Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 up to 15 months after infection.

Information concerning the longevity of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection may have considerable implications for durability of immunity induced by vaccines. Here, we monitored the SARS-CoV-2 specific immune response in COVID-19 patients followed up to 15 months after symptoms onset. Following a peak at day 15-28 postinfection, the IgG antibody response and plasma neutralizing titers gradually decreased over time but stabilized after 6 months. Compared to G614, plasma neutralizing titers were more than 8-fold lower against variants Beta, Gamma, and Delta. SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B and T cells persisted in the majority of patients up to 15 months although a significant decrease in specific T cells, but not B cells, was observed between 6 and 15 months. Antiviral specific immunity, especially memory B cells in COVID-19 convalescent patients, is long-lasting, but some variants of concern may at least partially escape the neutralizing activity of plasma antibodies.

SARS-CoV-2-specific B- and T-cell immunity in a population-based study of young Swedish adults.

BACKGROUND: Young adults are now considered major spreaders of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease. Although most young individuals experience mild to moderate disease, there are concerns of long-term adverse health effects. The impact of COVID-19 disease and to which extent population-level immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exists in young adults remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a population-based study on humoral and cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and explored COVID-19 disease characteristics in young adults. METHODS: We invited participants from the Swedish BAMSE (Barn [Children], Allergy Milieu, Stockholm, Epidemiology) birth cohort (age 24-27 years) to take part in a COVID-19 follow-up. From 980 participants (October 2020 to June 2021), we here present data on SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain-specific IgM, IgA, and IgG titers measured by ELISA and on symptoms and epidemiologic factors associated with seropositivity. Further, SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B- and T-cell responses were detected for a subpopulation (n = 108) by ELISpot and FluoroSpot. RESULTS: A total of 28.4% of subjects were seropositive, of whom 18.4% were IgM single positive. One in 7 seropositive subjects was asymptomatic. Seropositivity was associated with use of public transport, but not with sex, asthma, rhinitis, IgE sensitization, smoking, or body mass index. In a subset of representative samples, 20.7% and 35.0% had detectable SARS-CoV-2 specific B- and T-cell responses, respectively. B- and T-cell memory responses were clearly associated with seropositivity, but T-cell responses were also detected in 17.2% of seronegative subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of IgM and T-cell responses may improve population-based estimations of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The pronounced surge of both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections among young adults indicates that the large-scale vaccination campaign should be continued.

Assessment of aPTT-based clot waveform analysis for the detection of haemostatic changes in different types of infections.

Infections cause varying degrees of haemostatic dysfunction which can be detected by clot waveform analysis (CWA), a global haemostatic marker. CWA has been shown to predict poor outcomes in severe infections with disseminated intravascular coagulopathy. The effect of less severe bacterial and viral infections on CWA has not been established. We hypothesized that different infections influence CWA distinctively. Patients admitted with bacterial infections, dengue and upper respiratory tract viral infections were recruited if they had an activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) measured on admission. APTT-based CWA was performed on Sysmex CS2100i automated analyser using Dade Actin FSL reagent. CWA parameters [(maximum velocity (min1), maximum acceleration (min2) and maximum deceleration (max2)] were compared against control patients. Infected patients (n = 101) had longer aPTT than controls (n = 112) (34.37 ± 7.72 s vs 27.80 ± 1.59 s, p < 0.001), with the mean (± SD) aPTT longest in dengue infection (n = 36) (37.99 ± 7.93 s), followed by bacterial infection (n = 52) (33.96 ± 7.33 s) and respiratory viral infection (n = 13) (29.98 ± 3.92 s). Compared to controls (min1; min2; max2) (5.53 ± 1.16%/s; 0.89 ± 0.19%/s2; 0.74 ± 0.16%/s2), bacterial infection has higher CWA results (6.92 ± 1.60%/s; 1.04 ± 0.28%/s2; 0.82 ± 0.24%/s2, all p < 0.05); dengue infection has significantly lower CWA values (3.93 ± 1.32%/s; 0.57 ± 0.17%/s2; 0.43 ± 0.14%/s2, all p < 0.001) whilst respiratory virus infection has similar results (6.19 ± 1.32%/s; 0.95 ± 0.21%/s2; 0.73 ± 0.18%/s2, all p > 0.05). CWA parameters demonstrated positive correlation with C-reactive protein levels (min1: r = 0.54, min2: r = 0.44, max2: r = 0.34; all p < 0.01). Different infections affect CWA distinctively. CWA could provide information on the haemostatic milieu triggered by infection and further studies are needed to better define its application in this area.

Persistence of SARS-CoV-2-specific B and T cell responses in convalescent COVID-19 patients 6-8 months after the infection.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring the adaptive immune responses during the natural course of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection provides useful information for the development of vaccination strategies against this virus and its emerging variants. We thus profiled the serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody (Ab) levels and specific memory B and T cell responses in convalescent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: A total of 119 samples from 88 convalescent donors who experienced mild to critical disease were tested for the presence of elevated anti-spike and anti-receptor binding domain Ab levels over a period of 8 months. In addition, the levels of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing Abs and specific memory B and T cell responses were tested in a subset of samples. FINDINGS: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Abs were present in 85% of the samples collected within 4 weeks after the onset of symptoms in COVID-19 patients. Levels of specific immunoglobulin M (IgM)/IgA Abs declined after 1 month, while levels of specific IgG Abs and plasma neutralizing activities remained relatively stable up to 6 months after diagnosis. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Abs were still present, although at a significantly lower level, in 80% of the samples collected at 6-8 months after symptom onset. SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B and T cell responses developed with time and were persistent in all of the patients followed up for 6-8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that protective adaptive immunity following natural infection of SARS-CoV-2 may persist for at least 6-8 months, regardless of disease severity. Development of medium- or long-term protective immunity through vaccination may thus be possible. FUNDING: This project was supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (ATAC, no. 101003650), the Italian Ministry of Health (Ricerca Finalizzata grant no. GR-2013-02358399), the Center for Innovative Medicine, and the Swedish Research Council. J.A. was supported by the SciLifeLab/KAW national COVID-19 research program project grant 2020.

Clinical and laboratory features of hypercoagulability in COVID-19 and other respiratory viral infections amongst predominantly younger adults with few comorbidities.

COVID-19 caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory viral (non-CoV-2-RV) infections are associated with thrombotic complications. The differences in prothrombotic potential between SARS-CoV-2 and non-CoV-2-RV have not been well characterised. We compared the thrombotic rates between these two groups of patients directly and further delved into their coagulation profiles. In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, all consecutive COVID-19 and non-CoV-2-RV patients admitted between January 15th and April 10th 2020 were included. Coagulation parameters studied were prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time and its associated clot waveform analysis (CWA) parameter, min1, min2 and max2. In the COVID-19 (n = 181) group there were two (1.0 event/1000-hospital-days) myocardial infarction events while one (1.8 event/1000-hospital-day) was reported in the non-CoV-2-RV (n = 165) group. These events occurred in patients who were severely ill. There were no venous thrombotic events. Coagulation parameters did not differ throughout the course of mild COVID-19. However, CWA parameters were significantly higher in severe COVID-19 compared with mild disease, suggesting hypercoagulability (min1: 6.48%/s vs 5.05%/s, P < 0.001; min2: 0.92%/s2 vs 0.74%/s2, P = 0.033). In conclusion, the thrombotic rates were low and did not differ between COVID-19 and non-CoV-2-RV patients. The hypercoagulability in COVID-19 is a highly dynamic process with the highest risk occurring when patients were most severely ill. Such changes in haemostasis could be detected by CWA. In our population, a more individualized thromboprophylaxis approach, considering clinical and laboratory factors, is preferred over universal pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for all hospitalized COVID-19 patients and such personalized approach warrants further research.

A Comparison of Clinical and Laboratory Manifestations of Thrombotic Events in Patients with COVID-19 and Other Respiratory Viral Infections (preprint)

Background: COVID-19 caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory viral (non-CoV-2-RV) infections are associated with thrombotic complications. The differences in prothrombotic potential between SARS-CoV-2 and non-CoV-2-RV have not been well characterised. We compared the thrombotic rates between these two groups of patients directly and further delved into their coagulation profiles. Methods: In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, all consecutive COVID-19 and non-CoV-2-RV patients admitted between January 15th and April 10th 2020 were included. Coagulation parameters studied were prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time and its associated clot waveform analysis (CWA) parameter, min1, min2 and max2.Findings: In the COVID-19 (n=181) group there were two (1.0 event/1000-hospital-days) thrombotic events while one (1.8 event/1000-hospital-day) was reported in the non-CoV-2-RV (n=165) group. All of these events were myocardial infarction occurring in the intensive care unit. Coagulation parameters did not differ throughout the course of mild COVID-19. However, CWA parameters were significantly higher in severe COVID-19 compared with mild disease, suggesting hypercoagulability (min1: 6.48%/s vs 5.05%/s, P <0.001; min2: 0.92%/s2 vs 0.74%/s2, P =0.033).Interpretation: The thrombotic rates were low and did not differ between COVID-19 and non-CoV-2-RV patients. The hypercoagulability in COVID-19 is a highly dynamic process with the highest risk occurring when patients were most severely ill. Such changes in haemostasis could be detected by CWA. In our population, a more individualized thromboprophylaxis approach, considering clinical and laboratory factors, is preferred over universal pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for all hospitalized COVID-19 patients and such personalized approach warrants further research. Funding: This research was funded by the SingHealth Duke-NUS Academic Medicine COVID-19 Research Grant.Declaration of Interests: The authors declare no competing interests.Ethics Approval Statement: This database is part of a prospective study to characterize emerging infectious diseases and was approved by our institutional review board (CIRB no. 2018/3045).

A comparison of clinical and laboratory manifestations of thrombotic events in patients with COVID-19 and other respiratory viral infections. (preprint)

COVID-19 caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory viral (non-CoV-2-RV) infections are associated with thrombotic complications. The differences in prothrombotic potential between SARS-CoV-2 and non-CoV-2-RV have not been well characterised. We compared the thrombotic rates between these two groups of patients directly and further delved into their coagulation profiles. In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, all consecutive COVID-19 and non-CoV-2-RV patients admitted between January 15th and April 10th 2020 were included. Coagulation parameters studied were prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time and its associated clot waveform analysis (CWA) parameter, min1, min2 and max2. In the COVID-19 (n=181) group there were two (1.0 event/1000-hospital-days) thrombotic events while one (1.8 event/1000-hospital-day) was reported in the non-CoV-2-RV (n=165) group. All of these events were myocardial infarction occurring in the intensive care unit. Coagulation parameters did not differ throughout the course of mild COVID-19. However, CWA parameters were significantly higher in severe COVID-19 compared with mild disease, suggesting hypercoagulability (min1: 6.48%/s vs 5.05%/s, P<0.001; min2: 0.92%/s2 vs 0.74%/s2, P=0.033). In conclusion, the thrombotic rates were low and did not differ between COVID-19 and non-CoV-2-RV patients. The hypercoagulability in COVID-19 is a highly dynamic process with the highest risk occurring when patients were most severely ill. Such changes in haemostasis could be detected by CWA. In our population, a more individualized thromboprophylaxis approach, considering clinical and laboratory factors, is preferred over universal pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for all hospitalized COVID-19 patients and such personalized approach warrants further research. 

Risk estimation and prediction of the transmission of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in the mainland of China excluding Hubei province.

BACKGROUND: In December 2019, an outbreak of coronavirus disease (later named as COVID-19) was identified in Wuhan, China and, later on, detected in other parts of China. Our aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of the evolution of interventions and self-protection measures, estimate the risk of partial lifting control measures and predict the epidemic trend of the virus in the mainland of China excluding Hubei province based on the published data and a novel mathematical model. METHODS: A novel COVID-19 transmission dynamic model incorporating the intervention measures implemented in China is proposed. COVID-19 daily data of the mainland of China excluding Hubei province, including the cumulative confirmed cases, the cumulative deaths, newly confirmed cases and the cumulative recovered cases between 20 January and 3 March 2020, were archived from the National Health Commission of China (NHCC). We parameterize the model by using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method and estimate the control reproduction number (Rc), as well as the effective daily reproduction ratio- Re(t), of the disease transmission in the mainland of China excluding Hubei province. RESULTS: The estimation outcomes indicate that Rc is 3.36 (95% CI: 3.20-3.64) and Re(t) has dropped below 1 since 31 January 2020, which implies that the containment strategies implemented by the Chinese government in the mainland of China are indeed effective and magnificently suppressed COVID-19 transmission. Moreover, our results show that relieving personal protection too early may lead to a prolonged disease transmission period and more people would be infected, and may even cause a second wave of epidemic or outbreaks. By calculating the effective reproduction ratio, we prove that the contact rate should be kept at least less than 30% of the normal level by April, 2020. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure the pandemic ending rapidly, it is necessary to maintain the current integrated restrict interventions and self-protection measures, including travel restriction, quarantine of entry, contact tracing followed by quarantine and isolation and reduction of contact, like wearing masks, keeping social distance, etc. People should be fully aware of the real-time epidemic situation and keep sufficient personal protection until April. If all the above conditions are met, the outbreak is expected to be ended by April in the mainland of China apart from Hubei province.