address Public Health Priorities.

Background: Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 can be detected by various testing platforms, but a detailed understanding of assay performance is critical. Methods: We developed and validated a simple enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect IgG binding to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2, which was then applied for surveillance. ELISA results were compared to a set of complimentary serologic assays using a large panel of clinical research samples. Results: The RBD ELISA exhibited robust performance in ROC curve analysis (AUC> 0.99; Se = 89%, Sp = 99.3%). Antibodies were detected in 23/353 (6.5%) healthcare workers, 6/9 RT-PCR-confirmed mild COVID-19 cases, and 0/30 non-COVID-19 cases from an ambulatory site. RBD ELISA showed a positive correlation with neutralizing activity (p = <0.0001, R2 = 0.26). Conclusions: We applied a validated SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG ELISA in multiple contexts and performed orthogonal testing on samples. This study demonstrates the utility of a simple serologic assay for detecting prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly as a tool for efficiently testing large numbers of samples as in population surveillance. Our work also highlights that precise understanding of SARS-CoV-2 infection and immunity at the individual level, particularly with wide availability of vaccination, may be improved by orthogonal testing and/or more complex assays such as multiplex bead assays.

Occupational risk factors for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare personnel: A cross-sectional analysis of subjects enrolled in the COVID-19 Prevention in Emory Healthcare Personnel (COPE) study.

Among 353 healthcare personnel in a longitudinal cohort in 4 hospitals in Atlanta, Georgia (May-June 2020), 23 (6.5%) had severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. Spending >50% of a typical shift at the bedside (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.2-10.5) and black race (OR, 8.4; 95% CI, 2.7-27.4) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.

Estimating the Cumulative Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and the Infection Fatality Ratio in Light of Waning Antibodies.

BACKGROUND: Serology tests can identify previous infections and facilitate estimation of the number of total infections. However, immunoglobulins targeting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been reported to wane below the detectable level of serologic assays (which is not necessarily equivalent to the duration of protective immunity). We estimate the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection from serology studies, accounting for expected levels of antibody acquisition (seroconversion) and waning (seroreversion), and apply this framework using data from New York City and Connecticut. METHODS: We estimated time from seroconversion to seroreversion and infection fatality ratio (IFR) using mortality data from March to October 2020 and population-level cross-sectional seroprevalence data from April to August 2020 in New York City and Connecticut. We then estimated the daily seroprevalence and cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: The estimated average time from seroconversion to seroreversion was 3-4 months. The estimated IFR was 1.1% (95% credible interval, 1.0%, 1.2%) in New York City and 1.4% (1.1, 1.7%) in Connecticut. The estimated daily seroprevalence declined after a peak in the spring. The estimated cumulative incidence reached 26.8% (24.2%, 29.7%) at the end of September in New York City and 8.8% (7.1%, 11.3%) in Connecticut, higher than maximum seroprevalence measures (22.1% and 6.1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection is underestimated using cross-sectional serology data without adjustment for waning antibodies. Our approach can help quantify the magnitude of underestimation and adjust estimates for waning antibodies.

The Importance and Challenges of Identifying SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections.

Reports of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection have raised important questions about the strength and durability of the immune response to primary infection, which are key factors in predicting the course of the pandemic. Identifying reinfection requires detecting the virus at two different time points and using viral genomic data to distinguish reinfection from persistent viral carriage. This process is hindered by challenges of logistics and capacity, such as banking samples from primary infection and performing viral genome sequencing. These challenges may help to explain why very few cases have been described to date. In addition, reinfection may be a rare phenomenon, but detailed prospective studies are needed to rigorously assess its frequency. To provide context for future investigations of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, we review 16 cases that have been published to date or are available in preprint. Reinfection occurred across demographic spectra and in patients whose initial infections were both asymptomatic/mild and moderate/severe. For cases in which severity could be compared between episodes, half of reinfections were less severe, raising the possibility of partial immune protection. Although many patients had a positive total immunoglobulin or IgG result at the time of reinfection, very little examination of their immune response was performed. Further work is needed to elucidate the frequency, determinants, and consequences of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Establishing the necessary frameworks for surveillance and investigation will rely heavily on clinical laboratories and clinical investigators, and we propose several considerations to guide the medical community in identifying and characterizing SARS-CoV-2 reinfections.

COVID-19 Serology at Population Scale: SARS-CoV-2-Specific Antibody Responses in Saliva.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of an ongoing pandemic that has infected over 36 million and killed over 1 million people. Informed implementation of government public health policies depends on accurate data on SARS-CoV-2 immunity at a population scale. We hypothesized that detection of SARS-CoV-2 salivary antibodies could serve as a noninvasive alternative to serological testing for monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 infection and seropositivity at a population scale. We developed a multiplex SARS-CoV-2 antibody immunoassay based on Luminex technology that comprised 12 CoV antigens, mostly derived from SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S). Saliva and sera collected from confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and from the pre-COVID-19 era were tested for IgG, IgA, and IgM to the antigen panel. Matched saliva and serum IgG responses (n = 28) were significantly correlated. The salivary anti-N IgG response resulted in the highest sensitivity (100%), exhibiting a positive response in 24/24 reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 cases sampled at >14 days post-symptom onset (DPSO), whereas the salivary anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG response yielded 100% specificity. Temporal kinetics of IgG in saliva were consistent with those observed in blood and indicated that most individuals seroconvert at around 10 DPSO. Algorithms employing a combination of the IgG responses to N and S antigens result in high diagnostic accuracy (100%) by as early as 10 DPSO. These results support the use of saliva-based antibody testing as a noninvasive and scalable alternative to blood-based antibody testing.

The receptor binding domain of the viral spike protein is an immunodominant and highly specific target of antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 patients.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that first emerged in late 2019 is responsible for a pandemic of severe respiratory illness. People infected with this highly contagious virus can present with clinically inapparent, mild, or severe disease. Currently, the virus infection in individuals and at the population level is being monitored by PCR testing of symptomatic patients for the presence of viral RNA. There is an urgent need for SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests to identify all infected individuals, irrespective of clinical symptoms, to conduct surveillance and implement strategies to contain spread. As the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein is poorly conserved between SARS-CoVs and other pathogenic human coronaviruses, the RBD represents a promising antigen for detecting CoV-specific antibodies in people. Here we use a large panel of human sera (63 SARS-CoV-2 patients and 71 control subjects) and hyperimmune sera from animals exposed to zoonotic CoVs to evaluate RBD's performance as an antigen for reliable detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. By day 9 after the onset of symptoms, the recombinant SARS-CoV-2 RBD antigen was highly sensitive (98%) and specific (100%) for antibodies induced by SARS-CoVs. We observed a strong correlation between levels of RBD binding antibodies and SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies in patients. Our results, which reveal the early kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses, support using the RBD antigen in serological diagnostic assays and RBD-specific antibody levels as a correlate of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies in people.