Improving the representativeness of UKs national COVID-19 Infection Survey through spatio-temporal regression and post-stratification (preprint)

Population-representative estimates of SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence and antibody levels in specific geographic areas at different time points are needed to optimise policy responses. However, even population-wide surveys are potentially impacted by biases arising from differences in participation rates across key groups. Here, we use spatio-temporal regression and post-stratification models to UKs national COVID-19 Infection Survey (CIS) to obtain representative estimates of PCR positivity (6,496,052 tests) and antibody prevalence (1,941,333 tests) for different regions, ages and ethnicities (7-December-2020 to 4-May-2022). Not accounting for vaccination status through post-stratification led to small underestimation of PCR positivity, but more substantial overestimations of antibody levels in the population (up to 21%), particularly in groups with low vaccine uptake in the general population. There was marked variation in the relative contribution of different areas and age-groups to each wave. Future analyses of infectious disease surveys should take into account major drivers of outcomes of interest that may also influence participation, with vaccination being an important factor to consider.

Correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant and anti-spike antibody responses after a third/booster vaccination or breakthrough infection in the UK general population (preprint)

Following primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, understanding the relative extent of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection from boosters or from breakthrough infections (i.e. infection in the context of previous vaccination) has important implications for vaccine policy. In this study, we investigated correlates of protection against Omicron BA.4/5 infections and anti-spike IgG antibody trajectories after a third/booster vaccination or breakthrough infection following second vaccination in 154,149 adults [≥]18y from the United Kingdom general population. We found that higher anti-spike IgG antibody levels were associated with increased protection against Omicron BA.4/5 infection and that breakthrough infections were associated with higher levels of protection at any given antibody level than booster vaccinations. Breakthrough infections generated similar antibody levels to third/booster vaccinations, and the subsequent declines in antibody levels were similar to or slightly slower than those after third/booster vaccinations. Taken together our findings show that breakthrough infection provides longer lasting protection against further infections than booster vaccinations. For example, considering antibody levels associated with 67% protection against infection, a third/booster vaccination did not provide long-lasting protection, while a Delta/Omicron BA.1 breakthrough infection could provide 5-10 months of protection against Omicron BA.4/5 reinfection. 50-60% of the vaccinated UK population with a breakthrough infection would still be protected by the end of 2022, compared to <15% of the triple-vaccinated UK population without previous infection. Although there are societal impacts and risks to some individuals associated with ongoing transmission, breakthrough infection could be an efficient immune-boosting mechanism for subgroups of the population, including younger healthy adults, who have low risks of adverse consequences from infection.

The challenge of limited vaccine supplies: impact of prior infection on anti-spike IgG antibody trajectories after a single COVID-19 vaccination (preprint)

Given high SARS-CoV-2 incidence, coupled with slow and inequitable vaccine roll-out, there is an urgent need for evidence to underpin optimum vaccine deployment, aiming to maximise global population immunity at speed. We evaluate whether a single vaccination in previously infected individuals generates similar initial and subsequent antibody responses to two vaccinations in those without prior infection. We compared anti-spike IgG antibody responses after a single dose of ChAdOx1, BNT162b2, or mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the COVID-19 Infection Survey in the UK general population. In 100,849 adults who received at least one vaccination, 13,404 (13.3%) had serological and/or PCR evidence of prior infection. Prior infection significantly boosted antibody responses for all three vaccines, producing a higher peak level and longer half-life, and a response comparable to those without prior infection receiving two vaccinations. In those with prior infection, median time above the positivity threshold was estimated to last for >1 year after the first dose. Single-dose vaccination targeted to those previously infected may provide protection in populations with high rates of previous infection faced with limited vaccine supply, as an interim measure while vaccine campaigns are scaled up.

SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG antibody responses after second dose of ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2 in the UK general population (preprint)

We investigated anti-spike IgG antibody responses following second doses of ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the UK general population. In 186,527 individuals, we found significant boosting of anti-spike IgG by second doses of both vaccines in all ages and using different dosing intervals, including the 3-week interval for BNT162b2. After second vaccination, BNT162b2 generated higher peak levels than ChAdOX1. Antibody levels declined faster at older ages than younger ages with BNT162b2, but were similar across ages with ChAdOX1. With both vaccines, prior infection significantly increased antibody peak level and half-life. Protection was estimated to last for 0.5-1 year after ChAdOx1 and >1 year after BNT162b2, but could be reduced against emerging variants. Reducing the dosing interval to 8 weeks for both vaccines or further to 3 weeks for BNT162b2 may help increase short-term protection against the Delta variant. A third booster dose may be needed, prioritised to more vulnerable people.

Anti-spike antibody response to natural SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population (preprint)

We estimated the duration and determinants of antibody response after SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population using representative data from 7,256 United Kingdom COVID-19 infection survey participants who had positive swab SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests from 26-April-2020 to 14-June-2021. A latent class model classified 24% of participants as non-responders not developing anti-spike antibodies. These seronegative non-responders were older, had higher SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold values during infection (i.e. lower viral burden), and less frequently reported any symptoms. Among those who seroconverted, using Bayesian linear mixed models, the estimated anti-spike IgG peak level was 7.3-fold higher than the level previously associated with 50% protection against reinfection, with higher peak levels in older participants and those of non-white ethnicity. The estimated anti-spike IgG half-life was 184 days, being longer in females and those of white ethnicity. We estimated antibody levels associated with protection against reinfection likely last 1.5-2 years on average, with levels associated with protection from severe infection present for several years. These estimates could inform planning for vaccination booster strategies.

Enhancing epidemiological investigation of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection with whole genome sequencing: A retrospective cohort study across four hospitals in the UK. (preprint)

Background Despite robust efforts, patients and staff acquire SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitals. In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated whether whole-genome sequencing (WGS) could enhance the epidemiological investigation of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. Methods and findings From 17-November-2020 to 5-January-2021, 803 inpatients and 329 staff were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection across four teaching hospitals in Oxfordshire, UK. We classified cases according to epidemiological definitions, sought epidemiological evidence of a potential source for each nosocomial infection, and evaluated if epidemiologically-linked cases had genomic evidence supporting transmission. We compared epidemiological and genomic outbreak identification. Using national epidemiological definitions, 109/803(14%) inpatient infections were classified as definite/probable nosocomial, 615(77%) as community-acquired and 79(10%) as indeterminate. There was strong epidemiological evidence to support definite/probable cases as nosocomial: 107/109(98%) had a prior-negative PCR in the same hospital stay before testing positive, and 101(93%) shared time and space with known infected patients/staff. Many indeterminate cases were likely infected in hospital: 53/79(67%) had a prior-negative PCR and 75(95%) contact with a potential source. 89/615(11% of all 803 patients) with apparent community-onset had a recent hospital exposure. WGS highlighted SARS-CoV-2 is mainly imported into hospitals: within 764 samples sequenced 607 genomic clusters were identified (>1 SNP distinct). Only 43/607(7%) clusters contained evidence of onward transmission (subsequent cases within 1 SNP). 20/21 epidemiologically-identified outbreaks contained multiple genomic introductions. Most (80%) nosocomial acquisition occurred in rapid super-spreading events in settings with a mix of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Hospitals not routinely admitting COVID-19 patients had low rates of transmission. Undiagnosed/unsequenced individuals prevent genomic data from excluding nosocomial acquisition. Conclusions Our findings suggest current surveillance definitions underestimate nosocomial acquisition and reveal most nosocomial transmission occurs from a relatively limited number of highly infectious individuals.

The impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on antibody responses in the general population in the United Kingdom (preprint)

Real-world data on antibody response post-vaccination in the general population are limited. 45,965 adults in the UKs national COVID-19 Infection Survey receiving Pfizer-BioNTech or Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines had 111,360 anti-spike IgG measurements. Without prior infection, seroconversion rates and quantitative antibody levels post single dose were lower in older individuals, especially >60y. Two doses achieved high responses across all ages, particularly increasing seroconversion in older people, to similar levels to those achieved after prior infection followed by a single dose. Antibody levels rose more slowly and to lower levels with Oxford-AstraZeneca vs Pfizer-BioNTech, but waned following a single Pfizer-BioNTech dose. Latent class models identified four responder phenotypes: older people, males, and those having long-term health conditions were more commonly low responders. Where supplies are limited, vaccines should be prioritised for those not previously infected, and second doses to individuals >60y. Further data on the relationship between vaccine-mediated protection and antibody responses are needed.

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike responses to Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines by previous infection status (preprint)

ObjectivesWe investigate determinants of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG responses in healthcare workers (HCWs) following one or two doses of Pfizer-BioNTech or Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines. MethodsHCWs participating in regular SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing were invited for serological testing prior to first and second vaccination, and 4 weeks post-vaccination if receiving a 12-week dosing interval. Quantitative post-vaccination anti-spike antibody responses were measured using the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay (detection threshold: [≥]50 AU/ml). We used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of seropositivity and generalised additive models to track antibody responses over time. ResultsVaccine uptake was 80%, but less in lower-paid roles and Black, south Asian and minority ethnic groups. 3570/3610(98.9%) HCWs were seropositive >14 days post-first vaccination and prior to second vaccination, 2706/2720(99.5%) after Pfizer-BioNTech and 864/890(97.1%) following Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines. Previously infected and younger HCWs were more likely to test seropositive post-first vaccination, with no evidence of differences by sex or ethnicity. All 470 HCWs tested >14 days after second vaccine were seropositive. Quantitative antibody responses were higher after previous infection: median(IQR) >21 days post-first Pfizer-BioNTech 14,604(7644-22,291) AU/ml vs. 1028(564-1985) AU/ml without prior infection (p<0.001). Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine recipients had lower readings post-first dose compared to Pfizer-BioNTech, with and without previous infection, 10,095(5354-17,096) and 435(203-962) AU/ml respectively (both p<0.001 vs. Pfizer-BioNTech). Antibody responses post-second vaccination were similar to those after prior infection and one vaccine dose. ConclusionsVaccination leads to detectable anti-spike antibodies in nearly all adult HCWs. Whether differences in response impact vaccine efficacy needs further study.

An observational cohort study on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and B.1.1.7 variant infection in healthcare workers by antibody and vaccination status (preprint)

Background Natural and vaccine-induced immunity will play a key role in controlling the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 variants have the potential to evade natural and vaccine-induced immunity. Methods In a longitudinal cohort study of healthcare workers (HCWs) in Oxfordshire, UK, we investigated the protection from symptomatic and asymptomatic PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conferred by vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2, Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCOV-19) and prior infection (determined using anti-spike antibody status), using Poisson regression adjusted for age, sex, temporal changes in incidence and role. We estimated protection conferred after one versus two vaccinations and from infections with the B.1.1.7 variant identified using whole genome sequencing. Results 13,109 HCWs participated; 8285 received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (1407 two doses) and 2738 the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (49 two doses). Compared to unvaccinated seronegative HCWs, natural immunity and two vaccination doses provided similar protection against symptomatic infection: no HCW vaccinated twice had symptomatic infection, and incidence was 98% lower in seropositive HCWs (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.02 [95%CI <0.01-0.18]). Two vaccine doses or seropositivity reduced the incidence of any PCR-positive result with or without symptoms by 90% (0.10 [0.02-0.38]) and 85% (0.15 [0.08-0.26]) respectively. Single-dose vaccination reduced the incidence of symptomatic infection by 67% (0.33 [0.21-0.52]) and any PCR-positive result by 64% (0.36 [0.26-0.50]). There was no evidence of differences in immunity induced by natural infection and vaccination for infections with S-gene target failure and B.1.1.7. Conclusion Natural infection resulting in detectable anti-spike antibodies and two vaccine doses both provide robust protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, including against the B.1.1.7 variant.

Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are associated with protection against reinfection (preprint)

BackgroundIt is critical to understand whether infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) protects from subsequent reinfection. MethodsWe investigated the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive results in seropositive and seronegative healthcare workers (HCWs) attending asymptomatic and symptomatic staff testing at Oxford University Hospitals, UK. Baseline antibody status was determined using anti-spike and/or anti-nucleocapsid IgG assays and staff followed for up to 30 weeks. We used Poisson regression to estimate the relative incidence of PCR-positive results and new symptomatic infection by antibody status, accounting for age, gender and changes in incidence over time. ResultsA total of 12219 HCWs participated and had anti-spike IgG measured, 11052 were followed up after negative and 1246 after positive antibody results including 79 who seroconverted during follow up. 89 PCR-confirmed symptomatic infections occurred in seronegative individuals (0.46 cases per 10,000 days at risk) and no symptomatic infections in those with anti-spike antibodies. Additionally, 76 (0.40/10,000 days at risk) anti-spike IgG seronegative individuals had PCR-positive tests in asymptomatic screening, compared to 3 (0.21/10,000 days at risk) seropositive individuals. Overall, positive baseline anti-spike antibodies were associated with lower rates of PCR-positivity (with or without symptoms) (adjusted rate ratio 0.24 [95%CI 0.08-0.76, p=0.015]). Rate ratios were similar using anti-nucleocapsid IgG alone or combined with anti-spike IgG to determine baseline status. ConclusionsPrior SARS-CoV-2 infection that generated antibody responses offered protection from reinfection for most people in the six months following infection. Further work is required to determine the long-term duration and correlates of post-infection immunity.

The duration, dynamics and determinants of SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses in individual healthcare workers (preprint)

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody measurements can be used to estimate the proportion of a population exposed or infected and may be informative about the risk of future infection. Previous estimates of the duration of antibody responses vary. MethodsWe present 6 months of data from a longitudinal seroprevalence study of 3217 UK healthcare workers (HCWs). Serial measurements of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid were obtained. Bayesian mixed linear models were used to investigate antibody waning and associations with age, gender, ethnicity, previous symptoms and PCR results. ResultsIn this cohort of working age HCWs, antibody levels rose to a peak at 24 (95% credibility interval, CrI 19-31) days post-first positive PCR test, before beginning to fall. Considering 452 IgG seropositive HCWs over a median of 121 days (maximum 171 days) from their maximum positive IgG titre, the mean estimated antibody half-life was 85 (95%CrI, 81-90) days. The estimated mean time to loss of a positive antibody result was 137 (95%CrI 127-148) days. We observed variation between individuals; higher maximum observed IgG titres were associated with longer estimated antibody half-lives. Increasing age, Asian ethnicity and prior self-reported symptoms were independently associated with higher maximum antibody levels, and increasing age and a positive PCR test undertaken for symptoms with longer antibody half-lives. ConclusionIgG antibody levels to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid wane within months, and faster in younger adults and those without symptoms. Ongoing longitudinal studies are required to track the long-term duration of antibody levels and their association with immunity to SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. SummarySerially measured SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid IgG titres from 452 seropositive healthcare workers demonstrate levels fall by half in 85 days. From a peak result, detectable antibodies last a mean 137 days. Levels fall faster in younger adults and following asymptomatic infection.

A haemagglutination test for rapid detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (preprint)

Serological detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is essential for establishing rates of seroconversion in populations, detection of seroconversion after vaccination, and for seeking evidence for a level of antibody that may be protective against COVID-19 disease. Several high-performance commercial tests have been described, but these require centralised laboratory facilities that are comparatively expensive, and therefore not available universally. Red cell agglutination tests have a long history in blood typing, and general serology through linkage of reporter molecules to the red cell surface. They do not require special equipment, are read by eye, have short development times, low cost and can be applied as a Point of Care Test (POCT). We describe a red cell agglutination test for the detection of antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD). We show that the Haemagglutination Test (HAT) has a sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 99% for detection of antibodies after a PCR diagnosed infection. The HAT can be titrated, detects rising titres in the first five days of hospital admission, correlates well with a commercial test that detects antibodies to the RBD, and can be applied as a point of care test. The developing reagent is composed of a previously described nanobody to a conserved glycophorin A epitope on red cells, linked to the RBD from SARS-CoV-2. It can be lyophilised for ease of shipping. We have scaled up production of this reagent to one gram, which is sufficient for ten million tests, at a cost of ~0.27 UK pence per test well. Aliquots of this reagent are ready to be supplied to qualified groups anywhere in the world that need to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, but do not have the facilities for high throughput commercial tests.

A haemagglutination test for rapid detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 (preprint)

Serological detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is essential for establishing rates of seroconversion in populations, detection of seroconversion after vaccination, and for seeking evidence for a level of antibody that may be protective against COVID-19 disease. Several high-performance commercial tests have been described, but these require centralised laboratory facilities that are comparatively expensive, and therefore not available universally. Red cell agglutination tests have a long history in blood typing, and general serology through linkage of reporter molecules to the red cell surface. They do not require special equipment, are read by eye, have short development times, low cost and can be applied as a Point of Care Test (POCT). We describe a red cell agglutination test for the detection of antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD). We show that the Haemagglutination Test (HAT) has a sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 99% for detection of antibodies after a PCR diagnosed infection. The HAT can be titrated, detects rising titres in the first five days of hospital admission, correlates well with a commercial test that detects antibodies to the RBD, and can be applied as a point of care test. The developing reagent is composed of a previously described nanobody to a conserved glycophorin A epitope on red cells, linked to the RBD from SARS-CoV-2. It can be lyophilised for ease of shipping. We have scaled up production of this reagent to one gram, which is sufficient for ten million tests, at a cost of ~0.27 UK pence per test well. Aliquots of this reagent are ready to be supplied to qualified groups anywhere in the world that need to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, but do not have the facilities for high throughput commercial tests.

Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection with LamPORE, a high-throughput platform combining loop-mediated isothermal amplification and nanopore sequencing (preprint)

LamPORE is a novel diagnostic platform for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA that combines loop-mediated isothermal amplification with nanopore sequencing, which could potentially be used to analyse thousands of samples per day on a single instrument. We evaluated the performance of LamPORE against RT-PCR using RNA extracted from spiked respiratory samples and from stored nose and throat swabs collected at two UK hospitals. The limit of detection of LamPORE was 7-10 genome copies/microlitre of extracted RNA. This is above the limit achievable by RT-PCR but was not associated with a significant reduction of sensitivity in clinical samples. Positive clinical specimens came mostly from patients with acute symptomatic infection, and among these LamPORE had a diagnostic sensitivity of 99.1% (226/228 [95% CI 96.9-99.9%]). Among negative clinical specimens, including 153 with other respiratory pathogens detected, LamPORE had a diagnostic specificity of 99.6% (278/279 [98.0-100.0%]). Overall, 1.4% (7/514 [0.5-2.9]) of samples produced an indeterminate result on first testing, and repeat LamPORE testing on the same RNA extract had a reproducibility of 96.8% (478/494 [94.8-98.1]). This indicates that LamPORE has a similar performance to RT-PCR for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic patients, and offers a promising approach to high-throughput testing.

Differential occupational risks to healthcare workers from SARS-CoV-2: A prospective observational study (preprint)

Background Personal protective equipment (PPE) and social distancing are key measures designed to mitigate the risk of occupational SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitals. Why healthcare workers nevertheless remain at increased risk is uncertain. Methods We conducted voluntary Covid-19 testing programmes for symptomatic and asymptomatic staff at a large UK teaching hospital using nasopharyngeal PCR testing and immunoassays for IgG antibodies. A positive result by either modality was used as a composite outcome. Risk factors for Covid-19 were investigated using multivariable logistic regression. Results 1083/9809(11.0%) staff had evidence of Covid-19 at some time and provided data on potential risk-factors. Staff with a confirmed household contact were at greatest risk (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.63 [95%CI 3.30-6.50]). Higher rates of Covid-19 were seen in staff working in Covid-19-facing areas (21.2% vs. 8.2% elsewhere) (aOR 2.49 [2.00-3.12]). Controlling for Covid-19-facing status, risks were heterogenous across the hospital, with higher rates in acute medicine (1.50 [1.05-2.15]) and sporadic outbreaks in areas with few or no Covid-19 patients. Covid-19 intensive care unit (ICU) staff were relatively protected (0.46 [0.29-0.72]). Positive results were more likely in Black (1.61 [1.20-2.16]) and Asian (1.58 [1.34-1.86]) staff, independent of role or working location, and in porters and cleaners (1.93 [1.25-2.97]). Contact tracing around asymptomatic staff did not lead to enhanced case identification. 24% of staff/patients remained PCR-positive at [≥]6 weeks post-diagnosis. Conclusions Increased Covid-19 risk was seen in acute medicine, among Black and Asian staff, and porters and cleaners. A bundle of PPE-related interventions protected staff in high-risk ICU areas.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected in blood samples from patients with COVID-19 is not associated with infectious virus (preprint)

Background: Laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (the cause of COVID-19) uses PCR to detect viral RNA (vRNA) in respiratory samples. SARS-CoV-2 RNA has also been detected in other sample types, but there is limited understanding of the clinical or laboratory significance of its detection in blood. Methods: We undertook a systematic literature review to assimilate the evidence for the frequency of vRNA in blood, and to identify associated clinical characteristics. We performed RT-PCR in serum samples from a UK clinical cohort of acute and convalescent COVID-19 cases (n=212), together with convalescent plasma samples collected by NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) (n=111 additional samples). To determine whether PCR-positive blood samples could pose an infection risk, we attempted virus isolation from a subset of RNA-positive samples. Results: We identified 28 relevant studies, reporting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 0-76% of blood samples; pooled estimate 10% (95%CI 5-18%). Among serum samples from our clinical cohort, 27/212 (12.7%) had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected by RT-PCR. RNA detection occurred in samples up to day 20 post symptom onset, and was associated with more severe disease (multivariable odds ratio 7.5). Across all samples collected [≥]28 days post symptom onset, 0/143 (0%, 95%CI 0.0-2.5%) had vRNA detected. Among our PCR-positive samples, cycle threshold (ct) values were high (range 33.5-44.8), suggesting low vRNA copy numbers. PCR-positive sera inoculated into cell culture did not produce any cytopathic effect or yield an increase in detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Conclusions: vRNA was detectable at low viral loads in a minority of serum samples collected in acute infection, but was not associated with infectious SARS-CoV-2 (within the limitations of the assays used). This work helps to inform biosafety precautions for handling blood products from patients with current or previous COVID-19.