Observed protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection following a primary infection: A Danish cohort study among unvaccinated using two years of nationwide PCR-test data

Post-COVID-19 Condition Fatigue Outcomes Among Danish Residents

Importance

Fatigue remains one of the most common and debilitating symptoms of post-COVID-19 condition; however, existing studies are limited to select populations and often lack noninfected controls. It also remains unclear to what extent severity of infection and psychiatric conditions, which are often linked to chronic fatigue, modify the risk of post-COVID-19 condition fatigue symptoms.

Objective

To evaluate the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on self-reported fatigue and postexertional malaise over time and to explore possible risk factors, such as the impact of acute SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization and preexisting psychiatric conditions on postacute fatigue.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cohort study, Danish residents aged 15 years and older were invited to participate in the EFTER-COVID survey, which used repeated, self-reported online questionnaires that collected information on fatigue (Fatigue Assessment Scale) and postexertional malaise scores (DePaul Symptom Questionnaire) after individuals' index SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test. Participants were included if they completed a baseline and at least 1 follow-up questionnaire 2 to 18 months after testing for SARS-CoV-2.

Exposure

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were fatigue and postexertional malaise 2 to 18 months after testing. Mixed-effects models were used to compare scores between SARS-CoV-2 test-positive and test-negative individuals (testing period April 2021 to February 2023).

Results

Of a total of 50 115 participants (median [IQR] age at test date, 57 [46-67] years; 29 774 female [59.4%]), 25 249 were test positive and 24 866 were test negative. Most participants were vaccinated with at least 2 doses (21 164 test-negative participants [85.1%] and 22 120 test-positive participants [87.6%]) before their SARS-CoV-2 index test and fatigue reporting. In the period 2 to 18 months after testing, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a small but significant 3% increase in self-reported fatigue scores (score ratio [SR], 1.03; 95% CI, 1.03-1.04) and higher odds of self-reported postexertional malaise (odds ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.81-2.30), compared with test-negative participants. In the same period, hospitalization with SARS-CoV-2 increased fatigue scores by 23% (SR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.20-1.26) compared with test-negative participants. Preexisting psychiatric conditions did not significantly modify postacute fatigue scores.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a subtle increase in self-reported fatigue and postexertional malaise symptoms 2 to 18 months after mild infection. In contrast, individuals hospitalized with acute SARS-CoV-2 experienced a more substantial increase in postacute symptoms. Preexisting psychiatric conditions did not significantly modify the risk of postacute fatigue symptoms. The findings largely captured symptoms following first-time infections in a population where most had been vaccinated. Persons who experienced severe acute infection may benefit from clinical follow-up for fatigue.

Heterogeneity of SARS-CoV-2 immune responses after the nationwide Omicron wave in China

It remains unclear how previous infections and vaccinations influenced and shaped heterogeneous immune responses against Omicron and its variants in diverse populations in China. After the national wave of Omicron in early 2023, we evaluated serum levels of neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) against Omicron (B.1.1.529) and its variants (BA.5, BF.7, and CH1.1) in 33 COVID-19 convalescents and 40 uninfected vaccinees, using vesicular stomatitis virus-based pseudovirus neutralizing assay. In addition, we followed 34 Delta convalescent patients to compare their immune responses against Omicron before (late 2021) and after the Omicron wave (early 2023). NAbs at the acute phase of the disease were investigated in 50 Omicron inpatients, including 24 vaccinated and 26 unvaccinated patients. Among them, nasal mucosal IgA levels were measured in 42 subjects. Compared to vaccination, breakthrough infections significantly increased the breadth and magnitude of serum nAbs and mucosal IgA levels against Omicron variants. Exposure to Omicron but not Delta elicited stronger pan-Omicron responses. In Omicron inpatients, nAbs continued to rise as vaccination doses increased. However, in both vaccinees and convalescents, a fourth dose vaccination did not elicit higher nAbs against Omicron. Furthermore, nAbs against Omicron variants lasted longer than nAbs against WT SARS-CoV-2. Breakthrough infections of Omicron variants elicited specific immune responses against Omicron compared to vaccination and Delta infection. Although repeated vaccination revealed limited impacts on serum nAbs, populations at high risk of hospitalization may still benefit from continued vaccination.IMPORTANCEThe study described the specific humoral immunity against Omicron and its variants (BA.5, BF.7, and CH1.1) in diverse populations, including Delta-positive convalescent patients, Omicron-infected patients with a previous or current confirmed Delta infection, Omicron-positive patients, and healthy controls. In addition, we followed Delta convalescents for 1 year to evaluate the effect of a booster vaccine, breakthrough infection, and reinfection. Nasal mucosal IgA levels against SARS-CoV-2 were also examined. The findings of this study demonstrated the varied responses of individuals in different states following the outbreak of Omicron, highlighting the potential advantages of ongoing immunization for groups that are more vulnerable and have a greater likelihood of being hospitalized.

The Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-Protein IgG, Which Is Detected Using the Chemiluminescence Microparticle Immunoassay (CMIA) in Individuals Having Either a History of COVID-19 Vaccination and/or SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Showed a High-Titer Neutralizing Effect

Neutralizing antibodies plays a primary role in protective immunity by preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) from entering the cells. Therefore, characterization of antiviral immunity is important for protection against SARS-CoV-2. In this study, the neutralizing effect of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 protein IgG, which was detected using the chemiluminescence microparticle immunoassay (CMIA)-based SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant (Abbott, Waukegan, IL, USA) test in SARS-CoV-2 infected and/or vaccinated individuals, was investigated with a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT). In total, 120 Seropositive individuals were included in this study. They were divided into two groups: Vaccinated (n = 60) and Vaccinated + Previously Infected (n = 60). A commercial sVNT, the ACE2-RBD Neutralization Test (Dia.Pro, Milan, Italy), was used to assess the neutralizing effect. The assay is performed in two steps: screening and titration. The screening showed positive results in all seropositive samples. Low titration in 1.7%, medium titration in 5%, and high titration in 93.3% of the Vaccinated group, and medium titration in 1.7% and high titration in 98.3% of the other group, as obtained from the ACE2-RBD titration test. A strong positive and significant correlation was found between the SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant test and the ACE2-RBD titration test at the 1/32 titration level for both groups (p < 0.001 for both). This study shows that the SARS-CoV-2 IgG detected using the CMIA method after SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination has a high neutralizing titration by using the sVNT. In line with these data, knowledge that seropositivity determined by CMIA also indicates a strong neutralizing effect contributes to countrywide planning for protecting the population.

Meta-analysis of hybrid immunity to mitigate the risk of Omicron variant reinfection

Background

Hybrid immunity (a combination of natural and vaccine-induced immunity) provides additional immune protection against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reinfection. Today, people are commonly infected and vaccinated; hence, hybrid immunity is the norm. However, the mitigation of the risk of Omicron variant reinfection by hybrid immunity and the durability of its protection remain uncertain. This meta-analysis aims to explore hybrid immunity to mitigate the risk of Omicron variant reinfection and its protective durability to provide a new evidence-based basis for the development and optimization of immunization strategies and improve the public's awareness and participation in COVID-19 vaccination, especially in vulnerable and at-risk populations.

Methods

Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases were searched for publicly available literature up to 10 June 2024. Two researchers independently completed the data extraction and risk of bias assessment and cross-checked each other. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed the risk of bias in included cohort and case-control studies, while criteria recommended by the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (AHRQ) evaluated cross-sectional studies. The extracted data were synthesized in an Excel spreadsheet according to the predefined items to be collected. The outcome was Omicron variant reinfection, reported as an Odds Ratio (OR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI) and Protective Effectiveness (PE) with 95% CI. The data were pooled using a random- or fixed-effects model based on the I2 test. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed.

Results

Thirty-three articles were included. Compared with the natural immunity group, the hybrid immunity (booster vaccination) group had the highest level of mitigation in the risk of reinfection (OR = 0.43, 95% CI:0.34-0.56), followed by the complete vaccination group (OR = 0.58, 95% CI:0.45-0.74), and lastly the incomplete vaccination group (OR = 0.64, 95% CI:0.44-0.93). Compared with the complete vaccination-only group, the hybrid immunity (complete vaccination) group mitigated the risk of reinfection by 65% (OR = 0.35, 95% CI:0.27-0.46), and the hybrid immunity (booster vaccination) group mitigated the risk of reinfection by an additional 29% (OR = 0.71, 95% CI:0.61-0.84) compared with the hybrid immunity (complete vaccination) group. The effectiveness of hybrid immunity (incomplete vaccination) in mitigating the risk of reinfection was 37.88% (95% CI, 28.88-46.89%) within 270-364 days, and decreased to 33.23%% (95% CI, 23.80-42.66%) within 365-639 days; whereas, the effectiveness after complete vaccination was 54.36% (95% CI, 50.82-57.90%) within 270-364 days, and the effectiveness of booster vaccination was 73.49% (95% CI, 68.95-78.04%) within 90-119 days.

Conclusion

Hybrid immunity was significantly more protective than natural or vaccination-induced immunity, and booster doses were associated with enhanced protection against Omicron. Although its protective effects waned over time, vaccination remains a crucial measure for controlling COVID-19.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier, CRD42024539682.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Risk of Postacute Psychiatric and Neurologic Diagnoses: A Nationwide Danish Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The extent and burden of postacute psychiatric and neurologic manifestations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are not yet fully understood. To evaluate the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and postacute manifestations of psychiatric and neurologic disorders, we conducted a nationwide cohort study including the entire Danish population aged 12 years or older on March 1, 2020.

METHODS

Individuals were followed up for SARS-CoV-2 infection and diagnosis of subsequent psychiatric and neurologic disorders from March 1, 2020, to January 31, 2023, using the Danish nationwide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) test surveillance database and the Danish National Patient Registry. The main period of interest was 1-12 months after infection. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of new onset of 11 psychiatric and 30 neurologic disorders were calculated by comparing incidence rates of disorders between SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals and individuals without a positive test (nonpositive individuals). Stratified analyses were conducted according to COVID-19 vaccination status, variant period, age, sex, and severity of infection.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,775,639 individuals in the study cohort (n = 3,239,008) were tested SARS-CoV-2 positive during follow-up. SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals compared with nonpositive individuals were at 24% reduced risk of any psychiatric disease (IRR 0.76, 95% CI 0.74-0.78) in the postacute period. The risk of any neurologic disorder was slightly higher among SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals than among those without a positive test (IRR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.07). IRRs for specific disorders varied considerably from a 3.9-fold increased risk of change in sense of smell or taste (IRR 3.91, 95% CI 2.77-5.53) to a 29% reduced risk of dementia (IRR 0.71, 95% CI 0.65-0.78). The severity of infection and vaccination status, more so than age, sex, and variant, were found to significantly influence the stratified IRRs. Compared with nonpositive individuals, hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were at a 2.1-fold (IRR 2.05, 95% CI 1.78-2.37) increased risk of psychiatric disorders and at a 2.4-fold increased risk of neurologic disorders (IRR 2.44, 95% CI 2.29-2.60).

DISCUSSION

Our study does not support previous findings of substantial postacute neurologic and psychiatric morbidities among the general population of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, but does corroborate an elevated risk among the most severe cases with COVID-19.

COVID-19 reinfections in Mexico City: implications for public health

Background

Since its appearance, COVID-19 has immensely impacted our society. Public health measures, from the initial lockdowns to vaccination campaigns, have mitigated the crisis. However, SARS-CoV-2's persistence and evolving variants continue to pose global threats, increasing the risk of reinfections. Despite vaccination progress, understanding reinfections remains crucial for informed public health responses.

Methods

We collected available data on clinical and genomic information for SARS-CoV-2 samples from patients treated in Mexico City from 2020 epidemiological week 10 to 2023 epidemiological week 06 encompassing the whole public health emergency's period. To identify clinical data we utilized the SISVER (Respiratory Disease Epidemiological Surveillance System) database for SARS-CoV-2 patients who received medical attention in Mexico City. For genomic surveillance we analyzed genomic data previously uploaded to GISAID generated by Mexican institutions. We used these data sources to generate descriptors of case number, hospitalization, death and reinfection rates, and viral variant prevalence throughout the pandemic period.

Findings

The fraction of reinfected individuals in the COVID-19 infected population steadily increased as the pandemic progressed in Mexico City. Most reinfections occurred during the fifth wave (40%). This wave was characterized by the coexistence of multiple variants exceeding 80% prevalence; whereas all other waves showed a unique characteristic dominant variant (prevalence >95%). Shifts in symptom patient care type and severity were observed, 2.53% transitioned from hospitalized to ambulatory care type during reinfection and 0.597% showed the opposite behavior; also 7.23% showed a reduction in severity of symptoms and 6.05% displayed an increase in severity. Unvaccinated individuals accounted for the highest percentage of reinfections (41.6%), followed by vaccinated individuals (31.9%). Most reinfections occurred after the fourth wave, dominated by the Omicron variant; and after the vaccination campaign was already underway.

Interpretation

Our analysis suggests reduced infection severity in reinfections, evident through shifts in symptom severity and care patterns. Unvaccinated individuals accounted for most reinfections. While our study centers on Mexico City, its findings may hold implications for broader regions, contributing insights into reinfection dynamics.

Antigen non-specific CD8+ T cells accelerate cognitive decline in aged mice following respiratory coronavirus infection

Primarily a respiratory infection, numerous patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 present with neurologic symptoms, some continuing long after viral clearance as a persistent symptomatic phase termed "long COVID". Advanced age increases the risk of severe disease, as well as incidence of long COVID. We hypothesized that perturbations in the aged immune response predispose elderly individuals to severe coronavirus infection and post-infectious sequelae. Using a murine model of respiratory coronavirus, mouse hepatitis virus strain A59 (MHV-A59), we found that aging increased clinical illness and lethality to MHV infection, with aged animals harboring increased virus in the brain during acute infection. This was coupled with an unexpected increase in activated CD8+ T cells within the brains of aged animals but reduced antigen specificity of those CD8+ T cells. Aged animals demonstrated spatial learning impairment following MHV infection, which correlated with increased neuronal cell death and reduced neuronal regeneration in aged hippocampus. Using primary cell culture, we demonstrated that activated CD8+ T cells induce neuronal death, independent of antigen-specificity. Specifically, higher levels of CD8+ T cell-derived IFN-γ correlated with neuronal death. These results support the evidence that CD8+ T cells in the brain directly contribute to cognitive dysfunction following coronavirus infection in aged individuals.

SARS-CoV-2 reinfections in the pediatric cohort-a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

This study focused on timelines of infection episodes and dominant variants and aims to determine disease severity and outcome of pediatric patients with reinfection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study retrospectively evaluated the medical records of the hospitalized patients and/or outpatients aged 0-18 with a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction between March 2020 and September 2022 at Ege University Children's Hospital.

RESULTS

Ninety-one pediatric patients reinfected with SARS-CoV-2 were included in the study. There was an underlying disease in 26.4% of the patients. The median time between the two infection episodes was 184 (90-662) days. There were 24 patients (26.3%) with the first infection in pre-Delta period; 17 (18.6%) of them were reinfected in Omicron BA.1 period, while 7 (7.6%) in Omicron BA.4/BA.5 period. Forty-five patients (49.4%) were infected initially in the Delta period; 35 patients (38.4%) were reinfected in the Omicron BA.1 period, while 10 patients (10.9%) were reinfected in the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 period. Twenty-two patients (24.1%) had the first infection in the Omicron BA.1 period and then reinfected in the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 period. Patients with reinfection more frequently displayed a symptom (84.6% vs. 94.5%, p = 0.03). The hospitalization rate significantly declined in reinfection (15.3% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.03). Severe disease, treatment needs and steroid use were decreased in reinfections without a significant difference (p > 0.05). Intensive care unit admission was not altered.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that reinfections frequently develop in previously healthy children but do not cause more severe outcomes. The risk of symptomatic reinfections is still high due to the effect of the Omicron variant.

Incidence and outcome of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in the pre-Omicron era: A global systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

With the emergence of new variants and sub-lineages of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), reinfections can significantly impact herd immunity, vaccination policies, and decisions on other public health measures. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesise the global evidence on SARS-CoV-2 reinfections in the pre-Omicron era.

Methods

We searched five global databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Global Health, WHO COVID-19) on 12 May 2022 and 28 July 2023 and three Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang, CQvip) on 16 October 2022 for articles reporting incidence and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection before the period of Omicron (B.1.1.529) predominance. We assessed risk of bias using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools and conducted meta-analyses with random effects models to estimate the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among initially infected cases and hospitalisation and mortality proportions among reinfected ones.

Results

We identified 7593 studies and extracted data from 64 included ones representing 21 countries. The proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was 1.16% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01-1.33) based on 11 639 247 initially infected cases, with ≥45 days between the two infections. Healthcare providers (2.28%; 95% CI = 1.37-3.40) had a significantly higher risk of reinfection than the general population (1.00%; 95% CI = 0.81-1.20), while young adults aged 18 to 35 years (1.01%; 95% CI = 0.8-1.25) had a higher reinfection burden than other age groups (children <18 years old: 0.57%; 95% CI = 0.39-0.79, older adults aged 36-65 years old: 0.53%; 95% CI = 0.41-0.65, elderly >65 years old: 0.37%; 95% CI = 0.15-0.66). Among the reinfected cases, 8.12% (95% CI = 5.30-11.39) were hospitalised, 1.31% (95% CI = 0.29-2.83) were admitted to the intensive care unit, and 0.71% (95% CI = 0.02-2.01) died.

Conclusions

Our data suggest a relatively low risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in the pre-Omicron era, but the risk of hospitalisation was relatively high among the reinfected cases. Considering the possibility of underdiagnosis, the reinfection burden may be underestimated.

Registration

PROSPERO: CRD42023449712.

A hybrid register and questionnaire study of Covid-19 and post-acute sick leave in Denmark

Post-acute sick leave is an underexplored indicator of the societal burden of SARS-CoV-2. Here,  we report findings about self-reported sick leave and risk factors thereof from a hybrid survey and register study, which include 37,482 RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases and 51,336 test-negative controls who were tested during the index- and alpha-dominant waves. We observe that an additional 33 individuals per 1000 took substantial sick leave following acute infection compared to persons with no known history of infection, where substantial sick leave is defined as >1 month of sick leave within the period 1-9 months after the RT-PCR test date. Being female, 50-65 years, or having certain pre-existing health conditions such as obesity, chronic lung diseases, and fibromyalgia each increase risk for taking substantial sick leave. Altogether, these results may help motivate improved diagnostic and treatment options for persons living with post-Covid conditions.

Validation of a SARS-CoV-2 Surrogate Neutralization Test Detecting Neutralizing Antibodies against the Major Variants of Concern

SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination elicit a broad range of neutralizing antibody responses against the different variants of concern (VOC). We established a new variant-adapted surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) and assessed the neutralization activity against the ancestral B.1 (WT) and VOC Delta, Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5. Analytical performances were compared against the respective VOC to the reference virus neutralization test (VNT) and two CE-IVD labeled kits using three different cohorts collected during the COVID-19 waves. Correlation analyses showed moderate to strong correlation for Omicron sub-variants (Spearman's r = 0.7081 for BA.1, r = 0.7205 for BA.2, and r = 0.6042 for BA.5), and for WT (r = 0.8458) and Delta-sVNT (r = 0.8158), respectively. Comparison of the WT-sVNT performance with two CE-IVD kits, the "Icosagen SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody ELISA kit" and the "Genscript cPass, kit" revealed an overall good correlation ranging from 0.8673 to -0.8773 and a midway profile between both commercial kits with 87.76% sensitivity and 90.48% clinical specificity. The BA.2-sVNT performance was similar to the BA.2 Genscript test. Finally, a correlation analysis revealed a strong association (r = 0.8583) between BA.5-sVNT and VNT sVNT using a double-vaccinated cohort (n = 100) and an Omicron-breakthrough infection cohort (n = 91). In conclusion, the sVNT allows for the efficient prediction of immune protection against the various VOCs.

An update on studies characterizing adaptive immune responses in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination

In this brief opinion piece, we highlight our studies characterizing adaptive SARS-CoV-2 immune responses in infection and vaccination, and the ability of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells to recognize emerging variants of concern, and the role of pre-existing cross-reactive T cells. In the context of the debate on correlates of protection, the pandemic's progression in the past 3 years underlined the need to consider how different adaptive immune responses might differentially contribute to protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection versus COVID-19 disease. Lastly, we discuss how cross-reactive T cell responses may be useful in generating a broad adaptive immunity, recognizing different variants and viral families. Considering vaccines with broadly conserved antigens could improve preparedness for future infectious disease outbreaks.

Predicting COVID-19 Incidence Using Wastewater Surveillance Data, Denmark, October 2021-June 2022

Analysis of wastewater is used in many settings for surveillance of SARS-CoV-2, but it remains unclear how well wastewater testing results reflect incidence. Denmark has had an extensive wastewater analysis system that conducts 3 weekly tests in ≈200 sites and has 85% population coverage; the country also offers free SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests to all residents. Using time series analysis for modeling, we found that wastewater data, combined with information on circulating variants and the number of human tests performed, closely fitted the incidence curve of persons testing positive. The results were consistent at a regional level and among a subpopulation of frequently tested healthcare personnel. We used wastewater analysis data to estimate incidence after testing was reduced to a minimum after March 2022. These results imply that data from a large-scale wastewater surveillance system can serve as a good proxy for COVID-19 incidence and for epidemic control.

Patterns of testing in the extensive Danish national SARS-CoV-2 test set-up

BACKGROUND

The Danish national SARS-CoV-2 mass test system was among the most ambitious worldwide. We describe its set-up and analyse differences in patterns of testing per demography and time period in relation to the three waves of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Denmark.

METHODS

We included all reported PCR- and rapid antigen-tests performed between 27 February 2020 and 10 March 2022 among all residents aged 2 years or above. Descriptive statistics and Poisson regression models were used to analyse characteristics of individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 using a national cohort study design.

RESULTS

A total of 63.7 million PCR-tests and 60.0 million rapid antigen-tests were performed in the study period, testing 90.9% and 78.8% of the Danish population at least once by PCR or antigen, respectively. Female sex, younger age, Danish heritage and living in the capital area were all factors positively associated with the frequency of PCR-testing. The association between COVID-19 vaccination and PCR-testing changed from negative to positive over time.

CONCLUSION

We provide details of the widely available, free-of-charge, national SARS-CoV-2 test system, which served to identify infected individuals, assist isolation of infectious individuals and contact tracing, and thereby mitigating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the Danish population. The test system was utilized by nearly the entire population at least once, and widely accepted across different demographic groups. However, demographic differences in the test uptake did exist and should be considered in order not to cause biases in studies related to SARS-CoV-2, e.g., studies of transmission and vaccine effectiveness.

The representative COVID-19 cohort Munich (KoCo19): from the beginning of the pandemic to the Delta virus variant

BACKGROUND

Population-based serological studies allow to estimate prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections despite a substantial number of mild or asymptomatic disease courses. This became even more relevant for decision making after vaccination started. The KoCo19 cohort tracks the pandemic progress in the Munich general population for over two years, setting it apart in Europe.

METHODS

Recruitment occurred during the initial pandemic wave, including 5313 participants above 13 years from private households in Munich. Four follow-ups were held at crucial times of the pandemic, with response rates of at least 70%. Participants filled questionnaires on socio-demographics and potential risk factors of infection. From Follow-up 2, information on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was added. SARS-CoV-2 antibody status was measured using the Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-N assay (indicating previous infection) and the Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-S assay (indicating previous infection and/or vaccination). This allowed us to distinguish between sources of acquired antibodies.

RESULTS

The SARS-CoV-2 estimated cumulative sero-prevalence increased from 1.6% (1.1-2.1%) in May 2020 to 14.5% (12.7-16.2%) in November 2021. Underreporting with respect to official numbers fluctuated with testing policies and capacities, becoming a factor of more than two during the second half of 2021. Simultaneously, the vaccination campaign against the SARS-CoV-2 virus increased the percentage of the Munich population having antibodies, with 86.8% (85.5-87.9%) having developed anti-S and/or anti-N in November 2021. Incidence rates for infections after (BTI) and without previous vaccination (INS) differed (ratio INS/BTI of 2.1, 0.7-3.6). However, the prevalence of infections was higher in the non-vaccinated population than in the vaccinated one. Considering the whole follow-up time, being born outside Germany, working in a high-risk job and living area per inhabitant were identified as risk factors for infection, while other socio-demographic and health-related variables were not. Although we obtained significant within-household clustering of SARS-CoV-2 cases, no further geospatial clustering was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination increased the coverage of the Munich population presenting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, but breakthrough infections contribute to community spread. As underreporting stays relevant over time, infections can go undetected, so non-pharmaceutical measures are crucial, particularly for highly contagious strains like Omicron.

The impact of multiple non-pharmaceutical interventions for China-bound travel on domestic COVID-19 outbreaks

Objectives

Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) implemented on China-bound travel have successfully mitigated cross-regional transmission of COVID-19 but made the country face ripple effects. Thus, adjusting these interventions to reduce interruptions to individuals' daily life while minimizing transmission risk was urgent.

Methods

An improved Susceptible-Infected-Recovered (SIR) model was built to evaluate the Delta variant's epidemiological characteristics and the impact of NPIs. To explore the risk associated with inbound travelers and the occurrence of domestic traceable outbreaks, we developed an association parameter that combined inbound traveler counts with a time-varying initial value. In addition, multiple time-varying functions were used to model changes in the implementation of NPIs. Related parameters of functions were run by the MCSS method with 1,000 iterations to derive the probability distribution. Initial values, estimated parameters, and corresponding 95% CI were obtained. Reported existing symptomatic, suspected, and asymptomatic case counts were used as the training datasets. Reported cumulative recovered individual data were used to verify the reliability of relevant parameters. Lastly, we used the value of the ratio (Bias2/Variance) to verify the stability of the mathematical model, and the effects of the NPIs on the infected cases to analyze the sensitivity of input parameters.

Results

The quantitative findings indicated that this improved model was highly compatible with publicly reported data collected from July 21 to August 30, 2021. The number of inbound travelers was associated with the occurrence of domestic outbreaks. A proportional relationship between the Delta variant incubation period and PCR test validity period was found. The model also predicted that restoration of pre-pandemic travel schedules while adhering to NPIs requirements would cause shortages in health resources. The maximum demand for hospital beds would reach 25,000/day, the volume of PCR tests would be 8,000/day, and the number of isolation rooms would reach 800,000/day within 30 days.

Conclusion

With the pandemic approaching the end, reexamining it carefully helps better address future outbreaks. This predictive model has provided scientific evidence for NPIs' effectiveness and quantifiable evidence of health resource allocation. It could guide the design of future epidemic prevention and control policies, and provide strategic recommendations on scarce health resource allocation.

Importance of Cellular Immunity and IFN-γ Concentration in Preventing SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Reinfection: A Cohort Study

Recent studies have highlighted the underestimated importance of the cellular immune response after the emergence of variants of concern (VOCs) of SARS-CoV-2, and the significantly reduced neutralizing power of antibody titers in individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. Our study included 303 participants who were tested at St. Catherine Specialty Hospital using the Quan-T-Cell SARS-CoV-2 in combination with the Quan-T-Cell ELISA (Euroimmun Medizinische Labordiagnostika, Lübeck, Germany) for the analysis of IFN-γ concentration, and with Anti-SARS-CoV-2 QuantiVac ELISA IgG (Euroimmun Medizinische Labordiagnostika, Lübeck, Germany) for the detection of human antibodies of the immunoglobulin class IgG against the S1 domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The statistical analysis showed a significant difference in the concentration of IFN-γ between reinfected participants and those without infection (p = 0.012). Participants who were not infected or reinfected with SARS-CoV-2 after vaccination and/or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection had a significantly higher level of cellular immunity. Furthermore, in individuals without additional vaccination, those who experienced infection/reinfection had significantly lower levels of IFN-γ compared to uninfected participants (p = 0.016). Our findings suggest a long-lasting effect of cellular immunity, measured by IFN-γ concentrations, which plays a key role in preventing infections and reinfections after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.

Severe COVID-19 during pregnancy in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark

INTRODUCTION

Pregnancy is a risk factor for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and adverse pregnancy outcomes. We aimed to explore maternal characteristics, pregnancy outcomes, vaccination status, and virus variants among pregnant women admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with severe COVID-19.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We identified pregnant women admitted to ICU in Sweden (n = 96), Norway (n = 31), and Denmark (n = 16) because of severe COVID-19, from national registers and clinical databases between March 2020 and February 2022 (Denmark), August 2022 (Sweden), or December 2022 (Norway). Their background characteristics, pregnancy outcome, and vaccination status were compared with all birthing women and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test-positive pregnant women during the same time period. We calculated the number admitted to ICU per 10 000 birthing and per 1000 SARS-CoV-2 test-positive women during the Index, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron periods.

RESULTS

Women admitted to ICU had a higher mean body mass index, were more often of non-Scandinavian origin, had on average lower education and income levels, had a higher proportion of chronic and pregnancy-related conditions, delivered preterm, had neonates with low Apgar scores, and had more infants admitted to neonatal care, compared with all birthing and test-positive pregnant women. Of those admitted to ICU, only 7% had been vaccinated before admission. Overall, the highest proportion of women admitted to ICU per birthing was during the Delta period (4.1 per 10 000 birthing women). In Norway, the highest proportion admitted to ICU per test-positive pregnant women was during the Delta period (17.8 per 1000 test-positive), whereas the highest proportion of admitted per test-positive in Sweden and Denmark was seen during the Index period (15.4 and 8.9 per 1000 test-positive, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Admission to ICU because of COVID-19 in pregnancy was a rare event in the Scandinavian countries, but women who were unvaccinated, of non-Scandinavian origin, and with lower socio-economic status were at higher risk of admission to ICU. In addition, women admitted to ICU for COVID-19 had higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Risk factors for and pregnancy outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 in pregnancy according to disease severity: A nationwide cohort study with validation of the SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis

INTRODUCTION

We identified risk factors and outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy in a universally tested population according to disease severity and validated information on SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy in national health registers in Denmark.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cohort study using data from national registers and medical records including all pregnancies between March 1, 2020 and February 28, 2021. We compared women with a validated positive SARS-CoV-2 test during pregnancy with non-infected pregnant women. Risk factors and pregnancy outcomes were assessed by Poisson and Cox regression models and stratified according to disease severity defined by hospital admission status and admission reason (COVID-19 symptoms or other). Using medical record data on actual period of pregnancy, we calculated predictive values of the SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in pregnancy in the registers.

RESULTS

SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected in 1819 (1.6%) of 111 185 pregnancies. Asthma was associated with infection (relative risk [RR] 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-2.07). Risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease requiring hospital admission were high body mass index (median ratio 1.06, 95% CI 1.04-1.09), asthma (RR 7.47, 95% CI 3.51-15.90) and gestational age at the time of infection (gestational age 28-36 vs < 22: RR 3.53, 95% CI 1.75-7.10). SARS-CoV-2-infected women more frequently had hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.31, 95% CI 1.04-1.64), early pregnancy loss (aHR 1.37, 95% CI 1.00-1.88), preterm delivery before gestational age 28 (aHR 2.31, 95% CI 1.01-5.26), iatrogenically preterm delivery before gestational age 37 (aHR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.19) and small-for-gestational age children (aHR 1.28, 95% CI 1.05-1.54). The associations were stronger among women admitted to hospital for any reason. The validity of the SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in relation to pregnancy in the registers compared with medical records showed a negative predictive value of 99.9 (95% CI 99.9-100.0) and a positive predictive value of 82.1 (95% CI 80.4-83.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Women infected with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy were at increased risk of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy, early pregnancy loss, preterm delivery and having children small for gestational age. The validity of Danish national registers was acceptable for identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy.

SARS-CoV-2 elicits non-sterilizing immunity and evades vaccine-induced immunity: implications for future vaccination strategies

Neither vaccination nor natural infection result in long-lasting protection against SARS-COV-2 infection and transmission, but both reduce the risk of severe COVID-19. To generate insights into optimal vaccination strategies for prevention of severe COVID-19 in the population, we extended a Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Removed (SEIR) mathematical model to compare the impact of vaccines that are highly protective against severe COVID-19 but not against infection and transmission, with those that block SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our analysis shows that vaccination strategies focusing on the prevention of severe COVID-19 are more effective than those focusing on creating of herd immunity. Key uncertainties that would affect the choice of vaccination strategies are: (1) the duration of protection against severe disease, (2) the protection against severe disease from variants that escape vaccine-induced immunity, (3) the incidence of long-COVID and level of protection provided by the vaccine, and (4) the rate of serious adverse events following vaccination, stratified by demographic variables.

Risk of reinfection, vaccine protection, and severity of infection with the BA.5 omicron subvariant: a nation-wide population-based study in Denmark

BACKGROUND

Estimates of immunity and severity for the SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariant BA.5 are important to assess the public health impact associated with its rapid global spread despite vaccination. We estimated natural and vaccine immunity and severity of BA.5 relative to BA.2 in Denmark, a country with high mRNA-vaccination coverage and free-of-charge RT-PCR testing.

METHODS

This nation-wide population-based study in Denmark included residents aged 18 years or older who had taken an RT-PCR test between 10 April and 30 June, 2022 (ie, the outcome period), and who the national COVID-19 surveillance system identified as having information since February 2020 on RT-PCR tests, whole-genome sequencing, vaccinations, and hospitalisation with a positive RT-PCR test and COVID-19 as the main diagnosis. First, we used a case-control design, in which cases were people infected with BA.5 or BA.2 during the outcome period and controls were people who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection during the outcome period. We calculated the protection provided by a previous PCR-confirmed omicron infection against BA.5 and BA.2 infection and hospitalisation among triple-vaccinated individuals. Second, we compared vaccination status in people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2 and estimated relative vaccine protection against each subvariant. Third, we compared rates of hospitalisation for COVID-19 among people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2. We estimated effects using logistic regression with adjustment for sex, age, region, PCR-test date, comorbidity and, as appropriate, vaccination and previous infection status.

FINDINGS

A total of 210 (2·4%) of 8678 of BA.5 cases, 192 (0·7%) of 29 292 of BA.2 cases, and 33 972 (19·0%) of 178 669 PCR-negative controls previously had an omicron infection, which was estimated in the adjusted analyses to offer 92·7% (95% CI 91·6-93·7) protection against BA.5 infection and 97·1% (96·6-97·5) protection against BA.2 infection. We found similarly high amounts of protection against hospitalisation owing to infection with BA.5 (96·4% [95% CI 74·2-99·5]) and BA.2 (91·2% [76·3-96·7]). Vaccine coverage (three mRNA doses vs none) was 9307 (94·2%) of 9878 among BA.5 cases and 30 581 (94·8%) of 32 272 among BA.2 cases, although in the adjusted analysis, there was a trend towards slightly higher vaccination coverage among BA.5 cases than BA.2 cases (OR 1·18 [95% CI 0·99-1·42]; p=0·064), possibly suggesting marginally poorer vaccine protection against BA.5. The rate of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 was higher among the BA.5 cases (210 [1·9%] of 11 314) than among the BA.2 cases (514 [1·4%] of 36 805), with an OR of 1·34 (95% CI 1·14-1·57) and an adjusted OR of 1·69 (95% CI 1·22-2·33), despite low and stable COVID-19 hospitalisation numbers during the study period.

INTERPRETATION

The study provides evidence that a previous omicron infection in triple-vaccinated individuals provides high amounts of protection against BA.5 and BA.2 infections. However, protection estimates greater than 90% might be too high if individuals with a previous infection were more likely than those without one to come forward for a test for reasons other than suspicion of COVID-19. Our analysis also showed that vaccine protection against BA.5 infection was similar to, or slightly weaker than, protection against BA.2 infection. Finally, there was evidence that BA.5 infections were associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation compared with BA.2 infections.

FUNDING

There was no funding source for this study.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Denmark: Results of Two Nationwide Population-Based Surveys, February and May 2021

Background

Seroprevalence studies can be used to measure the progression of national COVID-19 epidemics. The Danish National Seroprevalence Survey of SARS-CoV-2 infections (DSS) was conducted as five separate surveys between May 2020 and May 2021. Here, we present results from the two last surveys conducted in February and May 2021.

Methods

Persons aged 12 or older were randomly selected from the Danish Population Register and those having received COVID-19 vaccination subsequently excluded. Invitations to have blood drawn in local test centers were sent by mail. Samples were analyzed for whole Immunoglobulin by ELISA. Seroprevalence was estimated by sex, age and geography. Comparisons to vaccination uptake and RT-PCR test results were made.

Results

In February 2021, we found detectable antibodies in 7.2% (95% CI: 6.3-7.9%) of the invited participants (participation rate 25%) and in May 2021 in 8.6% (95% CI: 7.6-9.5%) of the invited (participation rate: 14%). Seroprevalence did not differ by sex, but by age group, generally being higher among the <50 than 50+ year-olds. In May 2021, levels of seroprevalence varied from an estimated 13% (95% CI: 12-15%) in the capital to 5.2% (95% CI: 3.4-7.4%) in rural areas. Combining seroprevalence results with vaccine coverage, estimates of protection against infection in May 2021 varied from 95% among 65+ year-olds down to 10-20% among 12-40 year-olds. In March-May 2021, an estimated 80% of all community SARS-CoV-2 infections were diagnosed by RT-PCR and captured by surveillance.

Conclusion

Seroprevalence estimates doubled during the 2020-21 winter wave of SARS-CoV-2 infections and then stabilized as vaccinations were rolled out. The epidemic affected large cities and younger people the most. Denmark saw comparatively low infections rates, but high test coverage; an estimated four out of five infections were detected by RT-PCR in March-May 2021.

Clinical Outcome of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Patients with Primary Antibody Deficiencies

In 2019, the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, caused a worldwide pandemic, affecting more than 630 million individuals and causing 6.5 million deaths. In the general population, poorer outcomes have been associated with older age, chronic lung and cardiovascular diseases, and lymphopenia, highlighting the important role of cellular immunity in the immune response against SARS-CoV-2. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 variants may have a significant impact on disease severity. There is a significant overlap with complications commonly found in inborn errors of immunity (IEI), such as primary antibody deficiencies. The results of various studies have provided ambiguous findings. Several studies identified risk factors in the general population with a minor impact on SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, other studies have found a significant contribution of underlying immunodeficiency and immune-system dysregulation to the disease course. This ambiguity probably reflects the demographic differences and viral evolution. Impaired antibody production was associated with prolonged viral shedding, suggesting a critical role of humoral immunity in controlling SARS-CoV-2 infection. This may explain the poorer outcomes in primary antibody deficiencies compared to other IEIs. Understanding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pathogenesis and identifying risk factors may help us identify patients at high risk of severe COVID-19 for whom preventive measures should be introduced.

Major Update 2: Antibody Response and Risk for Reinfection After SARS-CoV-2 Infection-Final Update of a Living, Rapid Review

BACKGROUND

The durability of the antibody response after SARS-CoV-2 infection and the role of antibodies in protection against reinfection are unclear.

PURPOSE

To synthesize evidence on the SARS-CoV-2 antibody response and reinfection risk with a focus on gaps identified in our prior reports.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, CINAHL, World Health Organization Research Database, and reference lists from 16 December 2021 through 8 July 2022, with surveillance through 22 August 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language, cohort studies evaluating IgG antibody duration at least 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection, the antibody response among immunocompromised adults, predictors of nonseroconversion, and reinfection risk.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two investigators sequentially extracted study data and rated quality.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Most adults had IgG antibodies after SARS-CoV-2 infection at time points greater than 12 months (low strength of evidence [SoE]). Although most immunocompromised adults develop antibodies, the overall proportion with antibodies is lower compared with immunocompetent adults (moderate SoE for organ transplant patients and low SoE for patients with cancer or HIV). Prior infection provided substantial, sustained protection against symptomatic reinfection with the Delta variant (high SoE) and reduced the risk for severe disease due to Omicron variants (moderate SoE). Prior infection was less protective against reinfection with Omicron overall (moderate SoE), but protection from earlier variants waned rapidly (low SoE).

LIMITATION

Single review for abstract screening and sequential review for study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment.

CONCLUSION

Evidence for a sustained antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is considerable for both Delta and Omicron variants. Prior infection protected against reinfection with both variants, but, for Omicron, protection was weaker and waned rapidly. This information may have limited clinical applicability as new variants emerge.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42020207098).

Pre-Existing Population Immunity and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Variant Establishment and Dominance Dynamics in the United States: An Ecological Study

We conducted an ecological analysis of the dynamics of Delta and Omicron establishment and dominance in US states. Omicron became the dominant circulating variant later in states with higher population-level immunity. By contrast, population immunity did not impact the maximum rate of takeover by Delta or Omicron from prior variants.

Risk and symptoms of COVID-19 in health professionals according to baseline immune status and booster vaccination during the Delta and Omicron waves in Switzerland-A multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Knowledge about protection conferred by previous Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and/or vaccination against emerging viral variants allows clinicians, epidemiologists, and health authorities to predict and reduce the future Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) burden. We investigated the risk and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 (re)infection and vaccine breakthrough infection during the Delta and Omicron waves, depending on baseline immune status and subsequent vaccinations.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In this prospective, multicentre cohort performed between August 2020 and March 2022, we recruited hospital employees from ten acute/nonacute healthcare networks in Eastern/Northern Switzerland. We determined immune status in September 2021 based on serology and previous SARS-CoV-2 infections/vaccinations: Group N (no immunity); Group V (twice vaccinated, uninfected); Group I (infected, unvaccinated); Group H (hybrid: infected and ≥1 vaccination). Date and symptoms of (re)infections and subsequent (booster) vaccinations were recorded until March 2022. We compared the time to positive SARS-CoV-2 swab and number of symptoms according to immune status, viral variant (i.e., Delta-dominant before December 27, 2021; Omicron-dominant on/after this date), and subsequent vaccinations, adjusting for exposure/behavior variables. Among 2,595 participants (median follow-up 171 days), we observed 764 (29%) (re)infections, thereof 591 during the Omicron period. Compared to group N, the hazard ratio (HR) for (re)infection was 0.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22 to 0.50, p < 0.001) for V, 0.25 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.57, p = 0.001) for I, and 0.04 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.10, p < 0.001) for H in the Delta period. HRs substantially increased during the Omicron period for all groups; in multivariable analyses, only belonging to group H was associated with protection (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.52, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.77, p = 0.001); booster vaccination was associated with reduction of breakthrough infection risk in groups V (aHR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.85, p = 0.001) and H (aHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00, p = 0.048), largely observed in the early Omicron period. Group H (versus N, risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.97, p = 0.021) and participants with booster vaccination (versus nonboosted, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.88, p < 0.001) reported less symptoms during infection. Important limitations are that SARS-CoV-2 swab results were self-reported and that results on viral variants were inferred from the predominating strain circulating in the community at that time, rather than sequencing.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that hybrid immunity and booster vaccination are associated with a reduced risk and reduced symptom number of SARS-CoV-2 infection during Delta- and Omicron-dominant periods. For previously noninfected individuals, booster vaccination might reduce the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection, although this benefit seems to wane over time.

Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection during periods of Alpha, Delta, or Omicron dominance: A Danish nationwide study

BACKGROUND

Individuals with a prior Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection have a moderate to high degree of protection against reinfection, though seemingly less so when the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 started to circulate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related hospitalization, and COVID-19-related death, in individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to assess the effect of time since vaccination during periods with different dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This study used a nationwide cohort design including all individuals with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, who were alive, and residing in Denmark between 1 January 2020 and 31 January 2022. Using Danish nationwide registries, we obtained information on SARS-CoV-2 infections, COVID-19 vaccination, age, sex, comorbidity, staying at hospital, and country of origin. The study population included were individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Estimates of VE against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a Poisson regression model and adjusted for age, sex, country of origin, comorbidity, staying at hospital, calendar time, and test incidence using a Cox regression model. The VE estimates were calculated separately for three periods with different dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants (Alpha (B.1.1.7), Delta (B.1.617.2), or Omicron (B.1.1.529)) and by time since vaccination using unvaccinated as the reference. In total, 148,527 person-years and 44,192 SARS-CoV-2 infections were included for the analysis regarding reinfections. The study population comprised of 209,814 individuals infected before or during the Alpha period, 292,978 before or during the Delta period, and 245,530 before or during the Omicron period. Of these, 40,281 individuals had completed their primary vaccination series during the Alpha period (19.2%), 190,026 during the Delta period (64.9%), and 158,563 during the Omicron period (64.6%). VE against reinfection following any COVID-19 vaccine type administered in Denmark, peaked at 71% (95% CI: -Inf to 100%) at 104 days or more after vaccination during the Alpha period, 94% (95% CI: 92% to 96%) 14 to 43 days after vaccination during the Delta period, and 60% (95% CI: 58% to 62%) 14 to 43 days after vaccination during the Omicron period. Waning immunity following vaccination was observed and was most pronounced during the Omicron period. Due to too few events, it was not possible to estimate VE for hospitalization and death. Study limitations include potentially undetected reinfections, differences in health-seeking behavior, or risk behavior between the compared groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that in previously infected individuals, completing a primary vaccination series was associated with a significant protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection compared with no vaccination. Even though vaccination seems to protect to a lesser degree against reinfection with the Omicron variant, these findings are of public health relevance as they show that previously infected individuals still benefit from COVID-19 vaccination in all three variant periods.

Antibody Response against Circulating Omicron Variants 8 Months after the Third Dose of mRNA Vaccine

The COVID-19 wave is being recently propelled by BA.2 and, particularly, BA.5 lineages, showing clear transmission advantages over the previously circulating strains. In this study, neutralizing antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 Wild-Type, BA.2 and BA.5 Omicron sublineages were evaluated among vaccinees, uninfected or infected with Omicron BA.1 strain, 8 months after the third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The aim of this study was to compare the cross-protective humoral response to the currently circulating variant strains induced by vaccination, followed by Omicron infection in some subjects. Results showed a low antibody titer against all three variants in uninfected vaccinated subjects. On the other hand, vaccinated subjects, infected with BA.1 variant after receiving the third dose (about 40 days later), showed a strong response against both BA.2 and BA.5 strains, albeit with lower titers. This reinforces the concept that vaccination is fundamental to induce an adequate and protective immune response against SARS-CoV-2, but needs to be updated, in order to also widen the range of action towards emerging variants, phylogenetically distant from the Wuhan strain, against which the current formulation is targeted.

Healthcare-Associated SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection after 3 Months with a Phylogenetically Distinct Omicron Variant: A Case Report

This case report describes a 60-year-old female patient suffering from systemic sclerosis, for which she received immunomodulatory drugs. Her first SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal sample was obtained in the emergency department, on 31 January 2022. Whole genome sequencing confirmed infection with Omicron BA.1.1. Her hospital stay was long and punctuated by many complications, including admission to the intensive care unit. At the beginning of April 2022, she started complaining of increased coughing, for which another SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test was performed. The latter nasopharyngeal swab showed a strongly positive result. To support the theory of healthcare-associated reinfection, whole genome sequencing was performed and confirmed reinfection with Omicron BA.2. Since this patient was one of ten positive cases in this particular ward, a hospital outbreak investigation was performed. Whole genome sequencing data were available for five of these ten patients and showed a cluster of four patients with ≤2 small nucleotide polymorphisms difference.