SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 reinfection after previous COVID-19 in two immunocompetent Italian patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Novazzi F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8242781 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 reinfection after previous COVID-19 in two immunocompetent Italian patients.
Novazzi Federica F Baj Andreina A Genoni Angelo A Spezia Pietro G PG Colombo Alberto A Cassani Gianluca G Zago Cristian C Pasciuta Renee R Della Gasperina Daniela D Ageno Walter W Severgnini Paolo P Dentali Francesco F Focosi Daniele D Maggi Fabrizio F
Journal of medical virology 20210515 9
Similar Datasets
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 reinfection rate is low. The relative severity of the first and second episodes of infection remains poorly studied. In this study, we aimed at assessing the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 reinfections and comparing the severity of the first and second episodes of infection. We retrospectively included patients with SARS-CoV-2 positive RT-PCR at least 90 days after clinical recovery from a COVID-19 episode and with at least one negative RT-PCR after the first infection. Whole genome sequencing and variant-specific RT-PCR were performed and clinical symptoms and severity of infection were retrospectively documented from medical files. A total of 209 COVID-19 reinfected patients were identified, accounting for 0.4% of positive cases diagnosed from 19 March 2020 to 24 August 2021. Serology was performed in 64 patients, of whom 39 (60.1%) had antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 when sampled at the early stage of their second infection. Only seven patients (3.4%) were infected twice with the same variant. We observed no differences in clinical presentation, hospitalization rate, and transfer to ICU when comparing the two episodes of infections. Our results suggest that the severity of the second episode of COVID-19 is in the same range as that of the first infection, including patients with antibodies.
| S-EPMC8942490 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ACE2 on epithelial cells is the SARS-CoV-2 entry receptor. Single-cell RNA-sequencing data derived from two COVID-19 cohorts revealed that MAP4K3/GLK-positive epithelial cells were increased in patients. SARS-CoV-2-induced GLK overexpression in epithelial cells correlated with COVID-19 severity and vesicle secretion. GLK overexpression induced the epithelial cell-derived exosomes containing ACE2; the GLK-induced exosomes transported ACE2 proteins to recipient cells, facilitating pseudovirus infection. Consistently, ACE2 proteins were increased in the serum exosomes from another COVID-19 cohort. Remarkably, SARS-CoV-2 spike protein stimulated GLK, and GLK stabilized ACE2 in epithelial cells. Mechanistically, GLK phosphorylated ACE2 at two serine residues (Ser776, Ser783), leading to dissociation of ACE2 from its E3 ligase UBR4. Reduction of UBR4-induced Lys48-linked ubiquitination at three lysine residues (Lys26, Lys112, Lys114) of ACE2 prevented its degradation. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus or live virus infection in humanized ACE2 mice induced GLK and ACE2 protein levels, as well as ACE2-containing exosomes. Collectively, ACE2 stabilization by SARS-CoV-2-induced MAP4K3/GLK may contribute to the pathogenesis of COVID-19.
| S-SCDT-EMM-2022-15904 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8426799 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe duration and effectiveness of immunity from infection with and vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are relevant to pandemic policy interventions, including the timing of vaccine boosters.MethodsWe investigated the duration and effectiveness of immunity in a prospective cohort of asymptomatic health care workers in the United Kingdom who underwent routine polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) testing. Vaccine effectiveness (≤10 months after the first dose of vaccine) and infection-acquired immunity were assessed by comparing the time to PCR-confirmed infection in vaccinated persons with that in unvaccinated persons, stratified according to previous infection status. We used a Cox regression model with adjustment for previous SARS-CoV-2 infection status, vaccine type and dosing interval, demographic characteristics, and workplace exposure to SARS-CoV-2.ResultsOf 35,768 participants, 27% (9488) had a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccine coverage was high: 95% of the participants had received two doses (78% had received BNT162b2 vaccine [Pfizer-BioNTech] with a long interval between doses, 9% BNT162b2 vaccine with a short interval between doses, and 8% ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine [AstraZeneca]). Between December 7, 2020, and September 21, 2021, a total of 2747 primary infections and 210 reinfections were observed. Among previously uninfected participants who received long-interval BNT162b2 vaccine, adjusted vaccine effectiveness decreased from 85% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72 to 92) 14 to 73 days after the second dose to 51% (95% CI, 22 to 69) at a median of 201 days (interquartile range, 197 to 205) after the second dose; this effectiveness did not differ significantly between the long-interval and short-interval BNT162b2 vaccine recipients. At 14 to 73 days after the second dose, adjusted vaccine effectiveness among ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine recipients was 58% (95% CI, 23 to 77) - considerably lower than that among BNT162b2 vaccine recipients. Infection-acquired immunity waned after 1 year in unvaccinated participants but remained consistently higher than 90% in those who were subsequently vaccinated, even in persons infected more than 18 months previously.ConclusionsTwo doses of BNT162b2 vaccine were associated with high short-term protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection; this protection waned considerably after 6 months. Infection-acquired immunity boosted with vaccination remained high more than 1 year after infection. (Funded by the U.K. Health Security Agency and others; ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN11041050.).
| S-EPMC8908850 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Bat sarbecovirus BANAL-236 is highly related to SARS-CoV-2 and infects human cells, albeit lacking the furin cleavage site in its spike protein. BANAL-236 replicates efficiently and pauci-symptomatically in humanized mice and in macaques, where its tropism is enteric, strongly differing from that of SARS-CoV-2. BANAL-236 infection leads to protection against superinfection by a virulent strain. We find no evidence of antibodies recognizing bat sarbecoviruses in populations in close contact with bats in which the virus was identified, indicating that such spillover infections, if they occur, are rare. Six passages in humanized mice or in human intestinal cells, mimicking putative early spillover events, select adaptive mutations without appearance of a furin cleavage site and no change in virulence. Therefore, acquisition of a furin site in the spike protein is likely a pre-spillover event that did not occur upon replication of a SARS-CoV-2-like bat virus in humans or other animals. Other hypotheses regarding the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 should therefore be evaluated, including the presence of sarbecoviruses carrying a spike with a furin cleavage site in bats.
| S-SCDT-10_15252-EMBR_202256055 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST955 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST645 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8144827 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 was first identified in December, 2020, in England. We aimed to investigate whether increases in the proportion of infections with this variant are associated with differences in symptoms or disease course, reinfection rates, or transmissibility.MethodsWe did an ecological study to examine the association between the regional proportion of infections with the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 variant and reported symptoms, disease course, rates of reinfection, and transmissibility. Data on types and duration of symptoms were obtained from longitudinal reports from users of the COVID Symptom Study app who reported a positive test for COVID-19 between Sept 28 and Dec 27, 2020 (during which the prevalence of B.1.1.7 increased most notably in parts of the UK). From this dataset, we also estimated the frequency of possible reinfection, defined as the presence of two reported positive tests separated by more than 90 days with a period of reporting no symptoms for more than 7 days before the second positive test. The proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections with the B.1.1.7 variant across the UK was estimated with use of genomic data from the COVID-19 Genomics UK Consortium and data from Public Health England on spike-gene target failure (a non-specific indicator of the B.1.1.7 variant) in community cases in England. We used linear regression to examine the association between reported symptoms and proportion of B.1.1.7. We assessed the Spearman correlation between the proportion of B.1.1.7 cases and number of reinfections over time, and between the number of positive tests and reinfections. We estimated incidence for B.1.1.7 and previous variants, and compared the effective reproduction number, Rt, for the two incidence estimates.FindingsFrom Sept 28 to Dec 27, 2020, positive COVID-19 tests were reported by 36 920 COVID Symptom Study app users whose region was known and who reported as healthy on app sign-up. We found no changes in reported symptoms or disease duration associated with B.1.1.7. For the same period, possible reinfections were identified in 249 (0·7% [95% CI 0·6-0·8]) of 36 509 app users who reported a positive swab test before Oct 1, 2020, but there was no evidence that the frequency of reinfections was higher for the B.1.1.7 variant than for pre-existing variants. Reinfection occurrences were more positively correlated with the overall regional rise in cases (Spearman correlation 0·56-0·69 for South East, London, and East of England) than with the regional increase in the proportion of infections with the B.1.1.7 variant (Spearman correlation 0·38-0·56 in the same regions), suggesting B.1.1.7 does not substantially alter the risk of reinfection. We found a multiplicative increase in the Rt of B.1.1.7 by a factor of 1·35 (95% CI 1·02-1·69) relative to pre-existing variants. However, Rt fell below 1 during regional and national lockdowns, even in regions with high proportions of infections with the B.1.1.7 variant.InterpretationThe lack of change in symptoms identified in this study indicates that existing testing and surveillance infrastructure do not need to change specifically for the B.1.1.7 variant. In addition, given that there was no apparent increase in the reinfection rate, vaccines are likely to remain effective against the B.1.1.7 variant.FundingZoe Global, Department of Health (UK), Wellcome Trust, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (UK), National Institute for Health Research (UK), Medical Research Council (UK), Alzheimer's Society.
| S-EPMC8041365 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The addictive protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection conferred by vaccination, as compared to natural immunity alone, remains to be quantified. We thus carried out a meta-analysis to summarize the existing evidence on the association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and the risk of reinfection and disease. We searched MedLine, Scopus and preprint repositories up to July 31, 2022, to retrieve cohort or case-control studies comparing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection or severe/critical COVID-19 among vaccinated vs. unvaccinated subjects, recovered from a primary episode. Data were combined using a generic inverse-variance approach. Eighteen studies, enrolling 18,132,192 individuals, were included. As compared to the unvaccinated, vaccinated subjects showed a significantly lower likelihood of reinfection (summary Odds Ratio-OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.42-0.54). Notably, the results did not change up to 12 months of follow-up, by number of vaccine doses, in studies that adjusted for potential confounders, adopting different reinfection definitions, and with different predominant strains. Once reinfected, vaccinated subjects were also significantly less likely to develop a severe disease (OR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.38-0.54). Although further studies on the long-term persistence of protection, under the challenge of the new circulating variants, are clearly needed, the present meta-analysis provides solid evidence of a stronger protection of hybrid vs. natural immunity, which may persist during Omicron waves and up to 12 months.
| S-EPMC9681813 | biostudies-literature