RESUMO
PURPOSE: Anti SARS-CoV-2 vaccination initially showed high effectiveness in preventing COVID-19. However, after the surge of variants of concern, the effectiveness dropped. Several studies investigated if this was related to the decrease of the humoral response over time; however, this issue is still unclear. The aim of this study was to understand whether SARS-CoV-2 anti-S IgG levels can be used to predict breakthrough infection risk and define the timing for further booster doses administration. METHOD: Within the framework of the ORCHESTRA Project, over 20,000 health workers from 11 European centers were enrolled since December 2020. We performed two Cox proportional hazards survival analyses regarding pre-Omicron (from January to July 2021) and Omicron (December 2021-May 2022) periods. The serological response was classified as high (above the 75th percentile), medium (25th-75th), or low (< 25th). RESULTS: Seventy-four (0.33%) and 2122 (20%) health workers were infected during the first and second periods, respectively. Both Cox analyses showed that having high anti-S titer was linked to a significantly lower risk of infection as compared to having medium serological response [HR of high vs medium anti-S titer = 0.27 (95% CI 0.11-0.66) during the first phase, HR = 0.76 (95% CI 0.62-0.93) during the second phase]. CONCLUSION: Vaccine effectiveness wanes significantly after new variants surge, making anti-S titer unsuitable to predict optimal timing for further booster dose administration. Studies on other immunological indicators, such as cellular immunity, are therefore needed to better understand the mechanisms and duration of protection against breakthrough infection risk.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Pessoal de Saúde , Imunoglobulina G , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/imunologia , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Imunoglobulina G/sangue , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Feminino , Adulto , Masculino , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Imunização Secundária , Glicoproteína da Espícula de Coronavírus/imunologia , Infecções IrruptivasRESUMO
Factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection risk are still debated. This case-control study aims to investigate the possible relationship between SARS-CoV-2 infection, evaluated through antibody response, and the main sociodemographic, occupational, clinical-anamnestic, and biochemical factors in a population of Modena province (Northern Italy), mainly workers. Both workers who voluntarily joined the screening campaign proposed by companies and self-referred individuals who underwent serological testing were enrolled. Subjects with antibody positivity were recruited as cases (n = 166) and subjects tested negative (n = 239) as controls. A questionnaire on sociodemographic, occupational, and clinical data was administered through telephone interviews. Serum zinc/iron/copper/chromium/nickel, vitamins D/B12, folates, triglycerides, and LDL/HDL/total cholesterol were measured. Cases lived more often in urban areas (61.8% vs. 57%). Cases and controls did not differ significantly by working macrocategories, but the percentage of workers in the ceramic sector was higher among cases. Low adherence to preventive measures in the workplace was more frequent among seropositives. Folate concentration was significantly lower among cases. Therefore, adequate folate levels, living in rural areas, and good adherence to preventive strategies seem protective against infection. Workers in the ceramic sector seem to be at greater risk; specific factors involved are not defined, but preventive interventions are needed.
RESUMO
Introduction: The impact of long-COVID-19 syndrome is rather variable, since it is influenced by several residual confounders. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of long COVID-19 in healthcare workers (HCWs) from four university hospitals in north-eastern Italy: Trieste, Padua, Verona, and Modena-Reggio Emilia. Methods: During the period June 2022-August 2022, HCWs were surveyed for past COVID-19 infections, medical history, and any acute as well as post-COVID-19 symptoms. The prevalence of long COVID-19 was estimated at 30-60 days or 61+ days since first negative swab following first and second COVID-19 episode. Furthermore, the risk of long COVID-19 was investigated by multivariable logistic regression. Results were expressed as the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with a 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Results: 5432 HCWs returned a usable questionnaire: 2401 were infected with SARS-CoV-2 at least once, 230 were infected at least twice, and 8 were infected three times. The prevalence of long COVID-19 after a primary COVID-19 infection was 24.0% at 30-60 days versus 16.3% at 61+ days, and 10.5% against 5.5% after the second SARS-CoV-2 event. The most frequent symptoms after a first COVID-19 event were asthenia (30.3%), followed by myalgia (13.7%), cough (12.4%), dyspnea (10.2%), concentration deficit (8.1%), headache (7.3%), and anosmia (6.5%), in decreasing order of prevalence. The risk of long COVID-19 at 30-60 days was significantly higher in HCWs hospitalized for COVID-19 (aOR = 3.34; 95%CI: 1.62; 6.89), those infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the early pandemic waves-namely the Wuhan (aOR = 2.16; 95%CI: 1.14; 4.09) or Alpha (aOR= 2.05; 95%CI: 1.25; 3.38) transmission periods-and progressively increasing with viral shedding time (VST), especially 15+ days (aOR = 3.20; 95%CI: 2.07; 4.94). Further determinants of long COVID-19 at 30-60 days since primary COVID-19 event were female sex (aOR = 1.91; 95%CI: 1.30; 2.80), age >40 years, abnormal BMI, or administrative services (reference category). In contrast, HCWs vaccinated with two doses before their primary infection (aOR = 0.57; 95%CI: 0.34; 0.94), undergraduate students, or postgraduate medical trainees were less likely to experience long COVID-19 at 30-60 days. Apart from pandemic waves, the main determinants of long COVID-19 at 30-60 days were confirmed at 61+ days. Conclusions: The risk of long COVID-19 following primary infection increased with the severity of acute disease and VST, especially during the initial pandemic waves, when more virulent viral strains were circulating, and susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 was higher since most HCWs had not been infected yet, COVID-19 vaccines were still not available, and/or vaccination coverage was still building up. The risk of long COVID-19 therefore decreased inversely with humoral immunity at the individual level. Nevertheless, the prevalence of long COVID-19 was remarkably lower after SARS-CoV-2 reinfections regardless of vaccination status, suggesting that hybrid humoral immunity did not increase protection against the syndrome compared to immunity mounted by either natural infection or vaccination separately. Since the risk of long COVID-19 is currently low with Omicron and patients who developed the syndrome following SARS-CoV-2 infection in the early pandemic waves tend to return to a state of full health with time, a cost-effective approach to screen post-COVID-19 symptoms during the Omicron time could be restricted to vulnerable individuals developing severe disease and/or with prolonged VST.