ABSTRACT
Previous vaccine efficacy (VE) studies have estimated neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations that correlate with protection from symptomatic infection; how these estimates compare to those generated in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unclear. Here, we assessed quantitative neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations using standardized SARS-CoV-2 assays on 3,067 serum specimens collected during July 27, 2020-August 27, 2020 from COVID-19 unvaccinated persons with detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using qualitative antibody assays. Quantitative neutralizing and binding antibody concentrations were strongly positively correlated (r=0.76, p<0.0001) and were noted to be several fold lower in the unvaccinated study population as compared to published data on concentrations noted 28 days post-vaccination. In this convenience sample, [~]88% of neutralizing and [~]63-86% of binding antibody concentrations met or exceeded concentrations associated with 70% COVID-19 VE against symptomatic infection from published VE studies; [~]30% of neutralizing and 1-14% of binding antibody concentrations met or exceeded concentrations associated with 90% COVID-19 VE. These data support observations of infection-induced immunity and current recommendations for vaccination post infection to maximize protection against symptomatic COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundCongregate settings are at risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks. Diagnostic testing can be used as a tool in these settings to identify outbreaks and to control transmission. MethodsWe used transmission modeling to estimate the minimum number of persons to test and the optimal frequency to detect small outbreaks of COVID-19 in a congregate facility. We also estimated the frequency of testing needed to interrupt transmission within a facility. ResultsThe number of people to test and frequency of testing needed depended on turnaround time, facility size, and test characteristics. Parameters are calculated for a variety of scenarios. In a facility of 100 people, 26 randomly selected individuals would need to be tested at least every 6 days to identify a true underlying prevalence of at least 5%, with test sensitivity of 85%, and greater than 95% outbreak detection sensitivity. Disease transmission could be interrupted with universal, facility-wide testing with rapid turnaround every three days. ConclusionsTesting a subset of individuals in congregate settings can improve early detection of small outbreaks of COVID-19. Frequent universal diagnostic testing can be used to interrupt transmission within a facility, but its efficacy is reliant on rapid turnaround of results for isolation of infected individuals.
