Insights into the Chemistry of the Cathodic Electrolyte Interphase for PTFE-Based Dry-Processed Cathodes.

Dry processing is a promising method for high-performance and low-cost lithium-ion battery manufacturing which uses polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) as a binder. However, the electrochemical stability of the PTFE binder in the cathodes and the generated chemistry of the cathode electrolyte interphase (CEI) layers are rarely reported. Herein, the CEI properties and PTFE electrochemical stability are studied via cycling the high-loading dry-processed electrodes in electrolytes with LiPF6 or LiClO4 salt. Using LiClO4 salt can eliminate other possible F sources, allowing the decomposition of PTFE to be studied. The detection of LiF in cells with the LiClO4 salt confirms that PTFE undergoes side reaction(s) in the cathodes. When compared with LiClO4, the CEI layer is much thicker when LiPF6 is used as the electrolyte salt. These results provide insights into the CEI layer and may potentially enlighten the development of binders and electrolytes for the high efficiency and long durability of DP-based LIBs.

Duration of Protection Against SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection and Associated Risk of Reinfection Assessed with Real-World Data

ImportanceBetter understanding of the protective duration of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection against reinfection is needed. ObjectivePrimary: To assess the durability of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among initially unvaccinated individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondary: Evaluate the crude SARS-CoV-2 reinfection rate and associated characteristics. Design and SettingRetrospective observational study of HealthVerity data among 144,678,382 individuals, during the pandemic era through April 2021. ParticipantsIndividuals studied had SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic or antibody index test results from February 29 through December 9, 2020, with [≥]365 days of pre-index continuous closed medical enrollment, claims, or electronic health record activity. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s)Rates of reinfection among index-positive individuals were compared to rates of infection among index-negative individuals. Factors associated with reinfection were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. For both objectives, the outcome was a subsequent positive molecular diagnostic test result. ResultsAmong 22,786,982 individuals with index SARS-CoV-2 laboratory test data (2,023,341 index positive), the crude rate of reinfection during follow-up was significantly lower (9.89/1,000-person years) than that of primary infection (78.39/1,000 person years). Consistent with prior findings, the risk of reinfection among index-positive individuals was 87% lower than the risk of infection among index-negative individuals (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.13, 0.13). The cumulative incidence of reinfection among index-positive individuals and infection among index-negative individuals was 0.85% (95% CI: 0.82%, 0.88%) and 6.2% (95% CI: 6.1%, 6.3%), respectively, over follow-up of 375 days. The duration of protection against reinfection was stable over the median 5 months and up to 1-year follow-up interval. Factors associated with an increased reinfection risk included older age, comorbid immunologic conditions, and living in congregate care settings; healthcare workers had a decreased reinfection risk. Conclusions and RelevanceThis large US population-based study demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2 reinfection is uncommon among individuals with laboratory evidence of a previous infection. Protection from SARS-CoV-2 reinfection is stable up to one year. Reinfection risk was primarily associated with age 85+ years, comorbid immunologic conditions and living in congregate care settings; healthcare workers demonstrated a decreased reinfection risk. These findings suggest that infection induced immunity is durable for variants circulating prior to Delta. Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSHow long does prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provide protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection? FindingAmong >22 million individuals tested February 2020 through April 2021, the relative risk of reinfection among those with prior infection was 87% lower than the risk of infection among individuals without prior infection. This protection was durable for up to a year. Factors associated with increased likelihood of reinfection included older age (85+ years), comorbid immunologic conditions, and living in congregate care settings; healthcare workers had lower risk. MeaningPrior SARS-CoV-2 infection provides a durable, high relative degree of protection against reinfection.

Real-world data suggest antibody positivity to SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a decreased risk of future infection

ImportanceThere is limited evidence regarding whether the presence of serum antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a decreased risk of future infection. Understanding susceptibility to infection and the role of immune memory is important for identifying at-risk populations and could have implications for vaccine deployment. ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate subsequent evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection based on diagnostic nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) among individuals who are antibody-positive compared with those who are antibody-negative, using real-world data. DesignThis was an observational descriptive cohort study. ParticipantsThe study utilized a national sample to create cohorts from a de-identified dataset composed of commercial laboratory test results, open and closed medical and pharmacy claims, electronic health records, hospital billing (chargemaster) data, and payer enrollment files from the United States. Patients were indexed as antibody-positive or antibody-negative according to their first SARS-CoV-2 antibody test recorded in the database. Patients with more than 1 antibody test on the index date where results were discordant were excluded. Main Outcomes/MeasuresPrimary endpoints were index antibody test results and post-index diagnostic NAAT results, with infection defined as a positive diagnostic test post-index, as measured in 30-day intervals (0-30, 31-60, 61-90, >90 days). Additional measures included demographic, geographic, and clinical characteristics at the time of the index antibody test, such as recorded signs and symptoms or prior evidence of COVID-19 (diagnoses or NAAT+) and recorded comorbidities. ResultsWe included 3,257,478 unique patients with an index antibody test. Of these, 2,876,773 (88.3%) had a negative index antibody result, 378,606 (11.6%) had a positive index antibody result, and 2,099 (0.1%) had an inconclusive index antibody result. Patients with a negative antibody test were somewhat older at index than those with a positive result (mean of 48 versus 44 years). A fraction (18.4%) of individuals who were initially seropositive converted to seronegative over the follow up period. During the follow-up periods, the ratio (CI) of positive NAAT results among individuals who had a positive antibody test at index versus those with a negative antibody test at index was 2.85 (2.73 - 2.97) at 0-30 days, 0.67 (0.6 - 0.74) at 31-60 days, 0.29 (0.24 - 0.35) at 61-90 days), and 0.10 (0.05 - 0.19) at >90 days. ConclusionsPatients who display positive antibody tests are initially more likely to have a positive NAAT, consistent with prolonged RNA shedding, but over time become markedly less likely to have a positive NAAT. This result suggests seropositivity using commercially available assays is associated with protection from infection. The duration of protection is unknown and may wane over time; this parameter will need to be addressed in a study with extended duration of follow up. Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSCan real-world data be used to evaluate the comparative risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for individuals who are antibody-positive versus antibody-negative? FindingOf patients indexed on a positive antibody test, 10 of 3,226 with a NAAT (0.3%) had evidence of a positive NAAT > 90 days after index, compared with 491 of 16,157 (3.0%) indexed on a negative antibody test. MeaningIndividuals who are seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 based on commercial assays may be at decreased future risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Planned variation in preanalytical conditions to evaluate biospecimen stability in the National Children's Study (NCS).

BACKGROUND: Preanalytical conditions encountered during collection, processing, and storage of biospecimens may influence laboratory results. The National Children's Study (NCS) is a planned prospective cohort study of 100,000 families to examine the influence of a wide variety of exposures on child health. In developing biospecimen collection, processing, and storage procedures for the NCS, we identified several analytes of different biochemical categories for which it was unclear to what extent deviations from NCS procedures could influence measurement results. METHODS: A pilot study was performed to examine effects of preanalytic sample handling conditions (delays in centrifugation, freezing delays, delays in separation from cells, additive delay, and tube type) on concentrations of eight different analytes. A total of 2825 measurements were made to assess 15 unique combinations of analyte and handling conditions in blood collected from 151 women of childbearing age (≥ 20 individuals per handling condition). RESULTS: The majority of analytes were stable under the conditions evaluated. However, levels of plasma interleukin-6 and serum insulin were decreased in response to sample centrifugation delays of up to 5.5 h post-collection (p<0.0001). In addition, delays in freezing centrifuged plasma samples (comparing 24, 48 and 72 h to immediate freezing) resulted in increased levels of adrenocorticotropic hormone (p=0.0014). CONCLUSIONS: Determining stability of proposed analytes in response to preanalytical conditions and handling helps to ensure high-quality specimens for study now and in the future. The results inform development of procedures, plans for measurement of analytes, and interpretation of laboratory results.