Longitudinal serologic and viral testing post–SARS-CoV-2 infection and post-receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a nursing home cohort—Georgia, October 2020‒April 2021

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

There are limited data describing SARS-CoV-2–specific immune responses and their durability following infection and vaccination in nursing home residents. We conducted a prospective longitudinal evaluation of 11 consenting SARS-CoV-2–positive nursing home residents to evaluate the quantitative titers and durability of binding antibodies detected after SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent COVID-19 vaccination. The evaluation included nine visits over 150 days from October 25, 2020, through April 1, 2021. Visits included questionnaire administration, blood collection for serology, and paired anterior nasal specimen collection for testing by BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW), reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), and viral culture. We evaluated quantitative titers of binding SARS-CoV-2 antibodies post-infection and post-vaccination (beginning after the first dose of the primary series). The median age among participants was 74 years; one participant was immunocompromised. Of 10 participants with post-infection serology results, 9 (90%) had detectable Pan-Ig, IgG, and IgA antibodies, and 8 (80%) had detectable IgM antibodies. At first antibody detection post-infection, two-thirds (6/9, 67%) of participants were RT-PCR–positive, but none were culture- positive. Ten participants received vaccination; all had detectable Pan-Ig, IgG, and IgA antibodies through their final observation ≤90 days post-first dose. Post-vaccination geometric means of IgG titers were 10–200-fold higher than post-infection. Nursing home residents in this cohort mounted robust immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 post-infection and post-vaccination. The augmented antibody responses post-vaccination are potential indicators of enhanced protection that vaccination may confer on previously infected nursing home residents.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.28.21268458: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: Residents were eligible to participate if they were medically stable, had decision-making capacity, and provided informed consent after testing SARS-CoV-2–positive using BinaxNOW™ COVID-19 Ag Cards (BinaxNOW) (Abbott; Scarborough, ME) in any of three rounds of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-led facility-wide point prevalence surveys (PPS) or by previous testing results generated by the facility (12, 13).
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Serum specimens were tested for anti–SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay targeting the extracellular domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (18).
    anti–SARS-CoV-2
    suggested: None
    SARS-CoV-2 spike protein ( 18
    suggested: None
    This assay uses anti–pan-immunoglobulin (Ig) secondary antibodies that detect any SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin isotype, including IgG, IgM, and IgA.
    anti–pan-immunoglobulin
    suggested: None
    SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin isotype , including IgG
    suggested: None
    IgA
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Information from questionnaires and chart abstraction were entered into a Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) database (15, 16).
    REDCap
    suggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)
    Data were analyzed by Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Office 365
    Microsoft Excel
    suggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)

    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:
    Our evaluation had several limitations. We had a small sample size, preventing statistical comparisons and potentially limiting the generalizability of our findings. Participants enrolled in our evaluation only received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine; therefore, we were unable to describe the impact of vaccination with other products. Some participants were unable to provide blood specimens when requested and most visits occurred only monthly, so we likely missed the exact timing of seroconversion, peak antibody titers, and seroreversion. Not detecting antibodies in one participant during this first 30 days post-infection was possibly an artifact of timing our collections relative to their infection. Descriptions of antibody duration were limited by the length of the evaluation period. Seven participants had visits that occurred one day after their first vaccine; though these visits were categorized as post-vaccination, we do not know if titers observed from this visit were a continuation of responses primed by their previous infection or a result of the vaccine already augmenting that response. Therefore, we may have underestimated the scale of post-vaccination augmentation because those titer calculations were influenced by values from measurements that were likely more reflective of the post-infection time period. Limited electronic medical record documentation of vital signs, including oxygen saturation, and the difficulty of discerning COVID-19 symptomology in a nu...

    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.