RESUMO
BackgroundThe durability and cross-neutralizability of protective antibodies against evolving SARS-CoV-2 variants are primary concerns in mitigating (re-)exposures. The role of antibody maturation, the process whereby selection of higher avidity antibodies augments host immunity, to determine SARS-CoV-2 neutralizability was investigated. MethodsSera collected from SARS-CoV-2 convalescent individuals at 2- or 10-months after recovery, and BNT162b2 vaccine recipients at 3 or 25 weeks post-vaccination, were analyzed. Anti-spike IgG avidity was measured on a urea-treated ELISA platform. Neutralizing ability of antibodies was assessed by surrogate virus neutralization. Fold change between variant and wild-type antigen neutralizability was calculated to infer breadth of neutralizability. ResultsCompared with early-convalescence, the avidity index of late-convalescent sera was significantly higher (median 37.7 (interquartile range 28.4-45.1) vs. 64.9 (57.5-71.5), p < 0.0001), indicative of progressive antibody maturation extending months beyond acute-phase illness. The urea-resistant, high-avidity fraction of IgG was best predictive of neutralizability (Spearmans r = 0.49 vs. 0.67 for wild-type; 0.18-0.52 vs. 0.48-0.83 for variants). Higher-avidity convalescent sera showed greater cross-neutralizability against SARS-CoV-2 variants (p < 0.001 for Alpha; p < 0.01 for Delta and Omicron). Vaccinees experienced delayed maturation kinetics, translating to limited breadth of neutralizability at week-25 post-vaccination which was only comparable to that of early-convalescence. ConclusionsAvidity maturation grants broader neutralizability that is resilient against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. With immunopotentiation through repeat vaccinations becoming a pivotal strategy to accomplish herd immunity, understanding the variable longitudinal evolutions of the two building blocks of hybrid immunity is crucial.
RESUMO
BackgroundThe impact of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on healthcare workers (HCWs) has been under-evaluated in Central America. We performed a seroepidemiological survey at a tertiary healthcare facility in El Salvador, where a large number of confirmed and far more suspected cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected HCWs had been documented during the first wave of the pandemic. MethodsDuring January-February 2021, a total 973 HCWs were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Participants completed a questionnaire asking of their demographic data. Occupational risk was assessed by statistically comparing the seropositivity rates among different occupational categories. ResultsOverall seroprevalence in HCWs reached 52.6% (512 of 973). Of the seropositive individuals, 61.7% (316 of 512) had experienced a documented COVID-19 diagnosis, while the remaining 38.3% (196 of 512) were unrecognized seroconversions. Differences in seropositivity rates existed between occupational categories; nurses demonstrated the highest at 63.8% (222 of 348, risk ratio 1.44, p < 0.0001), followed by auxiliary HCWs assigned to patient-related work (55.9%, 52 of 93), and medical doctors (46.7%, 50 of 107). Several non-patient-related professions showed above-average seroprevalence, suggesting substantial SARS-CoV-2 contacts outside the workplace: 60.0% (6 of 10) and 68.0% (17 of 25) for nutritionists and pharmacists, respectively. ConclusionsSARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence exceeded 50% among HCWs in El Salvador, with disparity among occupational categories with different workplace exposure risks. Importance of not only nosocomial infection prevention but also screening for transmissions having occurred outside the workplace were highlighted to efficiently control nosocomial spreads during a pandemic wave. Key pointsHealthcare workers in El Salvador were tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Seroprevalence reached 52.6%, with disparity among occupation; nurses ranked highest at 63.8% seropositivity. Alongside nosocomial transmissions, high seroprevalence associated with non-patient-related work suggested substantial SARS-CoV-2 contacts outside the workplace.
RESUMO
BackgroundIsothermal amplification-based tests were developed as rapid, low-cost, and simple alternatives to real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for SARS-COV-2 detection. MethodsClinical performance of two isothermal amplification-based tests (Atila Biosystems iAMP COVID-19 detection test and OptiGene COVID-19 Direct Plus RT-LAMP test) was compared to clinical RT-PCR assays using different sampling strategies. A total of 1378 participants were tested across four study sites. ResultsCompared to standard of care RT-PCR testing, the overall sensitivity and specificity of the Atila iAMP test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 were 76.2% and 94.9%, respectively, and increased to 88.8% and 89.5%, respectively, after exclusion of an outlier study site. Sensitivity varied based on the anatomic collected site. Sensitivity for nasopharyngeal was 65.4% (range across study sites:52.8%-79.8%), mid-turbinate 88.2%, saliva 55.1% (range across study sites:42.9%-77.8%) and anterior nares 66.7% (range across study sites:63.6%-76.5%). The specificity for these anatomic collection sites ranged from 96.7% to 100%. Sensitivity improved in symptomatic patients (overall 82.7%) and those with a higher viral load (overall 92.4% for ct[≤]25). Sensitivity and specificity of the OptiGene Direct Plus RT-LAMP test, conducted at a single study-site, were 25.5% and 100%, respectively. ConclusionsThe Atila iAMP COVID test with mid-turbinate sampling is a rapid, low-cost assay for detecting SARS-COV-2, especially in symptomatic patients and those with a high viral load, and could be used to reduce the risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission in clinical settings. Variation of performance between study sites highlights the need for site-specific clinical validation of these assays before clinical adoption.
