Reinfection rates among patients previously infected by SARS-CoV-2: systematic review and meta-analysis

Protective effectiveness of previous infection against subsequent SARS-Cov-2 infection: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The protective effectiveness provided by naturally acquired immunity against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection remain controversial.

Objective

To systematically evaluate the protective effect of natural immunity against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection with different variants.

Methods

We searched for related studies published in seven databases before March 5, 2023. Eligible studies included in the analysis reported the risk of subsequent infection for groups with or without a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was the overall pooled incidence rate ratio (IRR) of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection/infection between the two groups. We also focused on the protective effectiveness of natural immunity against reinfection/infection with different SARS-CoV-2 variants. We used a random-effects model to pool the data, and obtained the bias-adjusted results using the trim-and-fill method. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was performed by excluding included studies one by one to evaluate the stability of the results.

Results

We identified 40 eligible articles including more than 20 million individuals without the history of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The bias-adjusted efficacy of naturally acquired antibodies against reinfection was estimated at 65% (pooled IRR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.26-0.47), with higher efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 cases (pooled IRR = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.08-0.26) than asymptomatic infection (pooled IRR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.29-0.54). Meta-regression revealed that SARS-CoV-2 variant was a statistically significant effect modifier, which explaining 46.40% of the variation in IRRs. For different SARS-CoV-2 variant, the pooled IRRs for the Alpha (pooled IRR = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.06-0.19), Delta (pooled IRR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.15-0.24) and Omicron (pooled IRR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.42-0.87) variant were higher and higher. In other subgroup analyses, the pooled IRRs of SARS-CoV-2 infection were statistically various in different countries, publication year and the inclusion end time of population, with a significant difference (p = 0.02, p < 0.010 and p < 0.010), respectively. The risk of subsequent infection in the seropositive population appeared to increase slowly over time. Despite the heterogeneity in included studies, sensitivity analyses showed stable results.

Conclusion

Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection provides protection against pre-omicron reinfection, but less against omicron. Ongoing viral mutation requires attention and prevention strategies, such as vaccine catch-up, in conjunction with multiple factors.

How does the SARS-CoV-2 reinfection rate change over time? The global evidence from systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a significant increase in the number of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection reports in various countries. However, the trend of reinfection rate over time is not clear.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang for cohort studies, case-control studies, and cross-sectional studies up to March 16, 2023, to conduct a meta-analysis of global SARS-CoV-2 reinfection rate. Subgroup analyses were performed for age, country, study type, and study population, and time-varying reinfection rates of SARS-CoV-2 were estimated using meta-regression. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool.

RESULT

A total of 55 studies involving 111,846 cases of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection were included. The pooled SARS-CoV-2 reinfection rate was 0.94% (95% CI: 0.65 -1.35%). In the subgroup analyses, there were statistically significant differences in the pooled reinfection rates by reinfection variant, and study type (P < 0.05). Based on meta-regression, the reinfection rate fluctuated with time.

CONCLUSION

Meta-regression analysis found that the overall reinfection rate increased and then decreased over time, followed by a period of plateauing and then a trend of increasing and then decreasing, but the peak of the second wave of reinfection rate was lower than the first wave. SARS-CoV-2 is at risk of reinfection and the Omicron variant has a higher reinfection rate than other currently known variants. The results of this study could help guide public health measures and vaccination strategies in response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

The immunobiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccine responses: potential influences of cross-reactive memory responses and aging on efficacy and off-target effects

Immune responses to both SARS-CoV-2 infection and its associated vaccines have been highly variable within the general population. The increasing evidence of long-lasting symptoms after resolution of infection, called post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) or "Long COVID," suggests that immune-mediated mechanisms are at play. Closely related endemic common human coronaviruses (hCoV) can induce pre-existing and potentially cross-reactive immunity, which can then affect primary SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as vaccination responses. The influence of pre-existing immunity from these hCoVs, as well as responses generated from original CoV2 strains or vaccines on the development of new high-affinity responses to CoV2 antigenic viral variants, needs to be better understood given the need for continuous vaccine adaptation and application in the population. Due in part to thymic involution, normal aging is associated with reduced naïve T cell compartments and impaired primary antigen responsiveness, resulting in a reliance on the pre-existing cross-reactive memory cell pool which may be of lower affinity, restricted in diversity, or of shorter duration. These effects can also be mediated by the presence of down-regulatory anti-idiotype responses which also increase in aging. Given the tremendous heterogeneity of clinical data, utilization of preclinical models offers the greatest ability to assess immune responses under a controlled setting. These models should now involve prior antigen/viral exposure combined with incorporation of modifying factors such as age on immune responses and effects. This will also allow for mechanistic dissection and understanding of the different immune pathways involved in both SARS-CoV-2 pathogen and potential vaccine responses over time and how pre-existing memory responses, including potential anti-idiotype responses, can affect efficacy as well as potential off-target effects in different tissues as well as modeling PASC.

A semi-quantitative visual lateral flow immunoassay for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection for the follow-up of immune response to vaccination or recovery

The lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) technique is largely employed for the point-of-care detection of antibodies especially for revealing the immune response in serum. Visual LFIAs usually provide the qualitative yes/no detection of antibodies, while quantification requires some equipment, making the assay more expensive and complicated. To achieve visual semi-quantification, the alignment of several lines (made of the same antigen) along a LFIA strip has been proposed. The numbering of the reacting lines has been used to correlate with the quantity of some biomarkers in serum. Here, we designed the first semiquantitative LFIA for detecting antibodies and applied it to classify the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 raised by vaccination or natural infection. We used a recombinant spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) as the specific capture reagent to draw two test lines. The detection reagent was selected among three possible ligands that are able to bind to anti-spike human antibodies: the same RBD, staphylococcal protein A, and anti-human immunoglobulin G antibodies. The most convenient detector, adsorbed on gold nanoparticles, was chosen based on the highest correlation with an antibody titre of 171 human sera, measured by a reference serological method, and was the RBD (Spearman's rho = 0.84). Incorporated into the semiquantitative LFIA, it confirmed the ability to discriminate high- and low-titre samples and to classify them into two classes (Dunn's test, P < 0.05). The proposed approach enabled the semiquantification of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 by the unaided eye observation, thus overcoming the requirement of costly and complicated equipment, and represents a general strategy for the development of semiquantitative serological LFIAs.

COVID-19 vaccination implementation in 52 African countries: trajectory and implications for future pandemic preparedness

INTRODUCTION

To end the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO set a goal in 2021 to fully vaccinate 70% of the global population by mid-2022. We projected the COVID-19 vaccination trajectory in 52 African countries and compared the projected to the 'actual' or 'observed' coverage as of December 2022. We also estimated the required vaccination speed needed to have attained the WHO 70% coverage target by December 2022.

METHODS

We obtained publicly available, country-reported daily COVID-19 vaccination data, covering the initial 9 months following the deployment of vaccines. We used a deterministic compartmental Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered-type model and fit the model to the number of COVID-19 cases and vaccination coverage in each African country using a Markov chain Monte Carlo approach within a Bayesian framework.

FINDINGS

Only nine of the 52 African countries (Tunisia, Cabo Verde, Lesotho, Mozambique, Rwanda, Seychelles, Morocco, Botswana and Mauritius) were on track to achieve full COVID-19 vaccination coverage rates ranging from 72% to 97% by the end of December 2022, based on their progress after 9 months of vaccine deployment. Of the 52 countries, 26 (50%) achieved 'actual' or 'observed' vaccination coverage rates within ±10 percentage points of their projected vaccination coverage. Among the countries projected to achieve <30% by December 2022, nine of them (Chad, Niger, Nigeria, South Sudan, Tanzania, Somalia, Zambia, Sierra Leone and Côte d'Ivoire) achieved a higher observed coverage than the projected coverage, ranging from 12.3 percentage points in South Sudan to 35.7 percentage points above the projected coverage in Tanzania. Among the 52 countries, 83% (43 out of 52) needed to at least double their vaccination trajectory after 9 months of deployment to reach the 70% target by December 2022.

CONCLUSION

Our findings can guide countries in planning strategies for future global health emergencies and learning from each other, especially those that exceeded expectations and made significant progress towards the WHO's 2022 COVID-19 vaccination target despite projected poor coverage rates.

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.

Evidence of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection: analysis of 35,000 subjects and overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 is a rare but possible event. We evaluated the prevalence of reinfections in the Province of Modena and performed an overview of systematic reviews to summarize the current knowledge.

METHODS

We applied big data analysis and retrospectively analysed the results of oro- or naso-pharyngeal swab results tested for molecular research of viral RNA of SARS-CoV-2 between 1 January 2021 and 30 June 2021 at a single center. We selected individuals with samples sequence of positive, negative and then positive results. Between first and second positive result we considered a time interval of 90 days to be sure of a reinfection. We also performed a search for and evaluation of systematic reviews reporting SARS-CoV-2 reinfection rates. Main information was collected and the methodological quality of each review was assessed, according to A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR).

RESULTS

Initial positive results were revealed in more than 35,000 (20%) subjects; most (28%) were aged 30-49 years old. Reinfection was reported in 1,258 (3.5%); most (33%) were aged 30-49 years old. Reinfection rates according to vaccinated or non-vaccinated subjects were 0.6% vs 1.1% (p < 0.0001). Nine systematic reviews were identified and confirmed that SARS-CoV-2 reinfection rate is a rare event. AMSTAR revealed very low-moderate levels of quality among selected systematic reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a real, albeit rare risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Big data analysis enabled accurate estimates of the reinfection rates. Nevertheless, a standardized approach to identify and report reinfection cases should be developed.

The prevalence of and factors related to reinfection with COVID-19 in Ahvaz, Iran: A comparative cross-sectional study

Background and Aims

Reinfection with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus may be as serious as the first infection, exposing people to risks such as admission to hospital or even death. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of and the factors related to reinfection in Ahvaz, Iran.

Methods

This was a comparative cross-sectional study that was conducted on 200 reinfected individuals and 200 people who had once been infected with COVID-19. Infection with COVID-19 was confirmed using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, and those with reinfection had to have a negative PCR test after recovery from the first infection and a positive PCR test for COVID-19 > 90 days after the first infection. Data was collected using a questionnaire and a checklist. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square test, independent t-test, and logistic regression test.

Results

Around 7000 reinfections were observed in this study, and the prevalence of reinfection was 0.59% in Ahvaz City. A large proportion of the participants in the control group, 133 (66.5%) received two doses of COVID-19 vaccines compared with 110 (55%) in the reinfected group (p = 0.003), and 43 (21.5%) of reinfected participants did not receive any vaccine. Older people were 0.982 times more likely to get reinfected with COVID-19 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.966-0.997). Also, those receiving vaccination once or twice were 2.311 and 2.498 times less likely to get reinfected with COVID-19, respectively (95% CI: 1.093-4.887 and 1.281-4.872, respectively).

Conclusion

The findings of this study showed that the prevalence of reinfection among people in Ahvaz City was 0.59%. Older individuals, those without vaccination or with suboptimal vaccination, and people with comorbidities were at a higher risk for reinfection. Health policymakers should pay more attention to factors related to reinfection with COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 T Cell Immunity Responses following Natural Infection and Vaccination

(1) Background: SARS-CoV-2 T cell immunity is rapidly activated following SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination and is crucial for controlling infection progression and severity. The aim of the present study was to compare the levels of T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 between cohorts of subjects with hybrid immunity (convalescent and vaccinated), vaccinated naïve (non-exposed) and convalescent unvaccinated subjects. (2) Methods: We performed a retrospective descriptive analysis of data collected from the medical records of adult individuals who were consecutively examined at a large, private Medical Center of Attica from September 2021 to September 2022 in order to be examined on their own initiative for SARS-CoV-2 T cell immunity response. They were divided into three groups: Group A: SARS-CoV-2 convalescent and vaccinated subjects; Group B: SARS-CoV-2 naïve vaccinated subjects; Group C: SARS-CoV-2 convalescent unvaccinated subjects. The SARS-CoV-2 T cell response was estimated against spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) structural proteins by performing the methodology T-SPOT.COVID test. (3) Results: A total of 530 subjects were retrospectively included in the study, 252 females (47.5%) and 278 (52.5%) males ranging from 13 to 92 years old (mean 55.68 ± 17.0 years). Among them, 66 (12.5%) were included in Group A, 284 (53.6%) in Group B and 180 (34.0%) in Group C. Among the three groups, a reaction against S antigen was reported in 58/66 (87.8%) of Group A, 175/284 (61.6%) of Group B and 146/180 (81.1%) of Group C (chi-square, p < 0.001). Reaction against N antigen was present in 49/66 (74.2%) of Group A and in 140/180 (77.7%) of Group C (chi-square, p = 0.841). The median SFC count for S antigen was 24 (range from 0-218) in Group A, 12 (range from 0-275) in Group B and 18 (range from 0-160) in Group C (Kruskal-Wallis test, p < 0.001; pairwise comparisons: groups A-B, p < 0.001; groups A-C, p = 0.147; groups B-C, p < 0.001). The median SFCs count for N antigen was 13 (range 0-82) for Group A and 18 (range 0-168) for Group C (Kruskal-Wallis test, p = 0.27 for A-C groups). (4) Conclusions: Our findings suggest that natural cellular immunity, either alone or combined with vaccination, confers stronger and more durable protection compared to vaccine-induced cellular immunity.

The Associated Factors of SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection by Omicron Variant - Guangdong Province, China, December 2022 to January 2023

What is already known about this topic?

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection by variants is being reported commonly and has caused waves of epidemic in many countries. Because of dynamic zero policy, the SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was less reported in China.

What is added by this report?

SARS-CoV-2 reinfections were observed in Guangdong Province between December 2022 and January 2023. This study estimated that the reinfection incidence was 50.0% for the original strain primary infections, 35.2% for the Alpha or Delta variants, and 18.4% for the Omicron variant; The reinfection incidence within 3-6 months after primary infection by Omicron variant was 4.0%. Besides, 96.2% reinfection cases were symptomatic while only 7.7% sought medical attention.

What are the implications for public health practice?

These findings suggest a reduced likelihood of an Omicron-driven epidemic resurgence in the short term but emphasize the importance of maintaining vigilant surveillance of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants and conducting population-based antibody level surveys to inform response preparedness.

SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection and Severity of the Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Since the discovery of SARS-CoV-2, changes in genotype and reinfection with different variants have been observed in COVID-19-recovered patients, raising questions around the clinical pattern and severity of primary infection and reinfection. In this systematic review, we summarize the results of 23 studies addressing SARS-CoV-2 reinfections. A total of 23,231 reinfected patients were included, with pooled estimated reinfection rates ranging from 0.1 to 6.8%. Reinfections were more prevalent during the Omicron variant period. The mean age of reinfected patients was 38.0 ± 6. years and females were predominant among reinfected patients (M/F = 0.8). The most common symptoms during the first and second infection were fever (41.1%), cough (35.7% and 44.6%), myalgia (34.5% and 33.3%), fatigue (23.8% and 25.6%), and headaches (24.4% and 21.4%). No significant differences of clinical pattern were observed between primary infection and reinfection. No significant differences in the severity of infection were observed between primary infection and reinfection. Being female, being a patient with comorbidities, lacking anti-nucleocapsid IgG after the first infection, being infected during the Delta and Omicron wave, and being unvaccinated were associated with a higher risk of reinfection. Conflicting age-related findings were found in two studies. Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 suggests that natural immunity is not long-lasting in COVID-19 patients.

RC, Vos T, Hay SI, Murray CJL, Lim SS. Past SARS-CoV-2 infection protection against re-infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Understanding the level and characteristics of protection from past SARS-CoV-2 infection against subsequent re-infection, symptomatic COVID-19 disease, and severe disease is essential for predicting future potential disease burden, for designing policies that restrict travel or access to venues where there is a high risk of transmission, and for informing choices about when to receive vaccine doses. We aimed to systematically synthesise studies to estimate protection from past infection by variant, and where data allow, by time since infection.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified, reviewed, and extracted from the scientific literature retrospective and prospective cohort studies and test-negative case-control studies published from inception up to Sept 31, 2022, that estimated the reduction in risk of COVID-19 among individuals with a past SARS-CoV-2 infection in comparison to those without a previous infection. We meta-analysed the effectiveness of past infection by outcome (infection, symptomatic disease, and severe disease), variant, and time since infection. We ran a Bayesian meta-regression to estimate the pooled estimates of protection. Risk-of-bias assessment was evaluated using the National Institutes of Health quality-assessment tools. The systematic review was PRISMA compliant and was registered with PROSPERO (number CRD42022303850).

FINDINGS

We identified a total of 65 studies from 19 different countries. Our meta-analyses showed that protection from past infection and any symptomatic disease was high for ancestral, alpha, beta, and delta variants, but was substantially lower for the omicron BA.1 variant. Pooled effectiveness against re-infection by the omicron BA.1 variant was 45·3% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 17·3-76·1) and 44·0% (26·5-65·0) against omicron BA.1 symptomatic disease. Mean pooled effectiveness was greater than 78% against severe disease (hospitalisation and death) for all variants, including omicron BA.1. Protection from re-infection from ancestral, alpha, and delta variants declined over time but remained at 78·6% (49·8-93·6) at 40 weeks. Protection against re-infection by the omicron BA.1 variant declined more rapidly and was estimated at 36·1% (24·4-51·3) at 40 weeks. On the other hand, protection against severe disease remained high for all variants, with 90·2% (69·7-97·5) for ancestral, alpha, and delta variants, and 88·9% (84·7-90·9) for omicron BA.1 at 40 weeks.

INTERPRETATION

Protection from past infection against re-infection from pre-omicron variants was very high and remained high even after 40 weeks. Protection was substantially lower for the omicron BA.1 variant and declined more rapidly over time than protection against previous variants. Protection from severe disease was high for all variants. The immunity conferred by past infection should be weighed alongside protection from vaccination when assessing future disease burden from COVID-19, providing guidance on when individuals should be vaccinated, and designing policies that mandate vaccination for workers or restrict access, on the basis of immune status, to settings where the risk of transmission is high, such as travel and high-occupancy indoor settings.

FUNDING

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, J Stanton, T Gillespie, and J and E Nordstrom.

Pilot Study Results on Antibodies to the S- and N-Proteins of SARS-CoV-2 in Paired Sera from COVID-19 Patients with Varying Severity

In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the formation of individual classes of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in archived serial sera from hospitalized patients with the medium–severe (n = 17) and severe COVID-19 (n = 11). The serum/plasma samples were studied for the presence of IgG, IgM and IgA antibodies to the recombinant S- and N-proteins of SARS-CoV-2. By the 7th day of hospitalization, an IgG increase was observed in patients both with a positive PCR test and without PCR confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Significant increases in the anti-spike IgG levels were noted only in moderate COVID-19. The four-fold increase of IgM to N-protein was obtained more often in the groups with mild and moderate infections. The IgA levels decreased during the infection to both the S- and N-proteins, and the most pronounced decrease was in the severe COVID-19 patients. The serum IgG to S-protein one week after hospitalization demonstrated a high-power relationship (rs = 0.75) with the level of RBD antibodies. There was a medium strength relationship between the levels of CRP and IgG (rs = 0.43). Thus, in patients with acute COVID-19, an increase in antibodies can develop as early as 1 week of hospital stay. The SARS-CoV-2 antibody conversions may confirm SARS-CoV-2 infection in PCR-negative patients.

Supporting the Aspecific Physiological Defenses of Upper Airways against Emerging SARS-CoV-2 Variants

The rapid rollout of COVID-19 vaccines in 2021 sparked general optimism toward controlling the severe form of the disease, preventing hospitalizations and COVID-19-associated mortality, and the transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection [...].

Genomic evidence of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases in southern Brazil

Cases of reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been reported worldwide. We investigated reinfection cases in a set of more than 30,000 samples, and the SARS-CoV-2 genomes from selected samples from four patients with at least two positive diagnoses with an interval ≥ 45 days between tests were sequenced and analyzed. Comparative genomic and phylogenetic analysis confirmed three reinfection cases and suggested that the fourth one was caused by a virus of the same lineage. Viral sequencing is crucial for understanding the natural course of reinfections and for planning public health strategies for management of COVID-19.

Primary SARS-CoV-2 Infections, Re-infections and Vaccine Effectiveness during the Omicron Transmission Period in Healthcare Workers of Trieste and Gorizia (Northeast Italy), 1 December 2021-31 May 2022

Objective: To evaluate the incidence of primary and recurrent COVID-19 infections in healthcare workers (HCWs) routinely screened for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal swabs during the Omicron wave. Design: Dynamic Cohort study of HCWs (N = 7723) of the University Health Agency Giuliano Isontina (ASUGI), covering health services of the provinces of Trieste and Gorizia (Northeast Italy). Cox proportional hazard model was employed to estimate the risk of primary as well as recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection from 1 December 2021 through 31 May 2022, adjusting for a number of confounding factors. Results: By 1 December 2021, 46.8% HCWs of ASUGI had received the booster, 37.2% were immunized only with two doses of COVID-19 vaccines, 6.0% only with one dose and 10.0% were unvaccinated. During 1 March 2020-31 May 2022, 3571 primary against 406 SARS-CoV-2 recurrent infections were counted among HCWs of ASUGI, 59.7% (=2130/3571) versus 95.1% (=386/406) of which occurring from 1 December 2021 through 31 May 2022, respectively. All HCWs infected by SARS-CoV-2 during 1 December 2021 through 31 May 2022 presented mild flu-like disease. Compared to staff working in administrative services, the risk of primary as well as recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection increased in HCWs with patient-facing clinical tasks (especially nurses and other categories of HCWs) and in all clinical wards but COVID-19 units and community health services. Regardless of the number of swab tests performed during the study period, primary infections were less likely in HCWs immunized with one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. By contrast, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 re-infection was significantly lower in HCWs immunized with three doses (aHR = 0.58; 95%CI: 0.41; 0.80). During the study period, vaccine effectiveness (VE = 1-aHR) of the booster dose declined to 42% against re-infections, vanishing against primary SARS-CoV-2 infections. Conclusions: Though generally mild, SARS-CoV-2 infections and re-infections surged during the Omicron transmission period. Compared to unvaccinated colleagues, the risk of primary SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly lower in HCWs immunized just with one dose of COVID-19 vaccines. By Italian law, HCWs immunized only with one dose were either suspended or re-assigned to job tasks not entailing patient facing contact; hence, while sharing the same biological risk of unvaccinated colleagues, they arguably had a higher level of protection against COVID-19 infection. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 re-infections were less likely in HCWs vaccinated with three doses, suggesting that hybrid humoral immunity by vaccination combined with natural infection provided a higher level of protection than vaccination only. In this stage of the pandemic, where SARS-CoV-2 is more infectious yet much less pathogenic, health protection measures in healthcare premises at higher biological risk seem the rational approach to control the transmission of the virus.

Smoking cessation in the elderly as a sign of susceptibility to symptomatic COVID-19 reinfection in the United States

Background

We aimed to clarify the relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reinfection and basic disease and smoking status.

Methods

The electronic health records of 165,320 patients with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020, to August 27, 2021, were analyzed. Data on age, race, sex, smoking status (never, current, former), and basic disease were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models.

Results

In total, 6,133 patients (3.7%) were reinfected. The overall reinfection rate for never, current, and former smokers was 4.2, 3.5, and 5.7%, respectively. Although the risk of reinfection was highest among former smokers aged ≥65 years (7.7% [422/5,460]), the reinfection rate among current smokers aged ≥65 years was 6.2% (341/5,543). Among reinfected patients, the number of basic diseases was higher in former smokers (2.41 ± 1.16) than in current (2.28 ± 1.07, P = 0.07) and never smokers (2.07 ± 1.05, P < 0.001). Former smokers who are older may have been exposed to factors that increase their risk of symptomatic COVID-19 reinfection.

Early Negativization of SARS-CoV-2 Infection by Nasal Spray of Seawater plus Additives: The RENAISSANCE Open-Label Controlled Clinical Trial

Background: COVID-19 is an asymptomatic condition in 40% of cases, and most symptomatic patients present with mild/moderate disease not requiring hospitalization or intensive care, especially during the Omicron wave, when the hospitalization rate was estimated to be 0.3%. The main port of entry for SARS-CoV-2 in the human body is the nasal cavity and the upper respiratory tract is affected since the early stages of the infection. Nasal irrigation or aerosol by isotonic or hypertonic saline solution is a traditional therapeutic approach for respiratory or nasal inflammation, also featured by prophylactic properties against upper respiratory infections. Methods: We conducted a prospective open-label controlled study to assess the superiority of an already existing medication (Tonimer Lab Panthexyl 800)-a sterile hypertonic solution containing seawater, xylitol, panthenol and lactic acid-to reduce the viral shedding time in patients affected by asymptomatic or mild COVID-19. COVID-19 patients (N = 108) were split into two groups: a treatment arm (50 participants receiving standard of care plus nasal spray 3 times/day with Tonimer Lab Panthexyl 800) and a control arm (58 participants receiving standard of care but nasal spray with Tonimer Lab Panthexyl 800). The two groups, both testing initially positive for SARS-CoV-2 at real-time PCR (RT-PCR) on nasal swab, were followed up over time to assess the daily number of positive swab tests turning negative (study endpoint). Treatment effectiveness at various time lags since the first positive RT-PCR swab test was measured by rate of events in the experimental arm (EER) and in the control arm (CER), absolute risk increase (ARI) = (EER - CER), and number needed to treat (NNT) = (1/ARI). To investigate the endpoint, we used logistic and Cox regression models, expressing the result as odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI), respectively. The symptoms recorded with a modified COVID-Q questionnaire at both diagnosis and first negative antigenic swab test were compared in each group (treated versus controls) by exact symmetry test. Results: During the first five days of treatment, COVID-19 patients treated with Tonimer Lab Panthexyl 800 were more likely to become negative two days before controls. According to NNT, four subjects had to be treated for five days to achieve the study endpoint in one individual. The negativization rate in patients treated with Tonimer Lab Panthexyl 800 was significantly higher than patients' treated with standard of care alone (OR = 7.39, 95%CI: 1.83-29.8; HR = 6.12, 95%CI: 1.76-21.32). There was no evidence of side effects. Conclusions: Nasal spray with Tonimer Lab Panthexyl 800 was effective against SARS-CoV-2, stopping viral shedding in the treatment arm two days before the control group. This treatment should be continued for at least five days after the first positive swab test for SARS-CoV-2.

Effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccines (CovishieldTM and Covaxin ®) in healthcare workers in Mumbai, India: A retrospective cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

India started its vaccination programme for Coronavirus-19 infection (COVID-19) on 16 January 2021 with CovishieldTM (Oxford/Astra Zeneca vaccine manufactured by Serum Institute of India) and Covaxin ® (Bharat Biotech, India). We designed the present study to study the effectiveness of vaccines for COVID-19 in prevention of breakthrough infections and severe symptomatic cases among health care workers in a real-life scenario in Mumbai, India. Furthermore, we also wanted to study the factors associated with this effectiveness.

METHODS

This is cohort analysis of secondary data of 2762 individuals working in a tertiary health care setting in Mumbai, India (16 January 2021 to 16 October 2021). Vaccination records of all groups of health care staff (including the date of vaccination, type of vaccine taken, and date of positivity for COVID-19) were maintained at the hospital. The staff were tested for COVID-19 at least once a week and when symptomatic. The observation time for everyone was divided into unvaccinated, partially vaccinated (14 days after the first dose); and fully vaccinated (14 days after the second dose). If the individual was found to be positive, the day of positivity was considered the 'day of the event' for that individual. We combined unvaccinated/partially vaccinated into one group and completely vaccinated in the other group. We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and their 95% confidence intervals. The vaccine effectiveness (VE) was assessed as (1-HR)*100.

RESULTS

The mean age (SD) of the study participants was 32.3 (8.3) years; majority of these individuals had taken Covishield TM (99.0%) and only 0.9% (n = 27) had taken Covaxin ®. The incidence rate in the overall population was 0.067/100 person-days (PD). The incidence rate was significantly higher in the unvaccinated/partially vaccinated group compared with the fully vaccinated group (0.0989 / 100 PD vs 0.0403/100 PD; p < 0.001). The adjusted HR (aHR) in the fully vaccinated group compared with the unvaccinated/partially vaccinated group in the complete cohort was 0.30 (95% CI: 0.23, 0.39). Thus, the vaccine effectiveness (VE) for full vaccination was 70% (95% CI: 61%, 77%). It remained the same in the Covishield TM only cohort. The VE in completely vaccinated and with a history of previous infection was 88% (95% CI: 80%, 93%). Only 11 health care workers required hospitalization over the entire observation period; the incidence rate in our cohort was 0.0016 / 100 PD. None of the HCWs reported any severe adverse events after vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world scenario, we did find that complete vaccination reduced the rate of infection, particularly severe infection in health care personnel even during the severe delta wave in the country. Even among those infected, the hospitalisation rates were very low, and none died. We did not record any major side effects of vaccination in these personnel. Previous infection with COVID-19 and complete vaccination had a significantly higher effectiveness in prevention of infection.

Sustained seropositivity up to 20.5 months after COVID-19

This study evaluated the persistence of IgM, IgA, and IgG to SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid antigens up to 616 days since the onset of symptoms in a longitudinal cohort of 247 primary health care workers from Barcelona, Spain, followed up since the start of the pandemic. The study also assesses factors affecting antibody levels, including comorbidities and the responses to variants of concern as well as the frequency of reinfections. Despite a gradual and significant decline in antibody levels with time, seropositivity to five SARS-CoV-2 antigens combined was always higher than 90% over the whole study period. In a subset of 23 participants who had not yet been vaccinated by November 2021, seropositivity remained at 95.65% (47.83% IgM, 95.65% IgA, 95.65% IgG). IgG seropositivity against Alpha and Delta predominant variants was comparable to that against the Wuhan variant, while it was lower for Gamma and Beta (minority) variants and for IgA and IgM. Antibody levels at the time point closest to infection were associated with age, smoking, obesity, hospitalization, fever, anosmia/hypogeusia, chest pain, and hypertension in multivariable regression models. Up to 1 year later, just before the massive roll out of vaccination, antibody levels were associated with age, occupation, hospitalization, duration of symptoms, anosmia/hypogeusia, fever, and headache. In addition, tachycardia and cutaneous symptoms associated with slower antibody decay, and oxygen supply with faster antibody decay. Eight reinfections (3.23%) were detected in low responders, which is consistent with a sustained protective role for anti-spike naturally acquired antibodies. Stable persistence of IgG and IgA responses and cross-recognition of the predominant variants circulating in the 2020-2021 period indicate long-lasting and largely variant-transcending humoral immunity in the initial 20.5 months of the pandemic, in the absence of vaccination.

Risk of reinfection and disease after SARS-CoV-2 primary infection: Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

A precise estimate of the frequency and severity of SARS-CoV-2 reinfections would be critical to optimize restriction and vaccination policies for the hundreds of millions previously infected subjects. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of reinfection and COVID-19 following primary infection.

METHODS

We searched MedLine, Scopus and preprint repositories for cohort studies evaluating the onset of new infections among baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive subjects. Random-effect meta-analyses of proportions were stratified by gender, exposure risk, vaccination status, viral strain, time between episodes, and reinfection definition.

RESULTS

Ninety-one studies, enrolling 15,034,624 subjects, were included. Overall, 158,478 reinfections were recorded, corresponding to a pooled rate of 0.97% (95% CI: 0.71%-1.27%), with no substantial differences by definition criteria, exposure risk or gender. Reinfection rates were still 0.66% after ≥12 months from first infection, and the risk was substantially lower among vaccinated subjects (0.32% vs. 0.74% for unvaccinated individuals). During the first 3 months of Omicron wave, the reinfection rates reached 3.31%. Overall rates of severe/lethal COVID-19 were very low (2-7 per 10,000 subjects according to definition criteria) and were not affected by strain predominance.

CONCLUSIONS

A strong natural immunity follows the primary infection and may last for more than one year, suggesting that the risk and health care needs of recovered subjects might be limited. Although the reinfection rates considerably increased during the Omicron wave, the risk of a secondary severe or lethal disease remained very low. The risk-benefit profile of multiple vaccine doses for this subset of population needs to be carefully evaluated.

An Immune Response to Heterologous ChAdOx1/BNT162b2 Vaccination against COVID-19: Evaluation of the anti-RBD Specific IgG Antibodies Titers and Interferon Gamma Release Assay (IGRA) Test Results

This study aimed to assess the magnitude of anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) titers and Interferon-Gamma Release Assay (IGRA) test results following administration of booster BNT162b2 in 48 ChAd-primed participants (vaccination schedule: ChAd/ChAd/BNT). Whole blood samples were collected: first, before and second, 21 days after the booster dose. The IgG level was measured using chemiluminescent immunoassay; the intensity of the T-cell response—IFNγ concentration—was assessed using IGRA test. At 21 days after the booster, all subjects achieved reactive/positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG, and IGRA test results showed a significant increase compared to the results before booster administration. We compared the results before and after the booster between participants with and without prior history of COVID-19. The IFNγ concentrations in both cohorts were higher in convalescents (both before booster and 21 days after). The IgG titers were subtly lower in COVID-19 convalescents than in naïve but without statistical significance. Data on cell-mediated immunity are scarce, especially with regard to the general population. A better understanding of the complexity of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 could contribute to developing more effective vaccination strategies.

SARS-CoV-2 reinfections during the first three major COVID-19 waves in Bulgaria

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on the world over the past two years (2020-2021). One of the key questions about its future trajectory is the protection from subsequent infections and disease conferred by a previous infection, as the SARS-CoV-2 virus belongs to the coronaviruses, a group of viruses the members of which are known for their ability to reinfect convalescent individuals. Bulgaria, with high rates of previous infections combined with low vaccination rates and an elderly population, presents a somewhat unique context to study this question.

METHODS

We use detailed governmental data on registered COVID-19 cases to evaluate the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 reinfections in Bulgaria in the period between March 2020 and early December 2021.

RESULTS

For the period analyzed, a total of 4,106 cases of individuals infected more than once were observed, including 31 cases of three infections and one of four infections. The number of reinfections increased dramatically during the Delta variant-driven wave of the pandemic towards the end of 2021. We observe a moderate reduction of severe outcomes (hospitalization and death) in reinfections relative to primary infections, and a more substantial reduction of severe outcomes in breakthrough infections in vaccinated individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

In the available datasets from Bulgaria, prior infection appears to provide some protection from severe outcomes, but to a lower degree than the reduction in severity of breakthrough infections in the vaccinated compared to primary infections in the unvaccinated.

COVID-19 vs. Cancer Immunosurveillance: A Game of Thrones within an Inflamed Microenviroment

The COVID-19 pandemic accounts for more than 500 million confirmed infections and over 6 million deaths worldwide in the last 2 years. SARS-CoV-2 causes a highly complex form of inflammation that affects the human organism both acutely and chronically. In the same line, cancer as an inflammation-induced and immune-editing disease appears to cross-react with immune system at different levels including early interactions during carcinogenesis and later cross-talks within the tumor microenvironment. With all that in mind, a reasonable question one might address is whether the SARS-CoV-2 infection and the derived "long lasting inflammatory status" that is frequently observed in patients, might affect the cancer immunosurveillance mechanisms and consequently their risk of developing cancer, as well as the tumor and immune cell behaviors within the inflamed microenvironment. On this context, this review intends to outline and discuss the existing knowledge on SARS-CoV-2-mediated immunomodulation under the prism of changes that might be able to interfere with cancer cell immunoescape and the overall tumor progression and response to conventional therapeutics. Our goal is to highlight a potential interplay between the COVID-19 immunopathology and cancer immune-microenvironment that may pave the way for thorough investigation in the future.

Modeling pandemic to endemic patterns of SARS-CoV-2 transmission using parameters estimated from animal model data

The contours of endemic coronaviral disease in humans and other animals are shaped by the tendency of coronaviruses to generate new variants superimposed upon nonsterilizing immunity. Consequently, patterns of coronaviral reinfection in animals can inform the emerging endemic state of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We generated controlled reinfection data after high and low risk natural exposure or heterologous vaccination to sialodacryoadenitis virus (SDAV) in rats. Using deterministic compartmental models, we utilized in vivo estimates from these experiments to model the combined effects of variable transmission rates, variable duration of immunity, successive waves of variants, and vaccination on patterns of viral transmission. Using rat experiment-derived estimates, an endemic state achieved by natural infection alone occurred after a median of 724 days with approximately 41.3% of the population susceptible to reinfection. After accounting for translationally altered parameters between rat-derived data and human SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and after introducing vaccination, we arrived at a median time to endemic stability of 1437 (IQR = 749.25) days with a median 15.4% of the population remaining susceptible. We extended the models to introduce successive variants with increasing transmissibility and included the effect of varying duration of immunity. As seen with endemic coronaviral infections in other animals, transmission states are altered by introduction of new variants, even with vaccination. However, vaccination combined with natural immunity maintains a lower prevalence of infection than natural infection alone and provides greater resilience against the effects of transmissible variants.

Modeling pandemic to endemic patterns of SARS-CoV-2 transmission using parameters estimated from animal model data

The contours of endemic coronaviral disease in humans and other animals are shaped by the tendency of coronaviruses to generate new variants superimposed upon nonsterilizing immunity. Consequently, patterns of coronaviral reinfection in animals can inform the emerging endemic state of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We generated controlled reinfection data after high and low risk natural exposure or heterologous vaccination to sialodacryoadenitis virus (SDAV) in rats. Using deterministic compartmental models, we utilized in vivo estimates from these experiments to model the combined effects of variable transmission rates, variable duration of immunity, successive waves of variants, and vaccination on patterns of viral transmission. Using rat experiment-derived estimates, an endemic state achieved by natural infection alone occurred after a median of 724 days with approximately 41.3% of the population susceptible to reinfection. After accounting for translationally altered parameters between rat-derived data and human SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and after introducing vaccination, we arrived at a median time to endemic stability of 1437 (IQR = 749.25) days with a median 15.4% of the population remaining susceptible. We extended the models to introduce successive variants with increasing transmissibility and included the effect of varying duration of immunity. As seen with endemic coronaviral infections in other animals, transmission states are altered by introduction of new variants, even with vaccination. However, vaccination combined with natural immunity maintains a lower prevalence of infection than natural infection alone and provides greater resilience against the effects of transmissible variants.

Impact of previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and of S-Trimer (SCB-2019) COVID-19 vaccination on the risk of reinfection: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 2 and 3 trial

Background

We previously reported the efficacy of the adjuvanted-protein COVID-19 vaccine candidate S-Trimer (SCB-2019) in adults who showed no evidence of previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we aimed to investigate the extent of protection afforded by previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 on subsequent COVID-19 infection, as well as the efficacy, safety, and reactogenicity of SCB-2019 in participants who were enrolled in the Study evaluating Protective-Efficacy and safety of Clover's Trimeric Recombinant protein-based and Adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine (SPECTRA) trial who had already been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 before vaccination.

Methods

In a phase 2 and 3 multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial (SPECTRA) done at 31 sites in five countries, participants were randomly assigned 1:1 using the Cenduit Interactive Response Technology system (IQVIA, Durham, NC, USA), with a block size of six, to receive two doses of either SCB-2019 or placebo 21 days apart. The primary outcomes of the SPECTRA trial were vaccine efficacy, measured by real-time PCR (rtPCR)-confirmed COVID-19 of any severity, with onset from 14 days after the second vaccine dose, as well as the safety and solicited local and systemic adverse events in the phase 2 subset. Here, we present secondary analyses to calculate the protective efficacy due to previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 against reinfection with COVID-19 according to severity in SPECTRA participants who had evidence of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 at baseline, including efficacy against identified viral variants, as well as efficacy of SCB-2019 vaccination in this population.

Findings

We enrolled 30 174 participants between March 24, 2021, and Aug 10, 2021. In the 14 670 participants who were randomly assigned to receive placebo, there were 418 (2·8%) confirmed cases of COVID-19; 65 (0·9%) of 7339 SARS-CoV-2-exposed participants, and 353 (4·8%) of 7331 SARS-CoV-2-naive participants (attack rates of 5·5 cases per 100 person-years for SARS-CoV-2-exposed participants and 32·4 cases per 100 person-years for SARS-CoV-2-naive participants). Protective efficacy due to previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was 83·2% (95% CI 78·0–87·3) against any COVID-19, 92·5% (82·9–97·3) against moderate-to-severe COVID-19, and 100% (59·3–100) against severe COVID-19; no SARS-CoV-2-exposed participants had hospitalisation associated with COVID-19. Protective efficacy against variants were 100% for alpha (B.1.1.7) and lambda (C.37) variants, 88·6% (14·9–99·7) for B.1.623, 93·6% (80·1–98·7) for gamma (P.1), and 92·4% (81·2–97·6) for mu (B.1.621) variants, and lowest against beta (B.1.351; 72·2% [33·1–89·9]) and delta (B.1.617.2; 77·2% [61·3–87·2]) variants. In addition, one dose of SCB-2019 had 49·9% (1·5–75·6) efficacy against any symptomatic COVID-19, and two doses had 64·2% (26·5–83·8) efficacy. SCB-2019 was well tolerated in SARS-CoV-2-exposed participants, but was associated with higher rates of injection site pain (89 [33·8%] of 263 participants) than placebo (16 [6·7%] of 239 participants). Rates of solicited systemic adverse events, severe adverse events, and serious adverse events were similar between vaccine and placebo groups, and with rates in SARS-CoV-2-naive vaccine recipients.

Interpretation

Previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 decreased the risk and severity of subsequent COVID-19 infection, even against newly emerging variants. Protection is further enhanced by one or two doses of SCB-2019.

Funding

Clover Biopharmaceuticals, The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).

SARS-CoV-2: Reinfection after 18 Months of a Previous Case with Multiple Negative Nasopharyngeal Swab Tests and Positive Fecal Molecular Test

This short communication describes the reinfection after nearly 18 months of the same patient who was previously infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and who showed multiple negative real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) results by nasal swabs for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) but positive results on a fecal sample. We previously noted how, in the presence of symptoms suggestive of pneumonia, visible on a chest computed tomography (CT) scan and confirmed by fecal molecular testing, it was possible to draw the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. One year later, the same patient was again affected by SARS-CoV-2. This time, the first antigenic nasal swab showed readily positive results. However, the patient’s clinical course appeared to be more attenuated, showing no signs of pulmonary involvement in the radiographic examinations performed. This case shows a novelty in the pulmonary radiological evaluation of new SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Persistence of Naturally Acquired and Functional SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Blood Donors One Year after Infection

The developmental course of antibodies produced after a SARS-CoV-2 infection has been insufficiently investigated so far. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels against the viral nucleocapsid- and spike-protein among Austrian blood donors as a representative group of a supposedly healthy population within the first year after a SARS-CoV-2 infection. The impact of age, sex, vaccination status, AB0-blood group and awareness about the infection was evaluated. Our study shows that the level of anti-N antibodies is declining, while anti-S antibody levels remain stable. Antibodies detected were functional in vitro. Age, sex and blood group do not influence antibody dynamics. However, blood group AB shows significantly lower antibody levels and in vitro functionality compared to other blood groups. Our data reveal that one out of five individuals was not aware of a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and that the disease course neither affects the level of antibody production nor the in vitro functionality. We also found that 14% of participants show persisting COVID-19-related symptoms for up to nine months. Our results provide valuable insights into the dynamics of the immune response after a SARS-CoV-2 infection in a representative cohort of adult blood donors in Central Europe.