Understanding "Hybrid Immunity": Comparison and Predictors of Humoral Immune Responses to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection (SARS-CoV-2) and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccines.

BACKGROUND: Comparison of humoral responses in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccinees, those with SARS-CoV-2 infection, or combinations of vaccine/ infection ("hybrid immunity") may clarify predictors of vaccine immunogenicity. METHODS: We studied 2660 US Military Health System beneficiaries with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection-alone (n = 705), vaccination-alone (n = 932), vaccine-after-infection (n = 869), and vaccine-breakthrough-infection (n = 154). Peak anti-spike-immunoglobulin G (IgG) responses through 183 days were compared, with adjustment for vaccine product, demography, and comorbidities. We excluded those with evidence of clinical or subclinical SARS-CoV-2 reinfection from all groups. RESULTS: Multivariable regression results indicated that vaccine-after-infection anti-spike-IgG responses were higher than infection-alone (P < .01), regardless of prior infection severity. An increased time between infection and vaccination was associated with greater post-vaccination IgG response (P < .01). Vaccination-alone elicited a greater IgG response but more rapid waning of IgG (P < .01) compared with infection-alone (P < .01). BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccine-receipt was associated with greater IgG responses compared with JNJ-78436735 vaccine-receipt (P < .01), regardless of infection history. Those with vaccine-after-infection or vaccine-breakthrough-infection had a more durable anti-spike-IgG response compared to infection-alone (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine-receipt elicited higher anti-spike-IgG responses than infection-alone, although IgG levels waned faster in those vaccinated (compared to infection-alone). Vaccine-after-infection elicits a greater humoral response compared with vaccine or infection alone; and the timing, but not disease severity, of prior infection predicted these post-vaccination IgG responses. While differences between groups were small in magnitude, these results offer insights into vaccine immunogenicity variations that may help inform vaccination timing strategies.

Clinical, Immunological, and Virological SARS-CoV-2 Phenotypes in Obese and Nonobese Military Health System Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: The mechanisms underlying the association between obesity and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity remain unclear. After verifying that obesity was a correlate of severe COVID-19 in US Military Health System (MHS) beneficiaries, we compared immunological and virological phenotypes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in both obese and nonobese participants. METHODS: COVID-19-infected MHS beneficiaries were enrolled, and anthropometric, clinical, and demographic data were collected. We compared the SARS-CoV-2 peak IgG humoral response and reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction viral load in obese and nonobese patients, stratified by hospitalization, utilizing logistic regression models. RESULTS: Data from 511 COVID-19 patients were analyzed, among whom 24% were obese and 14% severely obese. Obesity was independently associated with hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-3.18) and need for oxygen therapy (aOR, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.61-7.11). In outpatients, severely obese had a log10 (1.89) higher nucleocapsid (N1) genome equivalents (GE)/reaction and log10 (2.62) higher N2 GE/reaction than nonobese (P = 0.03 and P < .001, respectively). We noted a correlation between body mass index and peak anti-spike protein IgG in inpatients and outpatients (coefficient = 5.48, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity is a strong correlate of COVID-19 severity in MHS beneficiaries. These findings offer new pathophysiological insights into the relationship between obesity and COVID-19 severity.

Anatomical Site, Viral Ribonucleic Acid Abundance, and Time of Sampling Correlate With Molecular Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 During Infection.

BACKGROUND: Nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs are the standard for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. If less invasive alternatives to NP swabs (eg, oropharyngeal [OP] or nasal swabs [NS]) are comparably sensitive, the use of these techniques may be preferable in terms of comfort, convenience, and safety. METHODS: This study compared the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in swab samples collected on the same day among participants with at least one positive PCR test. RESULTS: Overall, 755 participants had at least one set of paired swabs. Concordance between NP and other swab types was 75% (NS), 72% (OP), 54% (rectal swabs [RS]), and 78% (NS/OP combined). Kappa values were moderate for the NS, OP, and NS/OP comparisons (0.50, 0.45, and 0.54, respectively). Highest sensitivity relative to NP (0.87) was observed with a combination of NS/OP tests (positive if either NS or OP was positive). Sensitivity of the non-NP swab types was highest in the first week postsymptom onset and decreased thereafter. Similarly, virus RNA quantity was highest in the NP swabs as compared with NS, OP, and RS within two weeks postsymptom onset. OP and NS performance decreased as virus RNA quantity decreased. No differences were noted between NS specimens collected at home or in clinic. CONCLUSIONS: NP swabs detected more SARS-CoV-2 cases than non-NP swabs, and the sensitivity of the non-NP swabs decreased with time postsymptom onset. While other swabs may be simpler to collect, NP swabs present the best chance of detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA, which is essential for clinical care as well as genomic surveillance.

Performance of the inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome Plus (FLU-PRO Plus) Instrument in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: The inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome Plus (FLU-PRO Plus) is a patient-reported outcome data collection instrument assessing symptoms of viral respiratory tract infections across 8 body systems. This study evaluated the measurement properties of FLU-PRO Plus in a study enrolling individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Data from a prospective cohort study (EPICC) in US Military Health System beneficiaries evaluated for COVID-19 was utilized. Adults with symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with FLU-PRO Plus survey information within 1 week of symptom onset were included. Reliability of FLU-PRO Plus was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC; 2 days' reproducibility). Known-groups validity was assessed using patient global assessment (PGA) of disease severity. Patient report of return to usual health was used to assess responsiveness (day 1-6/7). RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-six SARS-CoV-2-positive participants were included in the analysis. Reliability among those who reported no change in their symptoms from one day to the next was high for most domains (ICC range, 0.68-0.94 for day 1 to day 2). Construct validity was demonstrated by moderate to high correlation between the PGA rating of disease severity and domain and total scores (eg, total scores correlation: 0.69 [influenza-like illness severity], 0.69 [interference in daily activities], and -0.58 [physical health]). In addition, FLU-PRO Plus demonstrated good known-groups validity, with increasing domain and total scores observed with increasing severity ratings. CONCLUSIONS: FLU-PRO Plus performs well in measuring signs and symptoms in SARS-CoV-2 infection with excellent construct validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness to change. Standardized data collection instruments facilitate meta-analyses, vaccine effectiveness studies, and other COVID-19 research activities.