Lowering SARS-CoV-2 viral load might affect transmission but not disease severity in secondary cases

A stronger antibody response in increased disease severity of SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

An assessment of the factors that interfere with serum levels and the persistence of anti-SARs-CoV-2 IgG antibodies is essential in order to estimate the risk of reinfection and to plan vaccination. We analyzed the impact of the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the clinical and biological factors regarding the persistence of SARs-CoV-2 anti-spike protein (IgG-S) antibodies at 12 months.

METHODS

This was an observational, longitudinal study with individuals who had recovered from COVID-19 between August 2020 and June 2021. Peripheral blood samples were collected from volunteers who were hospitalized (SERIOUS COVID-19) and those who required no hospitalization (COVID-19 LIGHT). Samples were grouped according to days after symptom onset: up to 90, between 91 and 180, ≥ 180 days after symptom onset. A semiquantitative test for IgG anti-spike protein S1(IgG-S1) was used.

RESULTS

We analyzed 238 individuals who had recovered from COVID-19, of whom 87 had been hospitalized and 151 had not. They provided 148 and 220 samples, respectively. Among those hospitalized, males (65.5%), volunteers aged over 60 years (41.1%), comorbidities such as arterial hypertension (67.8%) and diabetes mellitus (37.9%) were most frequent. We observed higher median serum IgG-S1 titers among those who had recovered from COVID-19 and had been hospitalized, at all collection time intervals (p < 0.001). We observed a weak correlation of increasing age with humoral IgG-S1 response (Spearman correlation = 0.298). There was a greater probability of IgG-S1 antibody persistence over time among samples from hospitalized individuals compared to samples from non-hospitalized participants (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study has revealed higher titers and a higher probability of the persistence of IgG-S1 in severe cases after SARs-CoV-2 primary infection in unvaccinated recovered patients. Thus, in this study, the severe clinical presentation of COVID-19 was the main factor influencing serum levels and the persistence of IgG-S1 antibodies in COVID-19.

Within-host diversity improves phylogenetic and transmission reconstruction of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Accurate inference of who infected whom in an infectious disease outbreak is critical for the delivery of effective infection prevention and control. The increased resolution of pathogen whole-genome sequencing has significantly improved our ability to infer transmission events. Despite this, transmission inference often remains limited by the lack of genomic variation between the source case and infected contacts. Although within-host genetic diversity is common among a wide variety of pathogens, conventional whole-genome sequencing phylogenetic approaches exclusively use consensus sequences, which consider only the most prevalent nucleotide at each position and therefore fail to capture low-frequency variation within samples. We hypothesized that including within-sample variation in a phylogenetic model would help to identify who infected whom in instances in which this was previously impossible. Using whole-genome sequences from SARS-CoV-2 multi-institutional outbreaks as an example, we show how within-sample diversity is partially maintained among repeated serial samples from the same host, it can transmitted between those cases with known epidemiological links, and how this improves phylogenetic inference and our understanding of who infected whom. Our technique is applicable to other infectious diseases and has immediate clinical utility in infection prevention and control.

SARS-CoV-2 versus other minor viral infection on kidney injury in asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic patients

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and has become a global pandemic since December 2019. Most of the patients are mild or asymptomatic and recovered well as those suffered from other respiratory viruses. SARS-CoV-2 infection is supposed to demonstrate more sequelae. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common among COVID-19 patients and is associated with disease severity and outcomes. Only a few studies focused on a detailed analysis of kidney damage in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic COVID-19 patients. Whether any minor viral infection is likely to exhibit similar minor effect on renal function as COVID-19 is still unclear, and the definite pathophysiology of viral invasion is not fully understood. Currently, the proposed mechanisms of AKI include direct effects of virus on kidney, dysregulated immune response, or as a result of multi-organs failure have been proposed. This study will discuss the difference between COVID-19 and other viruses, focusing on proposed mechanisms, biomarkers and whether it matters with clinical significance.

Within-host diversity improves phylogenetic and transmission reconstruction of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Accurate inference of who infected whom in an infectious disease outbreak is critical for the delivery of effective infection prevention and control. The increased resolution of pathogen whole-genome sequencing has significantly improved our ability to infer transmission events. Despite this, transmission inference often remains limited by the lack of genomic variation between the source case and infected contacts. Although within-host genetic diversity is common among a wide variety of pathogens, conventional whole-genome sequencing phylogenetic approaches to reconstruct outbreaks exclusively use consensus sequences, which consider only the most prevalent nucleotide at each position and therefore fail to capture low frequency variation within samples. We hypothesized that including within-sample variation in a phylogenetic model would help to identify who infected whom in instances in which this was previously impossible. Using whole-genome sequences from SARS-CoV-2 multi-institutional outbreaks as an example, we show how within-sample diversity is stable among repeated serial samples from the same host, is transmitted between those cases with known epidemiological links, and how this improves phylogenetic inference and our understanding of who infected whom. Our technique is applicable to other infectious diseases and has immediate clinical utility in infection prevention and control.

Determinants of SARS-CoV-2 Contagiousness in Household Contacts of Symptomatic Adult Index Cases

Background

Identifying determinants of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission in settings of contagion is fundamental to inform containment strategies. We assessed SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold value (Ct) from the first diagnostic nasal-pharyngeal swab of symptomatic index cases and which demographic or clinical characteristics among cases and contacts are associated with transmission risk within households.

Methods

This is a retrospective prevalence study on secondary SARS-CoV-2 cases (SC) among the household contacts of symptomatic adult index cases randomly sampled from all the SARS-CoV-2-positive diagnostic nasopharyngeal swabs analyzed at our regional referral hospital (Amedeo di Savoia Hospital, Turin, Italy) in March, 2020. Index cases underwent a telephone survey to collect their demographic and clinical data and all their household contacts. The Ct value of RdRp gene from the first diagnostic swab of index cases was recorded and index cases were grouped according to Ct tertiles (A < first tertile, first ≤ B ≤ second tertile, C ≥ second tertile). Post hoc analysis was performed in SC as well as contacts that did not undergo SARS-CoV-2 testing but developed compatible signs and symptoms. Non-parametric tests and generalized linear models were run.

Results

Index (n = 72) and contact (n = 164) median age was 54 (48-63) and 32 (20-56) years, respectively. A total of 60, 50, and 54 subjects were contacts of group A, B, and C index cases, respectively; 35.9% of contacts were SC. Twenty-four further subjects (14.6%) met the criteria for symptom-based likely positive SC. The secondary attack rate was 36.0% (28.6-43.4), assuming a mean incubation period of 5 days and a maximum infectious period of 20 days. SC prevalence differed between Ct groups (53.3% A, 32.0% B, 20.4% C; p < 0.001). No difference in SC was found according to sex, presence of signs/symptoms, and COVID-19 severity of index cases, or according to contacts' sex and number per household. The age of both index cases [aOR 4.52 (1.2-17.0) for 60 vs. ≤45 years old] and contacts [aOR 3.66 (1.3-10.6) for 60 vs. ≤45years old] and the Ct of the index [aOR 0.17 (0.07-0.4) for Ct ≥ 31.8 vs. Ct < 24.4] independently associated with SC risk. Sensitivity analysis including symptoms-based likely positive SC supported all the previous results.

Conclusion

In confined transmission settings such as households, PCR Ct values may inform on the contagiousness of infected subjects and age may modulate transmission/contagion risk.

Protective and pathogenic role of humoral responses in COVID-19

Since the advent of SARS-CoV-2 in Dec. 2019, the global endeavor to identify the pathogenic mechanism of COVID-19 has been ongoing. Although humoral immunity including neutralizing activity play an important role in protection from the viral pathogen, dysregulated antibody responses may be associated with the pathogenic progression of COVID-19, especially in high-risk individuals. In addition, SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibodies acquired by prior infection or vaccination act as immune pressure, driving continuous population turnover by selecting for antibody-escaping mutations. Here, we review accumulating knowledge on the potential role of humoral immune responses in COVID-19, primarily focusing on their beneficial and pathogenic properties. Understanding the multifaceted regulatory mechanisms of humoral responses during SARS-CoV-2 infection can help us to develop more effective therapeutics, as well as protective measures against the ongoing pandemic.

High association of COVID-19 severity with poor gut health score in Lebanese patients

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected millions of lives globally. However, the disease has presented more extreme challenges for developing countries that are experiencing economic crises. Studies on COVID-19 symptoms and gut health are scarce and have not fully analyzed possible associations between gut health and disease pathophysiology. Therefore, this study aimed to demonstrate a potential association between gut health and COVID-19 severity in the Lebanese community, which has been experiencing a severe economic crisis.

Methods

This cross-sectional study investigated SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive Lebanese patients. Participants were interviewed and gut health, COVID-19 symptoms, and different metrics were analyzed using simple and multiple logistic regression models.

Results

Analysis of the data showed that 25% of participants were asymptomatic, while an equal proportion experienced severe symptoms, including dyspnea (22.7%), oxygen need (7.5%), and hospitalization (3.1%). The mean age of the participants was 38.3 ±0.8 years, and the majority were males (63.9%), married (68.2%), and currently employed (66.7%). A negative correlation was found between gut health score and COVID-19 symptoms (Kendall’s tau-b = -0.153, P = 0.004); indicating that low gut health was associated with more severe COVID-19 cases. Additionally, participants who reported unhealthy food intake were more likely to experience severe symptoms (Kendall’s tau-b = 0.118, P = 0.049). When all items were taken into consideration, multiple ordinal logistic regression models showed a significant association between COVID-19 symptoms and each of the following variables: working status, flu-like illness episodes, and gut health score. COVID-19 severe symptoms were more common among patients having poor gut health scores (OR:1.31, 95%CI:1.07–1.61; P = 0.008), experiencing more than one episode of flu-like illness per year (OR:2.85, 95%CI:1.58–5.15; P = 0.001), and owning a job (OR:2.00, 95%CI:1.1–3.65; P = 0.023).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first study that showed the impact of gut health and exposure to respiratory viruses on COVID-19 severity in Lebanon. These findings can facilitate combating the pandemic in Lebanon.

COVID-19 false dichotomies and a comprehensive review of the evidence regarding public health, COVID-19 symptomatology, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, mask wearing, and reinfection

Scientists across disciplines, policymakers, and journalists have voiced frustration at the unprecedented polarization and misinformation around coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Several false dichotomies have been used to polarize debates while oversimplifying complex issues. In this comprehensive narrative review, we deconstruct six common COVID-19 false dichotomies, address the evidence on these topics, identify insights relevant to effective pandemic responses, and highlight knowledge gaps and uncertainties. The topics of this review are: 1) Health and lives vs. economy and livelihoods, 2) Indefinite lockdown vs. unlimited reopening, 3) Symptomatic vs. asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, 4) Droplet vs. aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, 5) Masks for all vs. no masking, and 6) SARS-CoV-2 reinfection vs. no reinfection. We discuss the importance of multidisciplinary integration (health, social, and physical sciences), multilayered approaches to reducing risk ("Emmentaler cheese model"), harm reduction, smart masking, relaxation of interventions, and context-sensitive policymaking for COVID-19 response plans. We also address the challenges in understanding the broad clinical presentation of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. These key issues of science and public health policy have been presented as false dichotomies during the pandemic. However, they are hardly binary, simple, or uniform, and therefore should not be framed as polar extremes. We urge a nuanced understanding of the science and caution against black-or-white messaging, all-or-nothing guidance, and one-size-fits-all approaches. There is a need for meaningful public health communication and science-informed policies that recognize shades of gray, uncertainties, local context, and social determinants of health.