COVID-19 infection elicits textbook immune response.

Imunita po prodelané infekci SARS-CoV-2 byla dlouhodobe zpochybnována. Z jiných typu respiracních onemocnení vsak víme, ze bunky, které se vytvorí pri první infekci, dlouhodobe prezívají a pri opakované infekci je díky nim imunitní reakce rychlejsí a úcinnejsí. Popisuje se zvýsení hladin protilátek, jejich lepsí avidita a vznik nových variant. Jiz existující pametové B a T lymfocyty jsou pouzity jako "prototyp", který se dále vylepsuje. U reinfikovaných osob tak logicky klesá riziko vázných prubehu onemocnení. V predkládaném clánku jsou uvedeny výsledky dlouhodobého merení hladiny IgG protilátek proti proteinum S a N a IgA protilátek proti proteinu S u 4 osob, které prodelaly opakované infekce SARS-CoV-2 spojené s nárustem hladin protilátek a s méne závazným prubehem, nez mela primoinfekce. Tyto zkusenosti potvrzují i závery z nasí predchozí dlouhodobé studie imunity u senioru z roku 2020, v níz byla také pozorována reaktivace imunity u rekonvalescentu po pravdepodobné nové expozici SARS-CoV-2, ale bez prodelaného onemocnení. Prezentované výsledky potvrzují jiz dríve publikovaná fakta, tedy ze prodelání nemoci neposkytuje dlouhodobou ochranu pred reinfekcí, zvláste novou variantou viru, ale pokud jiz k reinfekci dojde, bývá její prubeh méne závazný nez pri primoinfekci.

Five Commercial Immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Determination and Their Comparison and Correlation with the Virus Neutralization Test.

There is an ongoing debate as to whether SARS-CoV-2 antibodies can be found in patients who have recovered from COVID-19 disease. Currently, there is no consensus on whether the antibodies, if present, are protective. Our regular measurements of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, starting in July 2020, have provided us with the opportunity of becoming acquainted with the five different immunoassays. A total of 149 patients were enrolled in our study. We measured the samples using each immunoassay, then performing a virus neutralization test and comparing the results of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with this test. We observed that the production of neutralizing antibodies is age-dependent. Elderly patients have a higher proportion of high neutralizing titers than young patients. Based on our results, and in combination with the literature findings, we can conclude that the serological SARS-CoV-2 antibody measurement is a helpful tool in the fight against COVID-19. The assays can provide information about the patient's previous contact with the virus. Anti-spike protein assays correlate well with the virus neutralization test and can be used in the screening of potential convalescent plasma donors.

Exploratory drilling: how to set up, carry out, and evaluate a seroprevalence study.

Seroprevalence studies represent a very important tool to find out what fraction of population has already met with the new type of coronavirus (e.g. SARS-CoV-2). Without these data, it is almost impossible for the state authorities to manage the epidemic and adopt rational measures. This article brings the results of a medium-sized seroprevalence study which was carried out in the spring of 2020 in South Bohemia. In the Strakonice and Písek regions, the ELISA method was used to test the prevalence of IgA and IgG antibodies in 2011 subjects, volunteers from general public and selected professions working in areas with a higher exposure to the infection. The study showed that already in May 2020, 2.9% of inhabitants of the Strakonice region and 1.9% of inhabitants of the Písek region had antibodies against the coronavirus. These numbers imply that for each PCR positive person, there were at least fifty others who had probably already undergone the infection. The article points out three types of problems that might occur in such a study. First, the study must be planned correctly, and possible outcomes must be pre-assessed. Second, an appropriate test must be selected with known parameters. This enables us to correctly estimate the share of false positive and false negative results. Third, the data must be evaluated in a reasonable way and correct inference must be performed. We offer a set of recommendations how to manage these issues and how to solve problems that inevitably arise in such a large-scale testing.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in IBD healthcare professionals: are we currently able to provide COVID-free IBD clinics?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has spread worldwide triggering a pandemic during the year 2020. The proportion of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 whose infection remained subclinical is not known. However, such information is important to determine whether the control measures currently employed are sufficient to halt the spread of the virus. Current study has examined the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a population of 92 healthcare professionals working with patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test system for SARS-CoV-2 IgG from EUROIMMUN Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG (Germany) was used. Very low herd antibody-mediated immunity was proven, less than 2%, although we have been faced with the COVID-19 pandemic for several months. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody testing is currently unable to provide sufficient information about our anti-infectious immunity.

Testing for COVID-19: a few points to remember

Diagnostic approaches to COVID-19 include clinical history, PCR tests for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 virus and detection of antibodies. By combining these three approaches, the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies can be examined in healthcare teams. The aim of the study was to examine the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in a population of healthcare professionals 6 - 8 weeks after the first COVID-19 case was detected in the Czech Republic. A total of 269 subjects were enrolled in the study (187 women, 82 men) with a median age of 45.9 years (21 - 71 years). We used a questionnaire to ascertain travel history and clinical signs of any respiratory tract infection. Blood samples were collected, and IgG levels were analysed in all samples. The level of IgA antibodies was analysed in those positive for IgG. PCR testing was performed in cases testing positive for presence of antibodies. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test system for SARS-CoV-2 from Euroimmun (Germany) was used to analyse immunoglobulin levels. 17 % of the tested cohort reported symptoms compatible with COVID-19 and 35.8 % reported history of international travel. There were 5 subjects positive IgG cases (of 269;1.85 %), and one IgA positive and IgG borderline positive subject (0.37 %). There was only one PCR positive subject. Anti SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were thus detected in 2.22% of participating health professionals. This article shows the pitfalls of the testing methods and highlights the necessity of using a correct testing algorithm, considering the character of the tested population and the expected low prevalence.