Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 61
Filter
1.
Heliyon ; 9(6): e17179, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20240348

ABSTRACT

RT-qPCR is considered the gold standard for diagnosis of COVID-19; however, it is laborious, time-consuming, and expensive. RADTs have evolved recently as relatively inexpensive methods to address these shortcomings, but their performance for detecting different SARS-COV-2 variants remains limited. RADT test performance could be enhanced using different antibody labeling and signal detection techniques. Here, we aimed to evaluate the performance of two antigen RADTs for detecting different SARS-CoV-2 variants: (i) the conventional colorimetric RADT (Ab-conjugated with gold beads); and (ii) the new Finecare™ RADT (Ab-coated fluorescent beads). Finecare™ is a meter used for the detection of a fluorescent signal. 187 frozen nasopharyngeal swabs collected in Universal transport (UTM) that are RT-qPCR positive for different SARS-CoV-2 variants were selected, including Alpha (n = 60), Delta (n = 59), and Omicron variants (n = 108). Sixty flu and 60 RSV-positive samples were included as negative controls (total sample number = 347). The conventional RADT showed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 62.4% (95%CI: 54-70), 100% (95%CI: 97-100), 100% (95%CI: 100-100), and 58% (95%CI: 49-67), respectively. These measurements were enhanced using the Finecare™ RADT: sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 92.6% (95%CI: 89.08-92.3), 96% (95%CI: 96-99.61), 98% (95%CI: 89-92.3), and 85% (95%CI: 96-99.6) respectively. The sensitivity of both RADTs could be greatly underestimated because nasopharyngeal swab samples collected UTM and stored at -80 °C were used. Despite that, our results indicate that the Finecare™ RADT is appropriate for clinical laboratory and community-based surveillance due to its high sensitivity and specificity.

2.
Front Immunol ; 13: 984784, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318356

ABSTRACT

In 2021, Qatar experienced considerable incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection that was dominated sequentially by the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants. Using the cycle threshold (Ct) value of an RT-qPCR-positive test to proxy the inverse of infectiousness, we investigated infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 infections by variant, age, sex, vaccination status, prior infection status, and reason for testing in a random sample of 18,355 RT-qPCR-genotyped infections. Regression analyses were conducted to estimate associations with the Ct value of RT-qPCR-positive tests. Compared to Beta infections, Alpha and Delta infections demonstrated 2.56 higher Ct cycles (95% CI: 2.35-2.78), and 4.92 fewer cycles (95% CI: 4.67- 5.16), respectively. The Ct value declined gradually with age and was especially high for children <10 years of age, signifying lower infectiousness in small children. Children <10 years of age had 2.18 higher Ct cycles (95% CI: 1.88-2.48) than those 10-19 years of age. Compared to unvaccinated individuals, the Ct value was higher among individuals who had received one or two vaccine doses, but the Ct value decreased gradually with time since the second-dose vaccination. Ct value was 2.07 cycles higher (95% CI: 1.42-2.72) for those with a prior infection than those without prior infection. The Ct value was lowest among individuals tested because of symptoms and was highest among individuals tested as a travel requirement. Delta was substantially more infectious than Beta. Prior immunity, whether due to vaccination or prior infection, is associated with lower infectiousness of breakthrough infections, but infectiousness increases gradually with time since the second-dose vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Humans , Qatar , Vaccination , Young Adult
4.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 23(7): 816-827, 2023 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2254499

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Long-term effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA boosters in populations with different previous infection histories and clinical vulnerability profiles is inadequately understood. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a booster (third dose) vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19, relative to that of primary-series (two-dose) vaccination over a follow-up duration of 1 year. METHODS: This observational, matched, retrospective, cohort study was done on the population of Qatar in people with different immune histories and different clinical vulnerability to infection. The source of data are Qatar's national databases for COVID-19 laboratory testing, vaccination, hospitalisation, and death. Associations were estimated using inverse-probability-weighted Cox proportional-hazards regression models. The primary outcome of the study is the effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA boosters against infection and against severe COVID-19. FINDINGS: Data were obtained for 2 228 686 people who had received at least two vaccine doses starting from Jan 5, 2021, of whom 658 947 (29·6%) went on to receive a third dose before data cutoff on Oct 12, 2022. There were 20 528 incident infections in the three-dose cohort and 30 771 infections in the two-dose cohort. Booster effectiveness relative to primary series was 26·2% (95% CI 23·6-28·6) against infection and 75·1% (40·2-89·6) against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19, during 1-year follow-up after the booster. Among people clinically vulnerable to severe COVID-19, effectiveness was 34·2% (27·0-40·6) against infection and 76·6% (34·5-91·7) against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19. Effectiveness against infection was highest at 61·4% (60·2-62·6) in the first month after the booster but waned thereafter and was modest at only 15·5% (8·3-22·2) by the sixth month. In the seventh month and thereafter, coincident with BA.4/BA.5 and BA.2·75* subvariant incidence, effectiveness was progressively negative albeit with wide CIs. Similar patterns of protection were observed irrespective of previous infection status, clinical vulnerability, or type of vaccine (BNT162b2 vs mRNA-1273). INTERPRETATION: Protection against omicron infection waned after the booster, and eventually suggested a possibility for negative immune imprinting. However, boosters substantially reduced infection and severe COVID-19, particularly among individuals who were clinically vulnerable, affirming the public health value of booster vaccination. FUNDING: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and the Biomathematics Research Core (both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar), Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Programme, and Qatar University Biomedical Research Center.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , COVID-19 , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
5.
J Infect Public Health ; 16(5): 808-815, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2284031

ABSTRACT

Seasonal influenza viruses may lead to severe illness and mortality in patients with comorbidities, including Diabetes Mellitus (DM). Vaccination against influenza in DM patients may reduce influenza incidence and severity. Before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, influenza infections were the most prevalent respiratory infections in Qatar. Still, reports about influenza prevalence and vaccine efficacy in DM patients have not been reported. This study aimed to analyze influenza prevalence among other respiratory infections and assess influenza vaccine efficacy in DM patients in Qatar. Statistical analysis was performed on data obtained from Hamad Medical Corporation (HMC) database for patients that visited the emergency department (ED) with respiratory-like illnesses. The analysis was done for the period between January 2016 to December 2018. Among 17,525 patients who visited HMC-ED with clinical symptoms of respiratory infections, 2611(14.9%) were reported to have DM. Among DM patients, influenza was the most prevalent respiratory pathogen at 48.9%. Influenza virus A (IVA) was the most circulating type, contributing to 38.4%, followed by IVB contributing to 10.4% of total respiratory infections. Among the typed IVA-positive cases, 33.4% were H1N1, and 7.7% were H3N2. A significant decrease in influenza infections was reported in vaccinated DM patients (14.5%) when compared to non-vaccinated patients (18.9%) (p-value = 0.006). However, there was no significant relaxation in the clinical symptoms among vaccinated DM patients compared to their non-vaccinated counterparts. In conclusion, influenza was the most common etiology for respiratory viral infection among diabetic patients at the leading healthcare provider in Qatar. Although vaccination reduced the incidence rate among DM patients, it was less effective in preventing symptoms. Further studies on a larger cohort and for a more extended period are required to investigate influenza prevalence and vaccine efficacy among DM patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Respiratory Tract Infections , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype , Prevalence , Qatar/epidemiology , Pandemics , Vaccine Efficacy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Seasons , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology
8.
J Travel Med ; 2022 Nov 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2107532

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Waning protection against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants by pre-existing antibodies elicited due to current vaccination or natural infection is a global concern. Whether this is due to the waning of immunity to SARS-COV-2 remains unclear. AIM: We aimed to investigate the dynamics of antibody isotype responses among vaccinated naïve (VN) and naturally infected (NI) individuals. METHODS: We followed up antibody levels in COVID-19 mRNA-vaccinated subjects without prior infection (VN, n = 100) in two phases: phase-I (P-I) at ~ 1.4 and phase-II (P-II) at ~ 5.3 months. Antibody levels were compared to those of unvaccinated and naturally infected subjects (NI, n = 40) at ~ 1.7 (P-1) and 5.2 (P-II) months post-infection. Neutralizing antibodies (NTAb), anti-S-RBD-IgG, -IgM, and anti-S-IgA isotypes were measured. RESULTS: The VN group elicited significantly greater antibody responses (p < 0.001) than the NI group at P-I, except for IgM. In the VN group, a significant waning in antibody response was observed in all isotypes. There was about ~ a 4-fold decline in NTAb levels (p < 0.001), anti-S-RBD-IgG (~5-folds, p < 0.001), anti-S-RBD-IgM (~6-folds, p < 0.001), and anti-S1-IgA (2-folds, p < 0.001). In the NI group, a significant but less steady decline was notable in S-RBD-IgM (~2-folds, p < 0.001), and a much smaller but significant difference in NTAb (<2-folds, p < 0.001) anti-S-RBD IgG (<2-folds, p = 0.005). Unlike the VN group, the NI group mounted a lasting anti-S1-IgA response with no significant decline. Anti-S1-IgA, which were ~ 3 folds higher in VN subjects compared to NI in P-1 (p < 0.001), dropped to almost the same levels, with no significant difference observed between the two groups in P-II. CONCLUSION: While double-dose mRNA vaccination boosted antibody levels, vaccinated individuals' 'boost' was relatively short-lived.

9.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 19020, 2022 Nov 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2106452

ABSTRACT

Rapid and accurate measurement of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2)-specific neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) is paramount for monitoring immunity in infected and vaccinated subjects. The current gold standard relies on pseudovirus neutralization tests which require sophisticated skills and facilities. Alternatively, recent competitive immunoassays measuring anti-SARS-CoV-2 nAbs are proposed as a quick and commercially available surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT). Here, we report the performance evaluation of three sVNTs, including two ELISA-based assays and an automated bead-based immunoassay for detecting nAbs against SARS-CoV-2. The performance of three sVNTs, including GenScript cPass, Dynamiker, and Mindray NTAb was assessed in samples collected from SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (n = 160), COVID-19 vaccinated individuals (n = 163), and pre-pandemic controls (n = 70). Samples were collected from infected patients and vaccinated individuals 2-24 weeks after symptoms onset or second dose administration. Correlation analysis with pseudovirus neutralization test (pVNT) and immunoassays detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 binding antibodies was performed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was generated to assess the optimal threshold for detecting nAbs by each assay. All three sVNTs showed an excellent performance in terms of specificity (100%) and sensitivity (100%, 97.0%, and 97.1% for GenScript, Dynamiker, and Mindray, respectively) in samples collected from vaccinated subjects. GenScript demonstrated the strongest correlation with pVNT (r = 0.743, R2 = 0.552), followed by Mindray (r = 0.718, R2 = 0.515) and Dynamiker (r = 0.608, R2 = 0.369). Correlation with anti-SARS-CoV-2 binding antibodies was variable, but the strongest correlations were observed between anti-RBD IgG antibodies and Mindray (r = 0.952, R2 = 0.907). ROC curve analyses demonstrated excellent performance for all three sVNT assays in both groups, with an AUC ranging between 0.99 and 1.0 (p < 0.0001). Also, it was shown that the manufacturer's recommended cutoff values could be modified based on the tested cohort without significantly affecting the sVNT performance. The sVNT provides a rapid, low-cost, and scalable alternative to conventional neutralization assays for measuring and expanding nAbs testing across various research and clinical settings. Also, it could aid in evaluating actual protective immunity at the population level and assessing vaccine effectiveness to lay a foundation for boosters' requirements.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , RNA, Viral , Antibodies, Viral , Neutralization Tests , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Antibodies, Neutralizing
10.
Lancet Microbe ; 3(12): e944-e955, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2106236

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Understanding protection conferred by natural SARS-CoV-2 infection versus COVID-19 vaccination is important for informing vaccine mandate decisions. We compared protection conferred by natural infection versus that from the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines in Qatar. METHODS: We conducted two matched retrospective cohort studies that emulated target trials. Data were obtained from the national federated databases for COVID-19 vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 testing, and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death between Feb 28, 2020 (pandemic onset in Qatar) and May 12, 2022. We matched individuals with a documented primary infection and no vaccination record (natural infection cohort) with individuals who had received two doses (primary series) of the same vaccine (BNT162b2-vaccinated or mRNA-1273-vaccinated cohorts) at the start of follow-up (90 days after the primary infection). Individuals were exact matched (1:1) by sex, 10-year age group, nationality, comorbidity count, and timing of primary infection or first-dose vaccination. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death in the natural infection cohorts was compared with incidence in the vaccinated cohorts, using Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustment for matching factors. FINDINGS: Between Jan 5, 2021 (date of second-dose vaccine roll-out) and May 12, 2022, 104 500 individuals vaccinated with BNT162b2 and 61 955 individuals vaccinated with mRNA-1273 were matched to unvaccinated individuals with a documented primary infection. During follow-up, 7123 SARS-CoV-2 infections were recorded in the BNT162b2-vaccinated cohort and 3583 reinfections were recorded in the matched natural infection cohort. 4282 SARS-CoV-2 infections were recorded in the mRNA-1273-vaccinated cohort and 2301 reinfections were recorded in the matched natural infection cohort. The overall adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for SARS-CoV-2 infection was 0·47 (95% CI 0·45-0·48) after previous natural infection versus BNT162b2 vaccination, and 0·51 (0·49-0·54) after previous natural infection versus mRNA-1273 vaccination. The overall adjusted HR for severe (acute care hospitalisations), critical (intensive care unit hospitalisations), or fatal COVID-19 cases was 0·24 (0·08-0·72) after previous natural infection versus BNT162b2 vaccination, and 0·24 (0·05-1·19) after previous natural infection versus mRNA-1273 vaccination. Severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 was rare in both the natural infection and vaccinated cohorts. INTERPRETATION: Previous natural infection was associated with lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, regardless of the variant, than mRNA primary-series vaccination. Vaccination remains the safest and most optimal tool for protecting against infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death, irrespective of previous infection status. FUNDING: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Biomathematics Research Core, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar; Qatar Ministry of Public Health; Hamad Medical Corporation; Sidra Medicine; Qatar Genome Programme; and Qatar University Biomedical Research Center.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Reinfection , Retrospective Studies , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 Vaccines , Qatar/epidemiology , Public Health
11.
N Engl J Med ; 387(20): 1865-1876, 2022 11 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096907

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The BNT162b2 vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has been authorized for use in children 5 to 11 years of age and adolescents 12 to 17 years of age but in different antigen doses. METHODS: We assessed the real-world effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among children and adolescents in Qatar. To compare the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the national cohort of vaccinated participants with the incidence in the national cohort of unvaccinated participants, we conducted three matched, retrospective, target-trial, cohort studies - one assessing data obtained from children 5 to 11 years of age after the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant became prevalent and two assessing data from adolescents 12 to 17 years of age before the emergence of the omicron variant (pre-omicron study) and after the omicron variant became prevalent. Associations were estimated with the use of Cox proportional-hazards regression models. RESULTS: Among children, the overall effectiveness of the 10-µg primary vaccine series against infection with the omicron variant was 25.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0 to 38.6). Effectiveness was highest (49.6%; 95% CI, 28.5 to 64.5) right after receipt of the second dose but waned rapidly thereafter and was negligible after 3 months. Effectiveness was 46.3% (95% CI, 21.5 to 63.3) among children 5 to 7 years of age and 16.6% (95% CI, -4.2 to 33.2) among those 8 to 11 years of age. Among adolescents, the overall effectiveness of the 30-µg primary vaccine series against infection with the omicron variant was 30.6% (95% CI, 26.9 to 34.1), but many adolescents had been vaccinated months earlier. Effectiveness waned over time since receipt of the second dose. Effectiveness was 35.6% (95% CI, 31.2 to 39.6) among adolescents 12 to 14 years of age and 20.9% (95% CI, 13.8 to 27.4) among those 15 to 17 years of age. In the pre-omicron study, the overall effectiveness of the 30-µg primary vaccine series against SARS-CoV-2 infection among adolescents was 87.6% (95% CI, 84.0 to 90.4) and waned relatively slowly after receipt of the second dose. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination in children was associated with modest, rapidly waning protection against omicron infection. Vaccination in adolescents was associated with stronger, more durable protection, perhaps because of the larger antigen dose. (Funded by Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar and others.).


Subject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Vaccine Efficacy , Adolescent , Child , Humans , BNT162 Vaccine/administration & dosage , BNT162 Vaccine/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Qatar/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Child, Preschool , Vaccine Efficacy/statistics & numerical data
13.
J Travel Med ; 2022 Sep 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2051490

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The future of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic hinges on virus evolution and duration of immune protection of natural infection against reinfection. We investigated duration of protection afforded by natural infection, the effect of viral immune evasion on duration of protection, and protection against severe reinfection, in Qatar, between February 28, 2020 and June 5, 2022. METHODS: Three national, matched, retrospective cohort studies were conducted to compare incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity among unvaccinated persons with a documented SARS-CoV-2 primary infection, to incidence among those infection-naïve and unvaccinated. Associations were estimated using Cox proportional-hazard regression models. RESULTS: Effectiveness of pre-Omicron primary infection against pre-Omicron reinfection was 85.5% (95% CI: 84.8-86.2%). Effectiveness peaked at 90.5% (95% CI: 88.4-92.3%) in the 7th month after the primary infection, but waned to ~ 70% by the 16th month. Extrapolating this waning trend using a Gompertz curve suggested an effectiveness of 50% in the 22nd month and < 10% by the 32nd month. Effectiveness of pre-Omicron primary infection against Omicron reinfection was 38.1% (95% CI: 36.3-39.8%) and declined with time since primary infection. A Gompertz curve suggested an effectiveness of < 10% by the 15th month. Effectiveness of primary infection against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 reinfection was 97.3% (95% CI: 94.9-98.6%), irrespective of the variant of primary infection or reinfection, and with no evidence for waning. Similar results were found in sub-group analyses for those ≥50 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Protection of natural infection against reinfection wanes and may diminish within a few years. Viral immune evasion accelerates this waning. Protection against severe reinfection remains very strong, with no evidence for waning, irrespective of variant, for over 14 months after primary infection.

15.
Frontiers in immunology ; 13, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2046469

ABSTRACT

In 2021, Qatar experienced considerable incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection that was dominated sequentially by the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants. Using the cycle threshold (Ct) value of an RT-qPCR-positive test to proxy the inverse of infectiousness, we investigated infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 infections by variant, age, sex, vaccination status, prior infection status, and reason for testing in a random sample of 18,355 RT-qPCR-genotyped infections. Regression analyses were conducted to estimate associations with the Ct value of RT-qPCR-positive tests. Compared to Beta infections, Alpha and Delta infections demonstrated 2.56 higher Ct cycles (95% CI: 2.35-2.78), and 4.92 fewer cycles (95% CI: 4.67- 5.16), respectively. The Ct value declined gradually with age and was especially high for children <10 years of age, signifying lower infectiousness in small children. Children <10 years of age had 2.18 higher Ct cycles (95% CI: 1.88-2.48) than those 10-19 years of age. Compared to unvaccinated individuals, the Ct value was higher among individuals who had received one or two vaccine doses, but the Ct value decreased gradually with time since the second-dose vaccination. Ct value was 2.07 cycles higher (95% CI: 1.42-2.72) for those with a prior infection than those without prior infection. The Ct value was lowest among individuals tested because of symptoms and was highest among individuals tested as a travel requirement. Delta was substantially more infectious than Beta. Prior immunity, whether due to vaccination or prior infection, is associated with lower infectiousness of breakthrough infections, but infectiousness increases gradually with time since the second-dose vaccination.

16.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): e1188-e1191, 2022 Aug 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2017770

ABSTRACT

Beta (B.1.351)-variant coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease was investigated in Qatar. Compared with the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant, odds (95% confidence interval) of progressing to severe disease, critical disease, and COVID-19-related death were 1.24-fold (1.11-1.39), 1.49-fold (1.13-1.97), and 1.57-fold (1.03-2.43) higher, respectively, for the Beta variant.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
17.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(8)2022 Aug 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1988061

ABSTRACT

Background: Limited commercial LFA assays are available to provide a reliable quantitative measurement of the total binding antibody units (BAU/mL) against the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S-RBD). Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the fluorescence LFA FinecareTM 2019-nCoV S-RBD test along with its reader (Model No.: FS-113) against the following reference methods: (i) the FDA-approved GenScript surrogate virus-neutralizing assay (sVNT); and (ii) three highly performing automated immunoassays: BioMérieux VIDAS®3, Ortho VITROS®, and Mindray CL-900i®. Methods: Plasma from 488 vaccinees was tested by all aforementioned assays. Fingerstick whole-blood samples from 156 vaccinees were also tested by FinecareTM. Results and conclusions: FinecareTM showed 100% specificity, as none of the pre-pandemic samples tested positive. Equivalent FinecareTM results were observed among the samples taken from fingerstick or plasma (Pearson correlation r = 0.9, p < 0.0001), suggesting that fingerstick samples are sufficient to quantitate the S-RBD BAU/mL. A moderate correlation was observed between FinecareTM and sVNT (r = 0.5, p < 0.0001), indicating that FinecareTM can be used for rapid prediction of the neutralizing antibody (nAb) post-vaccination. FinecareTM BAU results showed strong correlation with VIDAS®3 (r = 0.6, p < 0.0001) and moderate correlation with VITROS® (r = 0.5, p < 0.0001) and CL-900i® (r = 0.4, p < 0.0001), suggesting that FinecareTM can be used as a surrogate for the advanced automated assays to measure S-RBD BAU/mL.

18.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 4675, 2022 08 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1984386

ABSTRACT

There is significant genetic distance between SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant BA.1 and BA.2 sub-lineages. This study investigates immune protection of infection with one sub-lineage against reinfection with the other sub-lineage in Qatar during a large BA.1 and BA.2 Omicron wave, from December 19, 2021 to March 21, 2022. Two national matched, retrospective cohort studies are conducted to estimate effectiveness of BA.1 infection against reinfection with BA.2 (N = 20,994; BA.1-against-BA.2 study), and effectiveness of BA.2 infection against reinfection with BA.1 (N = 110,315; BA.2-against-BA.1 study). Associations are estimated using Cox proportional-hazards regression models after multiple imputation to assign a sub-lineage status for cases with no sub-lineage status (using probabilities based on the test date). Effectiveness of BA.1 infection against reinfection with BA.2 is estimated at 94.2% (95% CI: 89.2-96.9%). Effectiveness of BA.2 infection against reinfection with BA.1 is estimated at 80.9% (95% CI: 73.1-86.4%). Infection with the BA.1 sub-lineage appears to induce strong, but not full immune protection against reinfection with the BA.2 sub-lineage, and vice versa, for at least several weeks after the initial infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Reinfection , Humans , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
19.
PLoS One ; 17(7): e0271324, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1938448

ABSTRACT

We developed a Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk score to guide targeted RT-PCR testing in Qatar. The Qatar national COVID-19 testing database, encompassing a total of 2,688,232 RT-PCR tests conducted between February 5, 2020-January 27, 2021, was analyzed. Logistic regression analyses were implemented to derive the COVID-19 risk score, as a tool to identify those at highest risk of having the infection. Score cut-off was determined using the ROC curve based on maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity. The score's performance diagnostics were assessed. Logistic regression analysis identified age, sex, and nationality as significant predictors of infection and were included in the risk score. The ROC curve was generated and the area under the curve was estimated at 0.63 (95% CI: 0.63-0.63). The score had a sensitivity of 59.4% (95% CI: 59.1%-59.7%), specificity of 61.1% (95% CI: 61.1%-61.2%), a positive predictive value of 10.9% (95% CI: 10.8%-10.9%), and a negative predictive value of 94.9% (94.9%-95.0%). The concept and utility of a COVID-19 risk score were demonstrated in Qatar. Such a public health tool can have considerable utility in optimizing testing and suppressing infection transmission, while maximizing efficiency and use of available resources.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Public Health , Qatar/epidemiology , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity
20.
N Engl J Med ; 387(1): 21-34, 2022 07 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1890356

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The protection conferred by natural immunity, vaccination, and both against symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with the BA.1 or BA.2 sublineages of the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a national, matched, test-negative, case-control study in Qatar from December 23, 2021, through February 21, 2022, to evaluate the effectiveness of vaccination with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna), natural immunity due to previous infection with variants other than omicron, and hybrid immunity (previous infection and vaccination) against symptomatic omicron infection and against severe, critical, or fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). RESULTS: The effectiveness of previous infection alone against symptomatic BA.2 infection was 46.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.5 to 51.9). The effectiveness of vaccination with two doses of BNT162b2 and no previous infection was negligible (-1.1%; 95% CI, -7.1 to 4.6), but nearly all persons had received their second dose more than 6 months earlier. The effectiveness of three doses of BNT162b2 and no previous infection was 52.2% (95% CI, 48.1 to 55.9). The effectiveness of previous infection and two doses of BNT162b2 was 55.1% (95% CI, 50.9 to 58.9), and the effectiveness of previous infection and three doses of BNT162b2 was 77.3% (95% CI, 72.4 to 81.4). Previous infection alone, BNT162b2 vaccination alone, and hybrid immunity all showed strong effectiveness (>70%) against severe, critical, or fatal Covid-19 due to BA.2 infection. Similar results were observed in analyses of effectiveness against BA.1 infection and of vaccination with mRNA-1273. CONCLUSIONS: No discernable differences in protection against symptomatic BA.1 and BA.2 infection were seen with previous infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity. Vaccination enhanced protection among persons who had had a previous infection. Hybrid immunity resulting from previous infection and recent booster vaccination conferred the strongest protection. (Funded by Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar and others.).


Subject(s)
2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Immunity, Innate , Immunization , SARS-CoV-2 , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273/immunology , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273/therapeutic use , BNT162 Vaccine/immunology , BNT162 Vaccine/therapeutic use , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Immunity, Innate/immunology , Immunization, Secondary , Recurrence , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccination
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL