The imprinting effect of COVID-19 vaccines: an expected selection bias in observational studies

Findings of recent observational studies have been interpreted as supporting immune imprinting of COVID-19 vaccines. In this work, we clarify that the current discussion can be mapped to an attempt to estimate the direct effect of vaccine boosters on SARS-CoV-2 reinfections, and that such direct effect cannot be correctly estimated with observational data. We conclude that recent observational estimates regarding immune imprinting are fundamentally biased, and that the increased risk of reinfection in individuals vaccinated with a vaccine booster compared to no booster is expected even if the immune imprinting hypothesis is false. We use graphical methods (directed acyclic graphs), data simulations and analysis of real-life data to illustrate the mechanism and magnitude of this bias.

Evolution of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 over seven months: experience of the Nationwide Seroprevalence ENE-COVID Study in Spain

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.

SARS-CoV-2 infection fatality risk in a nationwide seroepidemiological study

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.