Effectiveness of Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Preventing COVID-19 Hospitalization and Mortality in a Statewide Population.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibody (MAB) treatments for COVID-19 received Emergency Use Authorization in the United States. METHODS: We used surveillance data from Rhode Island to conduct a retrospective, statewide cohort study to estimate the effectiveness of MABs for preventing hospitalization and death during periods when Alpha and Delta variants were predominant. RESULTS: From 1/17/2021-10/26/2021, 285 long-term congregate care (LTCC) residents and 3,113 non-congregate patients met our eligibility criteria and received MAB; they were matched to 285 and 6,226 controls, respectively. Among LTCC residents, 8.8% (25/285) of patients who received MAB were hospitalized or died compared to 25.3% (72/285) of those who did not receive MAB (adjusted difference=16.7%, 95% confidence interval CI=11.0-22.3%). Among non-congregate patients, 4.5% (140/3,113) of patients who received MAB were hospitalized or died compared to 11.8% (737/6,226) of those who did not receive MAB (adjusted difference=7.2%, 95% CI=6.0-8.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of MABs led to an absolute reduction in hospitalization or death during periods when Alpha and Delta variants were predominant.

Effectiveness Associated With Vaccination After COVID-19 Recovery in Preventing Reinfection.

Importance: The benefit of vaccination for preventing reinfection among individuals who have been previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 is largely unknown. Objective: To obtain population-based estimates of the probability of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and the effectiveness associated with vaccination after recovery from COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used Rhode Island statewide surveillance data from March 1, 2020, to December 9, 2021, on COVID-19 vaccinations, laboratory-confirmed cases, hospitalizations, and fatalities to conduct a population-based, retrospective study during periods when wild type, Alpha, and Delta strains of SARS-CoV-2 were predominant. Participants included Rhode Island residents aged 12 years and older who were previously diagnosed with COVID-19 and unvaccinated at the time of first infection, stratified into 3 subpopulations: long-term congregate care (LTCC) residents, LTCC employees, and the general population (ie, individuals not associated with congregate settings). Data were analyzed from October 2021 to January 2022. Exposures: Completion of the primary vaccination series, defined as 14 days after the second dose of an mRNA vaccine or 1 dose of vector virus vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, defined as a laboratory-confirmed positive result on a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or antigen test at least 90 days after the first laboratory-confirmed positive result on a PCR or antigen test. Results: Overall, 3124 LTCC residents (median [IQR] age, 81 [71-89]; 1675 [53.6%] females), 2877 LTCC employees (median [IQR] age, 41 [30-53]; 2186 [76.0%] females), and 94 516 members of the general population (median [IQR] age, 35 [24-52] years; 45 030 [47.6%] females) met eligibility criteria. Probability of reinfection at 9 months for those who remained unvaccinated after recovery from prior COVID-19 was 13.0% (95% CI, 12.0%-14.0%) among LTCC residents, 10.0% (95% CI, 8.8%-11.5%) among LTCC employees, and 1.9% (95% CI, 1.8%-2.0%) among the general population. Completion of the primary vaccination series after infection was associated with 49% (95% CI, 27%-65%) protection among LTCC residents, 47% (95% CI, 19%-65%) protection among LTCC employees, and 62% (95% CI, 56%-68%) protection in the general population against reinfection, adjusting for potential sociodemographic and clinical confounders and temporal variation in infection rates. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection after recovery from COVID-19 was relatively high among individuals who remained unvaccinated. Vaccination after recovery from COVID-19 was associated with reducing risk of reinfection by approximately half.

Low Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in Rhode Island blood donors during may 2020 as determined using multiple serological assay formats.

BACKGROUND: Epidemic projections and public health policies addressing Coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 have been implemented without data reporting on the seroconversion of the population since scalable antibody testing has only recently become available. METHODS: We measured the percentage of severe acute respiratory syndrome- Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) seropositive individuals from 2008 blood donors drawn in the state of Rhode Island (RI). We utilized multiple antibody testing platforms, including lateral flow immunoassays (LFAs), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and high throughput serological assays (HTSAs). To estimate seroprevalence, we utilized the Bayesian statistical method to adjust for sensitivity and specificity of the commercial tests used. RESULTS: We report than an estimated seropositive rate of RI blood donors of approximately 0.6% existed in April-May of 2020. Daily new case rates peaked in RI in late April 2020. We found HTSAs and LFAs were positively correlated with ELISA assays to detect antibodies specific to SARS-CoV-2 in blood donors. CONCLUSIONS: These data imply that seroconversion, and thus infection, is likely not widespread within this population. We conclude that IgG LFAs and HTSAs are suitable to conduct seroprevalence assays in random populations. More studies will be needed using validated serological tests to improve the precision and report the kinetic progression of seroprevalence estimates.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Rhode Island From a Statewide Random Sample.

Objectives. To characterize statewide seroprevalence and point prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Rhode Island.Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of randomly selected households across Rhode Island in May 2020. Antibody-based and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based tests for SARS-CoV-2 were offered. Hispanics/Latinos and African Americans/Blacks were oversampled to ensure adequate representation. Seroprevalence estimations accounted for test sensitivity and specificity and were compared according to age, race/ethnicity, gender, housing environment, and transportation mode.Results. Overall, 1043 individuals from 554 households were tested (1032 antibody tests, 988 PCR tests). The estimated seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 2.1% (95% credible interval [CI] = 0.6, 4.1). Seroprevalence was 7.5% (95% CI = 1.3, 17.5) among Hispanics/Latinos, 3.8% (95% CI = 0.0, 15.0) among African Americans/Blacks, and 0.8% (95% CI = 0.0, 2.4) among non-Hispanic Whites. Overall PCR-based prevalence was 1.5% (95% CI = 0.5, 3.1).Conclusions. Rhode Island had low seroprevalence relative to other settings, but seroprevalence was substantially higher among African Americans/Blacks and Hispanics/Latinos. Rhode Island sits along the highly populated northeast corridor, making our findings broadly relevant to this region of the country. Continued monitoring via population-based sampling is needed to quantify these impacts going forward.

Preserving 2 decades of healthcare gains for Africa in the coronavirus disease 2019 era.

: As coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) restrictions upend the community bonds that have enabled African communities to thrive in the face of numerous challenges, it is vital that the gains made in community-based healthcare are preserved by adapting our approaches. Instead of reversing the many gains made through locally driven development partnerships with international funding agencies for other viral diseases like HIV, we must use this opportunity to adapt the many lessons learned to address the burden of Covid-19. Programs like the Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare are currently leveraging widely available technologies in Africa to prevent patients from experiencing significant interruptions in care as the healthcare system adjusts to the challenges presented by Covid-19. These approaches are designed to preserve social contact while incorporating physical distancing. The gains and successes made through approaches like group-based medical care must not only continue but can help expand upon the extraordinary success of programs like President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.