Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.02.02.22269258

ABSTRACT

Importance: Unbiased assessment of risks associated with acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 is critical to informing mitigation efforts during pandemics. Objective: Understand risk factors for acquiring COVID-19 in a large, prospective cohort of adult residents recruited to be representative of a large US metropolitan area. Design: Fully remote longitudinal cohort study launched in October 2020 and ongoing; Study data reported through June 15, 2021. Setting: Brigham and Womens Hospital, Boston MA. Participants: Adults within 45 miles of Boston, MA. Intervention: Monthly at-home SARS-CoV-2 viral and antibody testing. Main Outcomes: Between October 2020 and January 2021, we enrolled 10,289 adults reflective of Massachusetts census data. At study entry, 567 (5.5%) participants had evidence of current or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. This increased to 13.4% by June 15, 2021. Compared to whites, Black non-Hispanic participants had a 2.2 fold greater risk of acquiring COVID-19 (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.91-2.50; p=<0.001) and Hispanics had a 1.5 fold greater risk (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.32-1.71; p=<0.016). Individuals aged 18-29, those who worked outside the home, and those living with other adults and children were at an increased risk. Individuals in the second and third lowest disadvantaged neighborhood communities, as measured by the area deprivation index as a marker for socioeconomic status by census block group, were associated with an increased risk in developing COVID-19. Individuals with medical risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease were at a decreased risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status are not only risk factors for severity of disease but are also the biggest determinants of acquisition of infection. Importantly, this disparity is significantly underestimated if based on PCR data alone as noted by the discrepancy in serology vs. PCR detection for non-white participants, and points to persistent disparity in access to testing. Meanwhile, medical conditions and advanced age that increase the risk for severity of SARS-CoV-2 disease were associated with a lower risk of acquisition of COVID-19 suggesting the importance of behavior modifications. These findings highlight the need for mitigation programs that overcome challenges of structural racism in current and future pandemics. Trial Registration: N/A


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
2.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.03.24.21254260

ABSTRACT

Background Antibody response duration following SARS-CoV-2 infection tends to be variable and depends on severity of disease and method of detection. Study design and methods COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) from 18 donors was collected longitudinally for a maximum of 63 - 129 days following resolution of symptoms. All the samples were initially screened by the Ortho Total Ig test to confirm positivity and subsequently tested with 7 additional direct sandwich or indirect binding assays (Ortho, Roche, Abbott, Broad Institute) directed against a variety of antigen targets (S1, RBD, and NC), along with 2 neutralization assays (Broad Institute live virus PRNT and Vitalant Research Institute Pseudovirus RVPN). Results The direct detection assays (Ortho Total Ig total and Roche Total Ig) showed increasing levels of antibodies over the time period, in contrast to the indirect IgG assays that showed a decline. Neutralization assays also demonstrated declining responses; the VRI RVPN pseudovirus had a greater rate of decline than the Broad PRNT live virus assay. Discussion These data show that in addition to variable individual responses and associations with disease severity, the detection assay chosen contributes to the heterogeneous results in antibody stability over time. Depending on the scope of the research, one assay may be preferable over another. For serosurveillance studies, direct, double Ag-sandwich assays appear to be the best choice due to their stability; in particular, algorithms that include both S1 and NC based assays can help reduce the rate of false-positivity and discriminate between natural infection and vaccine-derived seroreactivity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL