Low Levels of Neutralizing Antibodies After Natural Infection With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in a Community-Based Serological Study
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background
Confidence in natural immunity after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is one reason for vaccine hesitancy.
Methods
We measured antibody-mediated neutralization of spike protein-ACE2 receptor binding in a large community-based sample of seropositive individuals who differed in severity of infection (N = 790).
Results
A total of 39.8% of infections were asymptomatic, 46.5% were symptomatic with no clinical care, 13.8% were symptomatic with clinical care, and 3.7% required hospitalization. Moderate/high neutralizing activity was present after 41.3% of clinically managed infections, in comparison with 7.9% of symptomatic and 1.9% of asymptomatic infections.
Conclusions
Prior coronavirus disease 2019 infection does not guarantee a high level of antibody-mediated protection against reinfection in the general population.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.19.21253982: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Consent: Participants and study design: Between June 24 and November 11, 2020, N=4,562 adults in the Chicagoland area provided informed consent online, completed a web-based survey, and returned a self-collected finger stick DBS sample in the mail.
IRB: All research activities were implemented under protocols approved by the institutional review board at Northwestern University (#STU00212457 and #STU00212472).Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.19.21253982: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Consent: Participants and study design: Between June 24 and November 11, 2020, N=4,562 adults in the Chicagoland area provided informed consent online, completed a web-based survey, and returned a self-collected finger stick DBS sample in the mail.
IRB: All research activities were implemented under protocols approved by the institutional review board at Northwestern University (#STU00212457 and #STU00212472).Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
