Hidden fraction of Polish population immune to SARS-CoV-2 in May 2021

  1. Wiktoria Budziar
  2. Katarzyna Gembara
  3. Marek Harhala
  4. Aleksander Szymczak
  5. Natalia Jędruchniewicz
  6. Krzysztof Baniecki
  7. Aleksandra Pikies
  8. Artur Nahorecki
  9. Agnieszka Hoffmann
  10. Amelia Kardaś
  11. Alina Szewczyk-Dąbrowska
  12. Tomasz Klimek
  13. Zuzanna Kaźmierczak
  14. Wojciech Witkiewicz
  15. Kamil Barczyk
  16. Krystyna Dąbrowska

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Population immunity (herd immunity) to SARS-CoV-2 derives from two sources: vaccinations or cases of infection with the virus. Infections can be diagnosed as COVID-19 and registered, or they can be asymptomatic, oligosymptomatic, or even full-blown but undiagnosed and unregistered when patients recovered at home. Estimation of population immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is difficult and remains a subject of speculations. Here we present a population screening for SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG and IgA antibodies in Polish citizens (N = 501) who had never been positively diagnosed with or vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Serum samples were collected in Wrocław (Lower Silesia) on 15th and 22nd May 2021. Sera from hospitalized COVID-19 patients (N = 22) or from vaccinated citizens (N = 14) served as positive controls. Sera were tested with Microblot-Array COVID-19 IgG and IgA (quantitative) that contain specific SARS-CoV-2 antigens: NCP, RBD, Spike S2, E, ACE2, PLPro protein, and antigens for exclusion cross-reactivity with other coronaviruses: MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV, HCoV 229E Np, HCoV NL63 Np. Within the investigated population of healthy individuals who had never been positively diagnosed with or vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, we found that 35.5% (178 out of 501) were positive for SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and 52.3% (262 out of 501) were positive for SARS-CoV-2-specific IgA; 21.2% of the investigated population developed virus-specific IgG or IgA while being asymptomatic. Anti-RBD IgG, which represents virus-neutralizing potential, was found in 25.6% of individuals (128 out of 501). These patients, though positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, cannot be identified in the public health system as convalescents due to undiagnosed infections, and they are considered unaffected by SARS-CoV-2. Their contribution to population immunity against COVID-19 should however be considered in predictions and modeling of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of note, the majority of the investigated population still lacked anti-RBD IgG protection (74.4%); thus vaccination against COVID-19 is still of the most importance for controlling the pandemic.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0253638
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.22.21258711: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.06.22.21258711v1 on medRxiv