A Cross-Sectional Study of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies and Risk Factors for Seropositivity in Staff in Day Care Facilities and Preschools in Denmark.

The aim of this study was to provide information about immunity against COVID-19 along with risk factors and behavior among employees in day care facilities and preschools (DCS) in Denmark. In collaboration with the Danish Union of Pedagogues, during February and March 2021, 47,810 members were offered a point-of-care rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test (POCT) at work and were invited to fill in an electronic questionnaire covering COVID-19 exposure. Seroprevalence data from Danish blood donors (total Ig enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) were used as a proxy for the Danish population. A total of 21,018 (45%) DCS employees completed the questionnaire and reported their POCT result {median age, 44.3 years (interquartile range [IQR], [32.7 to 53.6]); females, 84.1%}, of which 20,267 (96.4%) were unvaccinated and included in analysis. A total of 1,857 (9.2%) participants tested seropositive, significantly higher than a seroprevalence at 7.6% (risk ratio [RR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14 to 1.27) among 40,541 healthy blood donors (median age, 42 years [IQR, 28 to 53]; males, 51.3%). Exposure at work (RR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.3 to 3.6) was less of a risk factor than exposure within the household (RR, 12.7; 95% CI, 10.2 to 15.8). Less than 25% of participants reported wearing face protection at work. Most of the participants expressed some degree of fear of contracting COVID-19 both at work and outside work. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was slightly higher in DCS staff than in blood donors, but possible exposure at home was associated with a higher risk than at work. DCS staff expressed fear of contracting COVID-19, though there was limited use of face protection at work. IMPORTANCE Identifying at-risk groups and evaluating preventive interventions in at-risk groups is imperative for the ongoing pandemic as well as for the control of future epidemics. Although DCS staff have a much higher risk of being infected within their own household than at their workplace, most are fearful of being infected with COVID-19 or bringing COVID-19 to work. This represents an interesting dilemma and an important issue which should be addressed by public health authorities for risk communication and pandemic planning. This study design can be used in a strategy for ongoing surveillance of COVID-19 immunity or other infections in the population. The findings of this study can be used to assess the need for future preventive interventions in DCS, such as the use of personal protective equipment.

A large cohort study of the effects of Lewis, ABO, 13 other blood groups, and secretor status on COVID-19 susceptibility, severity, and long COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported Blood type O to confer a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, while secretor status and other blood groups have been suspected to have a similar effect as well. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: To determine whether any other blood groups influence testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 severity, or prolonged COVID-19, we used a large cohort of 650,156 Danish blood donors with varying available data for secretor status and blood groups ABO, Rh, Colton, Duffy, Diego, Dombrock, Kell, Kidd, Knops, Lewis, Lutheran, MNS, P1PK, Vel, and Yt. Of these, 36,068 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 whereas 614,088 tested negative between 2020-02-17 and 2021-08-04. Associations between infection and blood groups were assessed using logistic regression models with sex and age as covariates. RESULTS: The Lewis blood group antigen Lea displayed strongly reduced SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility OR 0.85 CI[0.79-0.93] p < .001. Compared to blood type O, the blood types B, A, and AB were found more susceptible toward infection with ORs 1.1 CI[1.06-1.14] p < .001, 1.17 CI[1.14-1.2] p < .001, and 1.2 CI[1.14-1.26] p < .001, respectively. No susceptibility associations were found for the other 13 blood groups investigated. There was no association between any blood groups and COVID-19 hospitalization or long COVID-19. No secretor status associations were found. DISCUSSION: This study uncovers a new association to reduced SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility for Lewis type Lea and confirms the previous link to blood group O. The new association to Lea could be explained by a link between mucosal microbiome and SARS-CoV-2.

Risk of reinfection, vaccine protection, and severity of infection with the BA.5 omicron subvariant: a nation-wide population-based study in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of immunity and severity for the SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariant BA.5 are important to assess the public health impact associated with its rapid global spread despite vaccination. We estimated natural and vaccine immunity and severity of BA.5 relative to BA.2 in Denmark, a country with high mRNA-vaccination coverage and free-of-charge RT-PCR testing. METHODS: This nation-wide population-based study in Denmark included residents aged 18 years or older who had taken an RT-PCR test between 10 April and 30 June, 2022 (ie, the outcome period), and who the national COVID-19 surveillance system identified as having information since February 2020 on RT-PCR tests, whole-genome sequencing, vaccinations, and hospitalisation with a positive RT-PCR test and COVID-19 as the main diagnosis. First, we used a case-control design, in which cases were people infected with BA.5 or BA.2 during the outcome period and controls were people who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection during the outcome period. We calculated the protection provided by a previous PCR-confirmed omicron infection against BA.5 and BA.2 infection and hospitalisation among triple-vaccinated individuals. Second, we compared vaccination status in people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2 and estimated relative vaccine protection against each subvariant. Third, we compared rates of hospitalisation for COVID-19 among people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2. We estimated effects using logistic regression with adjustment for sex, age, region, PCR-test date, comorbidity and, as appropriate, vaccination and previous infection status. FINDINGS: A total of 210 (2·4%) of 8678 of BA.5 cases, 192 (0·7%) of 29 292 of BA.2 cases, and 33 972 (19·0%) of 178 669 PCR-negative controls previously had an omicron infection, which was estimated in the adjusted analyses to offer 92·7% (95% CI 91·6-93·7) protection against BA.5 infection and 97·1% (96·6-97·5) protection against BA.2 infection. We found similarly high amounts of protection against hospitalisation owing to infection with BA.5 (96·4% [95% CI 74·2-99·5]) and BA.2 (91·2% [76·3-96·7]). Vaccine coverage (three mRNA doses vs none) was 9307 (94·2%) of 9878 among BA.5 cases and 30 581 (94·8%) of 32 272 among BA.2 cases, although in the adjusted analysis, there was a trend towards slightly higher vaccination coverage among BA.5 cases than BA.2 cases (OR 1·18 [95% CI 0·99-1·42]; p=0·064), possibly suggesting marginally poorer vaccine protection against BA.5. The rate of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 was higher among the BA.5 cases (210 [1·9%] of 11 314) than among the BA.2 cases (514 [1·4%] of 36 805), with an OR of 1·34 (95% CI 1·14-1·57) and an adjusted OR of 1·69 (95% CI 1·22-2·33), despite low and stable COVID-19 hospitalisation numbers during the study period. INTERPRETATION: The study provides evidence that a previous omicron infection in triple-vaccinated individuals provides high amounts of protection against BA.5 and BA.2 infections. However, protection estimates greater than 90% might be too high if individuals with a previous infection were more likely than those without one to come forward for a test for reasons other than suspicion of COVID-19. Our analysis also showed that vaccine protection against BA.5 infection was similar to, or slightly weaker than, protection against BA.2 infection. Finally, there was evidence that BA.5 infections were associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation compared with BA.2 infections. FUNDING: There was no funding source for this study.

Persistent Symptoms and Sequelae After Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection Not Requiring Hospitalization: Results From Testing Denmark, a Danish Cross-sectional Survey.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is associated with persistent symptoms ("long COVID"). We assessed the burden of long COVID among nonhospitalized adults with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: In the fall of 2020, a cross-sectional survey was performed in the adult Danish general population. This included a self-administered point-of-care test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, the Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated symptom questions. Nonhospitalized respondents with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test ≥12 weeks before the survey (cases) were matched (1:10) to seronegative controls on age, sex, and body mass index. Propensity score-weighted odds ratios (ORs) and ORs for risk factors were estimated for each health outcome. Results: In total, 742 cases and 7420 controls were included. The attributable risk of at least 1 long-COVID symptom was 25.0 per 100 cases (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.2-27.4). Compared to controls, cases reported worse general health (OR, 5.9 [95% CI, 5.0-7.0]) and had higher odds for a broad range of symptoms, particularly loss of taste (OR, 11.8 [95% CI, 9.5-14.6]) and smell (OR, 11.2 [95% CI, 9.1-13.9]). Physical and Mental Component Summary scores were also significantly reduced with differences of -2.5 (95% CI, -3.1 to -1.8) and -2.0 (95% CI, -2.7 to -1.2), respectively. Female sex and severity of initial infection were major risk factors for long COVID. Conclusions: Nonhospitalized SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive individuals had significantly reduced physical and mental health, and 1 in 4 reported persistence of at least 1 long-COVID symptom.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Denmark: Results of Two Nationwide Population-Based Surveys, February and May 2021.

Background: Seroprevalence studies can be used to measure the progression of national COVID-19 epidemics. The Danish National Seroprevalence Survey of SARS-CoV-2 infections (DSS) was conducted as five separate surveys between May 2020 and May 2021. Here, we present results from the two last surveys conducted in February and May 2021. Methods: Persons aged 12 or older were randomly selected from the Danish Population Register and those having received COVID-19 vaccination subsequently excluded. Invitations to have blood drawn in local test centers were sent by mail. Samples were analyzed for whole Immunoglobulin by ELISA. Seroprevalence was estimated by sex, age and geography. Comparisons to vaccination uptake and RT-PCR test results were made. Results: In February 2021, we found detectable antibodies in 7.2% (95% CI: 6.3-7.9%) of the invited participants (participation rate 25%) and in May 2021 in 8.6% (95% CI: 7.6-9.5%) of the invited (participation rate: 14%). Seroprevalence did not differ by sex, but by age group, generally being higher among the <50 than 50+ year-olds. In May 2021, levels of seroprevalence varied from an estimated 13% (95% CI: 12-15%) in the capital to 5.2% (95% CI: 3.4-7.4%) in rural areas. Combining seroprevalence results with vaccine coverage, estimates of protection against infection in May 2021 varied from 95% among 65+ year-olds down to 10-20% among 12-40 year-olds. In March-May 2021, an estimated 80% of all community SARS-CoV-2 infections were diagnosed by RT-PCR and captured by surveillance. Conclusion: Seroprevalence estimates doubled during the 2020-21 winter wave of SARS-CoV-2 infections and then stabilized as vaccinations were rolled out. The epidemic affected large cities and younger people the most. Denmark saw comparatively low infections rates, but high test coverage; an estimated four out of five infections were detected by RT-PCR in March-May 2021.

Compartmental immunophenotyping in COVID-19 ARDS: A case series.

BACKGROUND: Severe immunopathology may drive the deleterious manifestations that are observed in the advanced stages of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but are poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to phenotype leukocyte subpopulations and the cytokine milieu in the lungs and blood of critically ill patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: We consecutively included patients less than 72 hours after intubation following informed consent from their next of kin. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid was evaluated by microscopy; bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and blood were assessed by 10-color flow cytometry and a multiplex cytokine panel. RESULTS: Four mechanically ventilated patients (aged 40-75 years) with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 ARDS were included. Immature neutrophils dominated in both blood and lungs, whereas CD4 and CD8 T-cell lymphopenia was observed in the 2 compartments. However, regulatory T cells and TH17 cells were found in higher fractions in the lung. Lung CD4 and CD8 T cells and macrophages expressed an even higher upregulation of activation markers than in blood. A wide range of cytokines were expressed at high levels both in the blood and in the lungs, most notably, IL-1RA, IL-6, IL-8, IP-10, and monocyte chemoattactant protein-1, consistent with hyperinflammation. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 ARDS exhibits a distinct immunologic profile in the lungs, with a depleted and exhausted CD4 and CD8 T-cell population that resides within a heavily hyperinflammatory milieu.

Risk of reinfection, vaccine protection, and severity of infection with the BA.5 omicron subvariant: a nation-wide population-based study in Denmark

Background Estimates of immunity and severity for the SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariant BA.5 are important to assess the public health impact associated with its rapid global spread despite vaccination. We estimated natural and vaccine immunity and severity of BA.5 relative to BA.2 in Denmark, a country with high mRNA-vaccination coverage and free-of-charge RT-PCR testing. Methods This nation-wide population-based study in Denmark included residents aged 18 years or older who had taken an RT-PCR test between 10 April and 30 June, 2022 (ie, the outcome period), and who the national COVID-19 surveillance system identified as having information since February 2020 on RT-PCR tests, whole-genome sequencing, vaccinations, and hospitalisation with a positive RT-PCR test and COVID-19 as the main diagnosis. First, we used a case–control design, in which cases were people infected with BA.5 or BA.2 during the outcome period and controls were people who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection during the outcome period. We calculated the protection provided by a previous PCR-confirmed omicron infection against BA.5 and BA.2 infection and hospitalisation among triple-vaccinated individuals. Second, we compared vaccination status in people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2 and estimated relative vaccine protection against each subvariant. Third, we compared rates of hospitalisation for COVID-19 among people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2. We estimated effects using logistic regression with adjustment for sex, age, region, PCR-test date, comorbidity and, as appropriate, vaccination and previous infection status. Findings A total of 210 (2·4%) of 8678 of BA.5 cases, 192 (0·7%) of 29 292 of BA.2 cases, and 33 972 (19·0%) of 178 669 PCR-negative controls previously had an omicron infection, which was estimated in the adjusted analyses to offer 92·7% (95% CI 91·6–93·7) protection against BA.5 infection and 97·1% (96·6–97·5) protection against BA.2 infection. We found similarly high amounts of protection against hospitalisation owing to infection with BA.5 (96·4% [95% CI 74·2–99·5]) and BA.2 (91·2% [76·3–96·7]). Vaccine coverage (three mRNA doses vs none) was 9307 (94·2%) of 9878 among BA.5 cases and 30 581 (94·8%) of 32 272 among BA.2 cases, although in the adjusted analysis, there was a trend towards slightly higher vaccination coverage among BA.5 cases than BA.2 cases (OR 1·18 [95% CI 0·99–1·42];p=0·064), possibly suggesting marginally poorer vaccine protection against BA.5. The rate of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 was higher among the BA.5 cases (210 [1·9%] of 11 314) than among the BA.2 cases (514 [1·4%] of 36 805), with an OR of 1·34 (95% CI 1·14–1·57) and an adjusted OR of 1·69 (95% CI 1·22–2·33), despite low and stable COVID-19 hospitalisation numbers during the study period. Interpretation The study provides evidence that a previous omicron infection in triple-vaccinated individuals provides high amounts of protection against BA.5 and BA.2 infections. However, protection estimates greater than 90% might be too high if individuals with a previous infection were more likely than those without one to come forward for a test for reasons other than suspicion of COVID-19. Our analysis also showed that vaccine protection against BA.5 infection was similar to, or slightly weaker than, protection against BA.2 infection. Finally, there was evidence that BA.5 infections were associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation compared with BA.2 infections. Funding There was no funding source for this study.

Effect of Influenza Vaccination on Risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Prospective Cohort Study of 46†000 Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess whether influenza vaccination has an impact on the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: A cohort of 46 112 healthcare workers were tested for antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and filled in a survey on COVID-19 symptoms, hospitalization, and influenza vaccination. RESULTS: The risk ratio of hospitalization due to SARS-CoV-2 for influenza vaccinated compared with unvaccinated participants was 1.00 for the seasonal vaccination in 2019/2020 (confidence interval, .56-1.78, P = 1.00). Likewise, no clinical effect of influenza vaccination on development of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was found. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings indicate that influenza vaccination does not affect the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19.

Seroprevalence and infection fatality rate of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in Denmark: A nationwide serosurveillance study.

Background: Introduction of the Omicron variant caused a steep rise in SARS-CoV-2 infections despite high vaccination coverage in the Danish population. We used blood donor serosurveillance to estimate the percentage of recently infected residents in the similarly aged background population with no known comorbidity. Methods: To detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies induced due to recent infection, and not vaccination, we assessed anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) immunoglobulin G (IgG) in blood donor samples. Individual level data on SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results and vaccination status were available. Anti-N IgG was measured fortnightly from January 18 to April 3, 2022. Samples from November 2021 were analysed to assess seroprevalence before introduction of the Omicron variant in Denmark. Findings: A total of 43 088 donations from 35 309 Danish blood donors aged 17-72 years were screened. In November 2021, 1·2% (103/8 701) of donors had detectable anti-N IgG antibodies. Adjusting for test sensitivity (estimates ranging from 74%-81%) and November seroprevalence, we estimate that 66% (95% confidence intervals (CI): 63%-70%) of the healthy, similarly aged Danish population had been infected between November 1, 2021, and March 15, 2022. One third of infections were not captured by SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. The infection fatality rate (IFR) was 6·2 (CI: 5·1-7·5) per 100 000 infections. Interpretation: Screening for anti-N IgG and linkage to national registers allowed us to detect recent infections and accurately assess assay sensitivity in vaccinated or previously infected individuals during the Omicron outbreak. The IFR was lower than during previous waves. Funding: The Danish Ministry of Health.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence among homeless people and shelter workers in Denmark: a nationwide cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) and associated shelter workers may be at higher risk of infection with "Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2" (SARS-CoV-2). The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among PEH and shelter workers in Denmark. DESIGN AND METHODS: In November 2020, we conducted a nationwide cross-sectional seroprevalence study among PEH and shelter workers at 21 recruitment sites in Denmark. The assessment included a point-of-care test for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, followed by a questionnaire. The seroprevalence was compared to that of geographically matched blood donors considered as a proxy for the background population, tested using a total Ig ELISA assay. RESULTS: We included 827 participants in the study, of whom 819 provided their SARS-CoV-2 antibody results. Of those, 628 were PEH (median age 50.8 (IQR 40.9-59.1) years, 35.5% female) and 191 were shelter workers (median age 46.6 (IQR 36.1-55.0) years and 74.5% female). The overall seroprevalence was 6.7% and was similar among PEH and shelter workers (6.8% vs 6.3%, p = 0.87); and 12.2% among all participants who engaged in sex work. The overall participant seroprevalence was significantly higher than that of the background population (2.9%, p < 0.001). When combining all participants who reported sex work or were recruited at designated safe havens, we found a significantly increased risk of seropositivity compared to other participants (OR 2.23, 95%CI 1.06-4.43, p = 0.02). Seropositive and seronegative participants reported a similar presence of at least one SARS-CoV-2 associated symptom (49% and 54%, respectively). INTERPRETATIONS: The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was more than twice as high among PEH and associated shelter workers, compared to the background population. These results could be taken into consideration when deciding in which phase PEH are eligible for a vaccine, as part of the Danish national SARS-CoV-2 vaccination program rollout. FUNDING: TrygFonden and HelseFonden.

Risk of hospitalisation associated with infection with SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant versus delta variant in Denmark: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of the severity of the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant (B.1.1.529) are crucial to assess the public health impact associated with its rapid global dissemination. We estimated the risk of SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalisations after infection with omicron compared with the delta variant (B.1.617.2) in Denmark, a country with high mRNA vaccination coverage and extensive free-of-charge PCR testing capacity. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we included all RT-PCR-confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Denmark, with samples taken between Nov 21 (date of first omicron-positive sample) and Dec 19, 2021. Individuals were identified in the national COVID-19 surveillance system database, which included results of a variant-specific RT-PCR that detected omicron cases, and data on SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalisations (primary outcome of the study). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) of hospitalisation after infection with omicron compared with delta, overall and stratified by vaccination status, in a Poisson regression model with robust SEs, adjusted a priori for reinfection status, sex, age, region, comorbidities, and time period. FINDINGS: Between Nov 21 and Dec 19, 2021, among the 188 980 individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 38 669 (20·5%) had the omicron variant. SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalisations and omicron cases increased during the study period. Overall, 124 313 (65·8%) of 188 980 individuals were vaccinated, and vaccination was associated with a lower risk of hospitalisation (adjusted RR 0·24, 95% CI 0·22-0·26) compared with cases with no doses or only one dose of vaccine. Compared with delta infection, omicron infection was associated with an adjusted RR of hospitalisation of 0·64 (95% CI 0·56-0·75; 222 [0·6%] of 38 669 omicron cases admitted to hospital vs 2213 [1·5%] of 150 311 delta cases). For a similar comparison by vaccination status, the RR of hospitalisation was 0·57 (0·44-0·75) among cases with no or only one dose of vaccine, 0·71 (0·60-0·86) among those who received two doses, and 0·50 (0·32-0·76) among those who received three doses. INTERPRETATION: We found a significantly lower risk of hospitalisation with omicron infection compared with delta infection among both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, suggesting an inherent reduced severity of omicron. Our results could guide modelling of the effect of the ongoing global omicron wave and thus health-care system preparedness. FUNDING: None.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among patients with severe mental illness: A cross-sectional study.

Patients with severe mental illness (SMI) i.e. schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder are at increased risk of severe outcomes if infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Whether patients with SMI are at increased risk of COVID-19 is, however, sparsely investigated. This important issue must be addressed as the current pandemic could have the potential to increase the existing gap in lifetime mortality between this group of patients and the background population. The objective of this study was to determine whether a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar disorder is associated with an increased risk of COVID-19. A cross-sectional study was performed between January 18th and February 25th, 2021. Of 7071 eligible patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar disorder, 1355 patients from seven psychiatric centres in the Capital Region of Denmark were screened for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. A total of 1258 unvaccinated patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 40.5 years (SD 14.6), 54.3% were female. Fifty-nine of the 1258 participants had a positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody test, corresponding to a adjusted seroprevalence of 4.96% (95% CI 3.87-6.35). No significant difference in SARS-CoV-2-risk was found between female and male participants (RR = 1.32; 95% CI 0.79-2.20; p = .290). No significant differences in seroprevalences between schizophrenia and bipolar disease were found (RR = 1.12; 95% CI 0.67-1.87; p = .667). Seroprevalence among 6088 unvaccinated blood donors from the same region and period was 12.24% (95% CI 11.41-13.11). SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among included patients with SMI was significantly lower than among blood donors (RR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.31-0.52; p < .001). Differences in seroprevalences remained significant when adjusting for gender and age, except for those aged 60 years or above. The study is registered at ClinicalTrails.gov (NCT04775407). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04775407?term=NCT04775407&draw=2&rank=1.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in social housing areas in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is thought to be more prevalent among ethnic minorities and individuals with low socioeconomic status. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies during the COVID-19 pandemic among citizens 15 years or older in Denmark living in social housing (SH) areas. METHODS: We conducted a study between January 8th and January 31st, 2021 with recruitment in 13 selected SH areas. Participants were offered a point-of-care rapid SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibody test and a questionnaire concerning risk factors associated with COVID-19. As a proxy for the general Danish population we accessed data on seroprevalence from Danish blood donors (total Ig ELISA assay) in same time period. RESULTS: Of the 13,279 included participants, 2296 (17.3%) were seropositive (mean age 46.6 (SD 16.4) years, 54.2% female), which was 3 times higher than in the general Danish population (mean age 41.7 (SD 14.1) years, 48.5% female) in the same period (5.8%, risk ratios (RR) 2.96, 95% CI 2.78-3.16, p > 0.001). Seropositivity was higher among males (RR 1.1, 95% CI 1.05-1.22%, p = 0.001) and increased with age, with an OR seropositivity of 1.03 for each 10-year increase in age (95% CI 1.00-1.06, p = 0.031). Close contact with COVID-19-infected individuals was associated with a higher risk of infection, especially among household members (OR 5.0, 95% CI 4.1-6.2 p < 0,001). Living at least four people in a household significantly increased the OR of seropositivity (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6, p = 0.02) as did living in a multi-generational household (OR 1.3 per generation, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, p = 0.003). Only 1.6% of participants reported not following any of the national COVID-19 recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Danish citizens living in SH areas of low socioeconomic status had a three times higher SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence compared to the general Danish population. The seroprevalence was significantly higher in males and increased slightly with age. Living in multiple generations households or in households of more than four persons was a strong risk factor for being seropositive. Results of this study can be used for future consideration of the need for preventive measures in the populations living in SH areas.

Long-term detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after infection and risk of re-infection.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate long-term sensitivity for detection of total antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 METHODS: From week 41, 2020, through week 26, 2021, all Danish blood donations were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with the Wantai assay. The results were linked with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results from the Danish Microbiological Database (MiBa). RESULTS: During the study period, 105,646 non-vaccinated Danish blood donors were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and 3,806 (3.6%) had a positive PCR test before the blood donation. Among the donors with a positive PCR test, 94.2% subsequently also had a positive antibody test. The time between the positive PCR test and the antibody test was up to 15 months and there was no evidence of a decline in proportion with detectable antibodies over time. A negative serological result test was associated with a higher incidence of re-infection (Incidence Rate Ratio = 0.102 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.039-0.262)). CONCLUSION: Among healthy blood donors, 94.2% developed SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after infection, and a lack of detectable antibodies was associated with re-infection.

Testing Denmark: a Danish Nationwide Surveillance Study of COVID-19.

"Testing Denmark" is a national, large-scale, epidemiological surveillance study of SARS-CoV-2 in the Danish population. Between September and October 2020, approximately 1.3 million people (age >15 years) were randomly invited to fill in an electronic questionnaire covering COVID-19 exposures and symptoms. The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was determined by point-of care rapid test (POCT) distributed to participants' home addresses. In total, 318,552 participants (24.5% invitees) completed the study and 2,519 (0.79%) were seropositive. Of the participants with a prior positive PCR test (n = 1,828), 29.1% were seropositive in the POCT. Although seropositivity increased with age, participants 61 years and over reported fewer symptoms and were tested less frequently. Seropositivity was associated with physical contact with SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals (risk ratio [RR] 7.43, 95% CI: 6.57-8.41), particular in household members (RR 17.70, 95% CI: 15.60-20.10). A greater risk of seropositivity was seen in home care workers (RR 2.09, 95% CI: 1.58-2.78) compared to office workers. A high degree of adherence with national preventive recommendations was reported (e.g., >80% use of face masks), but no difference were found between seropositive and seronegative participants. The seroprevalence result was somewhat hampered by a lower-than-expected performance of the POCT. This is likely due to a low sensitivity of the POCT or problems reading the test results, and the main findings therefore relate to risk associations. More emphasis should be placed on age, occupation, and exposure in local communities. IMPORTANCE To date, including 318,522 participants, this is the largest population-based study with broad national participation where tests and questionnaires have been sent to participants' homes. We found that more emphasis from national and local authorities toward the risk of infection should be placed on age of tested individuals, type of occupation, as well as exposure in local communities and households. To meet the challenge that broad nationwide information can be difficult to gather. This study design sets the stage for a novel way of conducting studies. Additionally, this study design can be used as a supplementary model in future general test strategy for ongoing monitoring of COVID-19 immunity in the population, both from past infection and from vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, however, with attention to the complexity of performing and reading the POCT at home.

Estimation of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Fatality Rate by Age and Comorbidity Status Using Antibody Screening of Blood Donors During the COVID-19 Epidemic in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Studies presenting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection fatality rate (IFR) for healthy individuals are warranted. We estimate IFR by age and comorbidity status using data from a large serosurvey among Danish blood donors and nationwide data on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality. METHODS: Danish blood donors aged 17-69 years donating blood October 2020-February 2021 were tested with a commercial SARS-CoV-2 total antibody assay. IFR was estimated for weeks 11 to 42, 2020 and week 43, 2020 to week 6, 2021, representing the first 2 waves of COVID-19 epidemic in Denmark. RESULTS: In total, 84944 blood donors were tested for antibodies. The seroprevalence was 2% in October 2020 and 7% in February 2021. Among 3898039 Danish residents aged 17-69 years, 249 deaths were recorded. The IFR was low for people <51 years without comorbidity during the 2 waves (combined IFR=3.36 per 100000 infections). The IFR was below 3‰ for people aged 61-69 years without comorbidity. IFR increased with age and comorbidity but declined from the first to second wave. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide study, the IFR was very low among people <51 years without comorbidity.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection Fatality Rate Among Elderly Danes: A Cross-sectional Study on Retired Blood Donors.

BACKGROUND: Although the vast majority of individuals succumbing to infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are elderly, infection fatality rate (IFR) estimates for the age group ≥70 years are still scarce. To this end, we assessed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among retired blood donors and combined it with national coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survey data to provide reliable population-based IFR estimates for this age group. METHODS: We identified 60 926 retired blood donors aged ≥70 years in the rosters of 3 regionwide Danish blood banks and invited them to fill in a questionnaire on COVID-19-related symptoms and behaviors. Among 24 861 (40.8%) responders, we invited a random sample of 3200 individuals for blood testing. Overall, 1201 (37.5%) individuals were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (Wantai) and compared with 1110 active blood donors aged 17-69 years. Seroprevalence 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were adjusted for assay sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: Among retired (aged ≥70 years) and active (aged 17-69 years) blood donors, adjusted seroprevalences were 1.4% (95% CI, .3-2.5%) and 2.5% (95% CI, 1.3-3.8%), respectively. Using available population data on COVID-19-related fatalities, IFRs for patients aged ≥70 years and for 17-69 years were estimated at 5.4% (95% CI, 2.7-6.4%) and .083% (95% CI, .054-.18%), respectively. Only 52.4% of SARS-CoV-2-seropositive retired blood donors reported having been sick since the start of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 IFR in the age group >69 years is estimated to be 65 times the IFR for people aged 18-69 years.

Risk Factors for Being Seronegative following SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a Large Cohort of Health Care Workers in Denmark.

Most individuals seroconvert after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but being seronegative is observed in 1 to 9%. We aimed to investigate the risk factors associated with being seronegative following PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a prospective cohort study, we screened health care workers (HCW) in the Capital Region of Denmark for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We performed three rounds of screening from April to October 2020 using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method targeting SARS-CoV-2 total antibodies. Data on all participants' PCR for SARS-CoV-2 RNA were captured from national registries. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models were applied to investigate the probability of being seronegative and the related risk factors, respectively. Of 36,583 HCW, 866 (2.4%) had a positive PCR before or during the study period. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 866 HCW was 42 (31 to 53) years, and 666 (77%) were female. After a median of 132 (range, 35 to 180) days, 21 (2.4%) of 866 were seronegative. In a multivariable model, independent risk factors for being seronegative were self-reported asymptomatic or mild infection hazard ratio (HR) of 6.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6 to 17; P < 0.001) and body mass index (BMI) of ≥30, HR 3.1 (95% CI, 1.1 to 8.8; P = 0.039). Only a few (2.4%) HCW were not seropositive. Asymptomatic or mild infection as well as a BMI above 30 were associated with being seronegative. Since the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 reduces the risk of reinfection, efforts to protect HCW with risk factors for being seronegative may be needed in future COVID-19 surges. IMPORTANCE Most individuals seroconvert after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but negative serology is observed in 1 to 9%. We found that asymptomatic or mild infection as well as a BMI above 30 were associated with being seronegative. Since the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 reduces the risk of reinfection, efforts to protect HCW with risk factors for being seronegative may be needed in future COVID-19 surges.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and reduced risk of reinfection through 6 months: a Danish observational cohort study of 44 000 healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVES: Antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) are a key factor in protecting against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We examined longitudinal changes in seroprevalence in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Copenhagen and the protective effect of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: In this prospective study, screening for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 (ELISA) was offered to HCWs three times over 6 months. HCW characteristics were obtained by questionnaires. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04346186. RESULTS: From April to October 2020 we screened 44 698 HCWs, of whom 2811 were seropositive at least once. The seroprevalence increased from 4.0% (1501/37 452) to 7.4% (2022/27 457) during the period (p < 0.001) and was significantly higher than in non-HCWs. Frontline HCWs had a significantly increased risk of seropositivity compared to non-frontline HCWs, with risk ratios (RRs) at the three rounds of 1.49 (95%CI 1.34-1.65, p < 0.001), 1.52 (1.39-1.68, p < 0.001) and 1.50 (1.38-1.64, p < 0.001). The seroprevalence was 1.42- to 2.25-fold higher (p < 0.001) in HCWs from dedicated COVID-19 wards than in other frontline HCWs. Seropositive HCWs had an RR of 0.35 (0.15-0.85, p 0.012) of reinfection during the following 6 months, and 2115 out of 2248 (95%) of those who were seropositive during rounds one or two remained seropositive after 4-6 months. The 133 of 2248 participants (5.0%) who seroreverted were slightly older and reported fewer symptoms than other seropositive participants. CONCLUSIONS: HCWs remained at increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 during the 6-month period. Seropositivity against SARS-CoV-2 persisted for at least 6 months in the vast majority of HCWs and was associated with a significantly lower risk of reinfection.

Motivating doctors into leadership and management: a cross-sectional survey

PurposeCalls for doctors to enter management are louder as the benefits of medical leadership become clearer. However, supply is not meeting demand. This study asks doctors (physicians): what might encourage you to go into leadership, and what are the disincentives? The same was asked about leadership training. First, the paper tries to understand doctors’ motivation to lead, specifically, to explore the job characteristics that act as incentives and disincentives. Second, the study points to organisational obstacles that further shrink the medical leadership pipeline.MethodDoctors were surveyed through the Organization of Danish Medical Societies. Our key variables included: (1) the incentives and disincentives for doctors of going into leadership and management and (2) the motivation to participate in leadership training. Our sample of 3534 doctors (17% response) is representative of the population of doctors in Denmark.FindingsThe main reason why doctors are motivated towards leadership is to make a difference. They are put off by fears of extra administration, longer hours, burnout, lack of resources and by organisational cultures resistant to change. However, doctors are aware of their need for leadership development prior to entering management.Practical implicationsTo improve succession planning, health systems should adapt to reflect the incentives of their potential medical leaders. Leadership training is also essential. These changes are especially important now;medical leaders are linked positively to organisational and patient outcomes and have been central in responding to COVID-19, stress and burnout among clinical staff continues to rise, and health systems face recruitment and retention challenges.