Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection History and Antibody Response to 3 Coronavirus Disease 2019 Messenger RNA Vaccine Doses.

BACKGROUND: Data on antibody kinetics are limited among individuals previously infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). From a cohort of healthcare personnel and other frontline workers in 6 US states, we assessed antibody waning after messenger RNA (mRNA) dose 2 and response to dose 3 according to SARS-CoV-2 infection history. METHODS: Participants submitted sera every 3 months, after SARS-CoV-2 infection, and after each mRNA vaccine dose. Sera were tested for antibodies and reported as area under the serial dilution curve (AUC). Changes in AUC values over time were compared using a linear mixed model. RESULTS: Analysis included 388 participants who received dose 3 by November 2021. There were 3 comparison groups: vaccine only with no known prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 224); infection prior to dose 1 (n = 123); and infection after dose 2 and before dose 3 (n = 41). The interval from dose 2 and dose 3 was approximately 8 months. After dose 3, antibody levels rose 2.5-fold (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.2-3.0) in group 2 and 2.9-fold (95% CI = 2.6-3.3) in group 1. Those infected within 90 days before dose 3 (and median 233 days [interquartile range, 213-246] after dose 2) did not increase significantly after dose 3. CONCLUSIONS: A third dose of mRNA vaccine typically elicited a robust humoral immune response among those with primary vaccination regardless of SARS-CoV-2 infection >3 months prior to boosting. Those with infection <3 months prior to boosting did not have a significant increase in antibody concentrations in response to a booster.

Household Transmission of Influenza A Viruses in 2021-2022.

Importance: Influenza virus infections declined globally during the COVID-19 pandemic. Loss of natural immunity from lower rates of influenza infection and documented antigenic changes in circulating viruses may have resulted in increased susceptibility to influenza virus infection during the 2021-2022 influenza season. Objective: To compare the risk of influenza virus infection among household contacts of patients with influenza during the 2021-2022 influenza season with risk of influenza virus infection among household contacts during influenza seasons before the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective study of influenza transmission enrolled households in 2 states before the COVID-19 pandemic (2017-2020) and in 4 US states during the 2021-2022 influenza season. Primary cases were individuals with the earliest laboratory-confirmed influenza A(H3N2) virus infection in a household. Household contacts were people living with the primary cases who self-collected nasal swabs daily for influenza molecular testing and completed symptom diaries daily for 5 to 10 days after enrollment. Exposures: Household contacts living with a primary case. Main Outcomes and Measures: Relative risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza A(H3N2) virus infection in household contacts during the 2021-2022 season compared with prepandemic seasons. Risk estimates were adjusted for age, vaccination status, frequency of interaction with the primary case, and household density. Subgroup analyses by age, vaccination status, and frequency of interaction with the primary case were also conducted. Results: During the prepandemic seasons, 152 primary cases (median age, 13 years; 3.9% Black; 52.0% female) and 353 household contacts (median age, 33 years; 2.8% Black; 54.1% female) were included and during the 2021-2022 influenza season, 84 primary cases (median age, 10 years; 13.1% Black; 52.4% female) and 186 household contacts (median age, 28.5 years; 14.0% Black; 63.4% female) were included in the analysis. During the prepandemic influenza seasons, 20.1% (71/353) of household contacts were infected with influenza A(H3N2) viruses compared with 50.0% (93/186) of household contacts in 2021-2022. The adjusted relative risk of A(H3N2) virus infection in 2021-2022 was 2.31 (95% CI, 1.86-2.86) compared with prepandemic seasons. Conclusions and Relevance: Among cohorts in 5 US states, there was a significantly increased risk of household transmission of influenza A(H3N2) in 2021-2022 compared with prepandemic seasons. Additional research is needed to understand reasons for this association.

Risk Factors for Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant among Previously Infected Frontline Workers.

In a cohort of essential workers in the United States previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, risk factors for reinfection included being unvaccinated, infrequent mask use, time since first infection, and being non-Hispanic Black. Protecting workers from reinfection requires a multipronged approach including up-to-date vaccination, mask use as recommended, and reduction in underlying health disparities.

Implementing Psychological First Aid for Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Feasibility Study of the ICARE Model.

Maintaining the resilience of healthcare workers (HCWs) during the protracted COVID-19 pandemic is critical as chronic stress is associated with burnout, inability to provide high-quality care, and decreased attentiveness to infection prevention protocols. Between May and July 2020, we implemented the ICARE model of psychological first aid (PFA) in a novel online (i.e., telehealth) format to address the psychological support needs of HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that HCWs needed psychological support related to obtaining clear information about pandemic policies and guidelines, navigating new rules and responsibilities, and processing overwhelming and conflicting emotions. The HCWs in our program repeatedly expressed appreciation for the support we provided. Future directions include establishing online discussion forums, increasing opportunities for individual support, and training HCWs to provide peer support using PFA. This program has far-reaching potential benefit to HCWs and to society at large in the context of a pandemic.

Cutting Edge: T Cell Responses to B.1.1.529 (Omicron) SARS-CoV-2 Variant Induced by COVID-19 Infection and/or mRNA Vaccination Are Largely Preserved.

Several studies have demonstrated that the SARS-CoV-2 variant-of-concern B.1.1.529 (Omicron) exhibits a high degree of escape from Ab neutralization. Therefore, it is critical to determine how well the second line of adaptive immunity, T cell memory, performs against Omicron. To this purpose, we analyzed a human cohort (n = 327 subjects) of two- or three-dose mRNA vaccine recipients and COVID-19 postinfection subjects. We report that T cell responses against Omicron were largely preserved. IFN-γ-producing T cell responses remained equivalent to the response against the ancestral strain (WA1/2020), with some (∼20%) loss in IL-2 single or IL-2+IFN-γ+ polyfunctional responses. Three-dose vaccinated participants had similar responses to Omicron relative to post-COVID-19 participants and exhibited responses significantly higher than those receiving two mRNA vaccine doses. These results provide further evidence that a three-dose vaccine regimen benefits the induction of optimal functional T cell immune memory.

Clinical outcomes of monoclonal antibody therapy during a COVID-19 outbreak in a skilled nursing facility-Arizona, 2021.

BACKGROUND: Adult residents of skilled nursing facilities (SNF) have experienced high morbidity and mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection and are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease. Use of monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment improves clinical outcomes among high-risk outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, but information on mAb effectiveness in SNF residents with COVID-19 is limited. We assessed outcomes in SNF residents with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 associated with an outbreak in Arizona during January-February 2021 that did and did not receive a mAb. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed to describe the effect of bamlanivimab therapy on COVID-19 mortality. Secondary outcomes included referral to an acute care setting and escalation of medical therapies at the SNF (e.g., new oxygen requirements). Residents treated with bamlanivimab were compared to residents who were eligible for treatment under the FDA's Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) but were not treated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine association between outcomes and treatment status. RESULTS: Seventy-five residents identified with COVID-19 during this outbreak met eligibility for mAb treatment, of whom 56 received bamlanivimab. Treated and untreated groups were similar in age and comorbidities associated with increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease. Treatment with bamlanivimab was associated with reduced 21-day mortality (adjusted OR = 0.06; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.39) and lower odds of initiating oxygen therapy (adjusted OR = 0.07; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.34). Referrals to acute care were not significantly different between treated and untreated residents. CONCLUSIONS: mAb therapy was successfully administered to SNF residents with COVID-19 in a large outbreak setting. Treatment with bamlanivimab reduced 21-day mortality and reduced initiation of oxygen therapy. As the COVID-19 pandemic evolves and newer immunotherapies gain FDA authorization, more studies of the effectiveness of mAb therapies for treating emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern in high-risk congregate settings are needed.

Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among COVID-19 vaccinated and unvaccinated healthcare personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers: Eight US locations, January-September 2021.

BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate the impact of changes in estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness on the incidence of laboratory-confirmed infection among frontline workers at high risk for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We analyzed data from a prospective frontline worker cohort to estimate the incidence of COVID-19 by month as well as the association of COVID-19 vaccination, occupation, demographics, physical distancing, and mask use with infection risk. Participants completed baseline and quarterly surveys, and each week self-collected mid-turbinate nasal swabs and reported symptoms. RESULTS: Among 1018 unvaccinated and 3531 fully vaccinated workers, the monthly incidence of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in January 2021 was 13.9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-17.4), declining to 0.5 (95% CI -0.4-1.4) per 1000 person-weeks in June. By September 2021, when the Delta variant predominated, incidence had once again risen to 13.6 (95% CI 7.8-19.4) per 1000 person-weeks. In contrast, there was no reportable incidence among fully vaccinated participants at the end of January 2021, and incidence remained low until September 2021 when it rose modestly to 4.1 (95% CI 1.9-3.8) per 1000. Below average facemask use was associated with a higher risk of infection for unvaccinated participants during exposure to persons who may have COVID-19 and vaccinated participants during hours in the community. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination was significantly associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection despite Delta variant predominance. Our data demonstrate the added protective benefit of facemask use among both unvaccinated and vaccinated frontline workers.

Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Health Care Personnel, First Responders, and Other Essential Workers During a Prevaccination COVID-19 Surge in Arizona.

Importance: Understanding the relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection across occupations can inform guidance to protect workers and communities. Less is known about infection risk for first responders and other essential workers than for health care personnel. Objective: To compare the prevaccination incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among first responders and other essential workers with incidence among health care personnel. Design Setting and Participants: This was a prospective cohort study of health care personnel, first responders, and other essential workers in Arizona from July 20, 2020, to March 14, 2021. Participants were seronegative at enrollment, had frequent direct contact with others at work, worked at least 20 hours per week, and submitted weekly nasal swab specimens for real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction analysis. Data analyses were performed from April 19, 2021, to June 4, 2021. Exposures: Occupation was the primary exposure of interest. Confounders assessed were sociodemographic characteristics, health status, community exposure, and work exposure. Main Outcomes and Measures: Crude incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined as the sum of first positive SARS-CoV-2 infections in participants divided by person-weeks at risk. Negative binomial regression was used to model SARS-CoV-2 infection by occupation to estimate unadjusted and adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method was used to generate a parsimonious multivariable model. Results: The study cohort comprised 1766 Arizona workers (mean age [SD], 43.8 [11.1] years; 1093 [61.9%] female; 401 [22.7%] were Hispanic and 1530 [86.6%] were White individuals) of whom 44.2% were health care personnel, 22.4% first responders, and 33.4% other essential workers. The cohort was followed up for 23 393 person-weeks. Crude incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 6.7, 13.2, and 7.4 per 1000 person-weeks at risk for health care personnel, first responders, and other essential workers, respectively. In unadjusted models, first responders had twice the incidence of infection as health care personnel (IRRs, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.44-2.79). While attenuated, this risk remained elevated in adjusted LASSO-optimized models (IRR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.07-2.38). Risk of infection among other essential workers was no different than for health care personnel in unadjusted or adjusted models. Conclusions and Relevance: This prospective cohort study found that first responders had a higher incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection than health care personnel, even after adjusting for potential confounding factors. Given their frequent contact with each other and with the public and their high rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the safety challenges for first responders warrant greater public health attention and research.

COVID-19 Infection, Reinfection, and Vaccine Effectiveness in a Prospective Cohort of Arizona Frontline/Essential Workers: The AZ HEROES Research Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Arizona Healthcare, Emergency Response, and Other Essential workers Study (AZ HEROES) aims to examine the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 illness among adults with high occupational exposure risk. OBJECTIVE: Study objectives include estimating incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in essential workers by symptom presentation and demographic factors, determining independent effects of occupational and community exposures on incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, establishing molecular and immunologic characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in essential workers, describing the duration and patterns of rRT-PCR-positivity, and examining post-vaccine immunologic response. METHODS: Eligible participants include Arizona residents aged 18-85 years who work at least 20 hours per week in an occupation involving regular direct contact (within three feet) with others. Recruitment goals are stratified by demographic characteristics (50% aged 40 or older, 50% women, and 50% Hispanic or American Indian), by occupation (40% healthcare personnel, 30% first responders, and 30% other essential workers), and by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (with up to 50% seropositive at baseline). Information on sociodemographics, health and medical history, vaccination status, exposures to individuals with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, use of personal protective equipment, and perceived risks are collected at enrollment and updated through quarterly surveys. Every week, participants complete active surveillance for COVID-19-like illness (CLI) and self-collect nasal swabs. Additional self-collected nasal swab and saliva specimens are collected in the event of CLI onset. Respiratory specimens are sent to Marshfield Laboratories and tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assay. CLI symptoms and impact on work and productivity are followed through illness resolution. Serum specimens are collected every 3 months and additional sera are collected following incident rRT-PCR positivity and after each COVID-19 vaccine dose. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections will be calculated by person-weeks at risk and compared by occupation and demographic characteristics and by seropositivity status and infection and vaccination history. RESULTS: The AZ HEROES study was funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Enrollment began July 27, 2020 and as of May 1, 2021 a total of 3,165 participants have been enrolled in the study. CONCLUSIONS: AZ HEROES is unique in aiming to recruit a diverse sample of essential workers and prospectively following strata of SARS-CoV-2 seronegative and seropositive adults. Survey results combined with active surveillance data on exposure, CLI, weekly molecular diagnostic testing, and periodic serology will be used to estimate the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, assess the intensity and durability of immune responses to natural infection and COVID-19 vaccination, and contribute to the evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT: DERR1-10.2196/28925.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) research agenda for healthcare epidemiology.

This SHEA white paper identifies knowledge gaps and challenges in healthcare epidemiology research related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with a focus on core principles of healthcare epidemiology. These gaps, revealed during the worst phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, are described in 10 sections: epidemiology, outbreak investigation, surveillance, isolation precaution practices, personal protective equipment (PPE), environmental contamination and disinfection, drug and supply shortages, antimicrobial stewardship, healthcare personnel (HCP) occupational safety, and return to work policies. Each section highlights three critical healthcare epidemiology research questions with detailed description provided in supplementary materials. This research agenda calls for translational studies from laboratory-based basic science research to well-designed, large-scale studies and health outcomes research. Research gaps and challenges related to nursing homes and social disparities are included. Collaborations across various disciplines, expertise and across diverse geographic locations will be critical.