In-depth virological assessment of kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19

  1. Ilies Benotmane
  2. Gabriela Gautier-Vargas
  3. Marie-Josée Wendling
  4. Peggy Perrin
  5. Aurélie Velay
  6. Xavier Bassand
  7. Dimitri Bedo
  8. Clément Baldacini
  9. Mylène Sagnard
  10. Dogan-Firat Bozman
  11. Margaux Della-Chiesa
  12. Morgane Solis
  13. Floriane Gallais
  14. Noëlle Cognard
  15. Jérôme Olagne
  16. Héloïse Delagrèverie
  17. Louise Gontard
  18. Baptiste Panaget
  19. David Marx
  20. Françoise Heibel
  21. Laura Braun-Parvez
  22. Bruno Moulin
  23. Sophie Caillard
  24. Samira Fafi-Kremer

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1111/ajt.16251
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.17.20132076: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the local Institutional Review Board (approval number: DC-2013-1990).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    4 2.3 SARS-CoV-2 serological assessment: Immunoglobulin (Ig) M and IgG antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 recombinant nucleocapsid and spike antigens were tested using a commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; DIA.PRO Diagnostic BioProbes
    4 2.3 SARS-CoV-2 serological assessment: Immunoglobulin (Ig) M
    suggested: None
    IgG antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 recombinant nucleocapsid and spike antigens
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism 8.0 (GraphPad Inc., San Diego, CA, USA).
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Despite some limitations of this study, including the small sample size and lack of data from some patients, this is the first report that provides a precise assessment of SARS-CoV-2 virological and antibody response kinetics in an immunocompromised population, with a follow-up for two months after symptom onset. Taken together, our data indicate that 1) SARS-CoV-2 shedding from the upper respiratory tract is prolonged in KTR patients, indicating the requirement for prolonged protective measures for these patients; 2) the SARS-CoV-2 plasma load is associated with COVID-19 severity and mortality, whereas the viral load of the upper respiratory tract is not; and 3) based on the presence of antibodies in all samples collected by us after the second week of symptom onset, the SARS-CoV-2 humoral response in our immunocompromised population does not show serious impairment and the antibodies persist until two months after COVID-19 symptom onset.

    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.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.06.17.20132076v1 on medRxiv