The public health response to the COVID-19 outbreak in mainland China: a narrative review.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused nations to adopt unprecedented control measures in order to curb its spread. As the first nation to respond, China's aggressive control measures appeared to have been effective in suppressing the first wave and keeping new cases under control. Here, we provide the historical context and details of China's public health response to COVID-19. We highlight the lessons and impact of the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak, which demonstrated the importance of transparency, surveillance and testing laboratories during an outbreak. We provide an overview of China's response strategy that was based on the principles of early detection, isolation, management and treatment and involved not only the large-scale coordination of multiple governmental bodies but also grass-root community participation throughout the country. These community-based organizations conducted active surveillance for febrile cases and provided support for those in quarantine and communities in lockdown. Importantly, these broader measures were supported by digital technology, including the extensive use of internet-based platforms and mobile applications (APPs). While there have been no significant increases in case numbers since April, there is still much concern over a second wave, considering the resumption of work and school, the lifting of travel restrictions and the outbreaks occurring globally. Control measures has since been implemented by provincial authorities, which includes continued surveillance and rapid testing. Although China's strict control measures may not suit every nation, the principles of early detection and isolation continue to hold true and have been a cornerstone of the initial and ongoing response to the COVID-19.

Human post-infection serological response to the spike and nucleocapsid proteins of SARS-CoV-2.

To inform seroepidemiological studies, we characterized the IgG- responses in COVID-19 patients against the two major SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins, spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N). We tested 70 COVID-19 sera collected up to 85 days post-symptom onset and 230 non-COVID-19 sera, including 27 SARS sera from 2003. Although the average SARS-CoV-2 S and N-IgG titers were comparable, N-responses were more variable among individuals. S- and N-assay specificity tested with non-COVID-19 sera were comparable at 97.5% and 97.0%, respectively. Therefore, S will make a better target due to its lower cross-reactive potential and its' more consistent frequency of detection compared to N.