Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21253142

RESUMO

ObjectivesTo analyse temporal trends in SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid IgG throughout the four rounds of the nationwide seroepidemiologic study ENE-COVID (April-November 2020), and to compare the fourth-round results of two immunoassays detecting antibodies against nucleocapsid and to S protein receptor-binding domain (RBD). MethodsA chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA) was offered to all participants in the first three rounds (Abbott; anti-nucleocapsid IgG). In the fourth round we offered this test and a chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) (Beckman; anti-RBD IgG) to i) a randomly selected sub-cohort, ii) participants who were IgG-positive in any of the three first rounds; and iii) participants who were IgG-positive in the fourth round by point-of-care immunochromatography. ResultsImmunoassays involving 10,153 participants (82.2% of people invited to donate samples) were performed in the fourth round. A total of 2595 participants (35.1% of participants with immunoassay results in the four rounds) were positive for anti-nucleocapsid IgG in at least one round. Anti-nucleocapsid IgG became undetectable in 43.3% of participants with positive first-round results. Pneumonia was more frequent in participants with anti-nucleocapsid IgG in all four rounds (11.2%) than those in which IgG became undetectable (2.4%). In fourth round, anti-nucleocapsid and anti-RBD IgG were detected in 5.5% and 5.4% participants of the randomly selected sub-cohort, and in 26.6% and 25.9% participants with at least one previous positive result, respectively. Agreement between techniques was 90.3% (kappa: 0.72). ConclusionsThe response of IgG to SARS-CoV-2 is heterogeneous and conditioned by infection severity. A substantial proportion of the SARS-CoV-2 infected population may have negative serologic results in the post-infection months.

2.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20169722

RESUMO

ObjectiveTo estimate the range of the age- and sex-specific infection fatality risk (IFR) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) based on confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths and excess all-cause deaths. DesignNationwide population-based seroepidemiological study combined with two national surveillance systems. Setting and participantsNon-institutionalized Spanish population of all ages. Main outcome measuresThe range of IFR was calculated as the observed number of COVID-19 deaths and excess deaths divided by the estimated number of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the non-institutionalized Spanish population. Laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 deaths were obtained from the National Epidemiological Surveillance Network (RENAVE) and excess all-cause deaths from the Monitoring Mortality System (MoMo) up to July 15, 2020. SARS-CoV-2 infections were derived from the estimated seroprevalence by a chemiluminiscent microparticle immunoassay for IgG antibodies in 61,092 participants in the ENE-COVID nationwide serosurvey between April 27 and June 22, 2020. ResultsThe overall IFR (95% confidence interval) was 0.8% (0.8% to 0.9%) for confirmed COVID-19 deaths and 1.1% (1.0% to 1.2%) for excess deaths. The IFR ranged between 1.1% (1.0% to 1.2%) and 1.4% (1.3% to 1.5%) in men and between 0.6% (0.5% to 0.6%) and 0.8% (0.7% to 0.8%) in women. The IFR increased sharply after age 50, ranging between 11.6% (8.1% to 16.5%) and 16.4% (11.4% to 23.2%) in men [≥]80 years and between 4.6% (3.4% to 6.3%) and 6.5% (4.7% to 8.8%) in women [≥]80 years. ConclusionThe sharp increase in SARS-CoV-2 IFR after age 50 was more marked in men than in women. Fatality from COVID-19 is substantially greater than that reported for other common respiratory diseases such as seasonal influenza. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPICInfection fatality risk (IFR) for SARS-CoV-2 is a key indicator for policy decision making, but its magnitude remains under debate. Case fatality risk, which accounts for deaths among confirmed COVID-19 cases, overestimates SARS-CoV-2 fatality as it excludes a large proportion of asymptomatic and mild-symptomatic infections. Population-based seroepidemiological studies are a valuable tool to properly estimate the number of infected individuals, regardless of symptoms. Also, because ascertainment of deaths due to COVID-19 is often incomplete, the calculation of the IFR should be complemented with data on excess all-cause mortality. In addition, data on age- and sex-specific IFR are scarce, even though age and sex are well known modifiers of the clinical evolution of COVID-19. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDSUsing the ENE-COVID nationwide serosurvey and two national surveillance systems in Spain, this study provides a range of age- and sex-specific IFR estimates for SARS-CoV-2 based on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 deaths and excess all-cause deaths. The risk of death was very low among infected individuals younger than 50 years, but it increased sharply with age, particularly among men. In the oldest age group ([≥]80 years), it was estimated that 12% to 16% of infected men and 5% to 6% of infected women died during the first epidemic wave.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...