Natural immunity against COVID-19 significantly reduces the risk of reinfection: findings from a cohort of sero-survey participants

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

Conflicting reports on the persistence of antibody levels in individuals recovered from COVID-19 infection, suggest that the immunity against COVID-19 may not be lasting for long. In India, by 30th June, 2021, not less than 30 million people were infected with COVID-19 and 0.39 million people were reported to have lost their life to the disease in India. I the current study we followed up with a subsample of our previous sero-survey participants to assess whether natural immunity against SARS-CoV-2 was associated with a reduced risk of re-infection. We conducted telephonic interview of a total of 3038 participants, out of which 2238 participants responded and 5 participants were found to be not alive, as conveyed by their close relatives. There was a non-response rate of 26.1%. Out of the 2238 participants, 1170 were sero-positive and 1068 were sero-negative for antibody against COVID-19. Our survey found that only 3 individuals in the sero-positive group got infected with COVID-19 whereas 127 individuals reported contracting the infection the sero-negative group. Interestingly, from the 127 sero-negative individuals who later contracted COVID-19 infection, 30 needed hospitalization, out of which 12 were on oxygen therapy, four in ICU and one was on ventilator. At the other hand, from the 3 sero-positives re-infected with COVID-19, one had hospitalization, but didnnot require oxygen support or critical care. These findings reinforce the strong plausibility that development of antibody following natural infection not only protects against re-infection by the virus to a great extent, but also safeguards against progression to severe COVID-19 disease.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.19.21260302: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: Consent was obtained prior to their enrollment in the study.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot 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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.