-
Journal of Global Health Nov 2023With the emergence of new variants and sub-lineages of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), reinfections can significantly impact herd immunity,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
With the emergence of new variants and sub-lineages of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), reinfections can significantly impact herd immunity, vaccination policies, and decisions on other public health measures. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesise the global evidence on SARS-CoV-2 reinfections in the pre-Omicron era.
METHODS
We searched five global databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Global Health, WHO COVID-19) on 12 May 2022 and 28 July 2023 and three Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang, CQvip) on 16 October 2022 for articles reporting incidence and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection before the period of Omicron (B.1.1.529) predominance. We assessed risk of bias using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools and conducted meta-analyses with random effects models to estimate the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among initially infected cases and hospitalisation and mortality proportions among reinfected ones.
RESULTS
We identified 7593 studies and extracted data from 64 included ones representing 21 countries. The proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was 1.16% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01-1.33) based on 11 639 247 initially infected cases, with ≥45 days between the two infections. Healthcare providers (2.28%; 95% CI = 1.37-3.40) had a significantly higher risk of reinfection than the general population (1.00%; 95% CI = 0.81-1.20), while young adults aged 18 to 35 years (1.01%; 95% CI = 0.8-1.25) had a higher reinfection burden than other age groups (children <18 years old: 0.57%; 95% CI = 0.39-0.79, older adults aged 36-65 years old: 0.53%; 95% CI = 0.41-0.65, elderly >65 years old: 0.37%; 95% CI = 0.15-0.66). Among the reinfected cases, 8.12% (95% CI = 5.30-11.39) were hospitalised, 1.31% (95% CI = 0.29-2.83) were admitted to the intensive care unit, and 0.71% (95% CI = 0.02-2.01) died.
CONCLUSIONS
Our data suggest a relatively low risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in the pre-Omicron era, but the risk of hospitalisation was relatively high among the reinfected cases. Considering the possibility of underdiagnosis, the reinfection burden may be underestimated.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO: CRD42023449712.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Child; Humans; Middle Aged; Young Adult; COVID-19; Incidence; Reinfection; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 37994839
DOI: 10.7189/jogh.13.06051 -
International Reviews of Immunology 2022Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is not frequent yet the incidence rate of it is increasing globally owing to the slow emergence of drift variants that pose a perpetual... (Review)
Review
Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is not frequent yet the incidence rate of it is increasing globally owing to the slow emergence of drift variants that pose a perpetual threat to vaccination strategies and have a greater propensity for disease reoccurrence. Long-term protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection relies on the induction of the innate as well as the adaptive immune response endowed with immune memory. However, a multitude of factors including the selection pressure, the waning immunity against SARS-CoV-2 over the first year after infection possibly favors evolution of more infectious immune escape variants, amplifying the risk of reinfection. Additionally, the correlates of immune protection, the novel SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC), the durability of the adaptive and mucosal immunity remain major challenges for the development of therapeutic and prophylactic interventions. Interestingly, a recent body of evidence indicated that the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is another important target organ for SARS-CoV-2 besides the respiratory system, potentially increasing the likelihood of reinfection by impacting the microbiome and the immune response via the gut-lung axis. In this review, we summarized the latest development in SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, and explored the untapped potential of trained immunity. We also highlighted the immune memory kinetics of the humoral and cell-mediated immune response, genetic drift of the emerging viral variants, and discussed the current challenges in vaccine development. Understanding the dynamics and the quality of immune response by unlocking the power of the innate, humoral and cell-mediated immunity during SARS-CoV-2 reinfection would open newer avenues for drug discovery and vaccine designs.
Topics: Adaptive Immunity; COVID-19; Humans; Reinfection; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34961403
DOI: 10.1080/08830185.2021.2019727 -
Journal of Infection and Public Health Aug 2023Studies comparing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection outcomes among individuals with previous infection (natural immunity) and previous infection plus vaccination (hybrid immunity)...
BACKGROUND
Studies comparing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection outcomes among individuals with previous infection (natural immunity) and previous infection plus vaccination (hybrid immunity) are limited.
METHODS
Retrospective cohort study comparing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among patients with hybrid immunity (cases) and natural immunity (controls) from March 2020 to February 2022. Reinfection was defined as positive PCR> 90 days after initial laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcomes included time to reinfection, symptom severity, COVID-19-related hospitalization, critical COVID-19 illness (need for intensive care unit, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death), length of stay (LOS).
RESULTS
A total of 773 (42%) vaccinated and 1073 (58%) unvaccinated patients with reinfection were included. Most patients (62.7%) were asymptomatic. Median time to reinfection was longer with hybrid immunity (391 [311-440] vs 294 [229-406] days, p < 0.001). Cases were less likely to be symptomatic (34.1% vs 39.6%, p = 0.001) or develop critical COVID-19 (2.3% vs 4.3%, p = 0.023). However, there was no significant difference in rates of COVID-19-related hospitalization (2.6% vs 3.8%, p = 0.142) or LOS (5 [2-9] vs 5 [3-10] days, p = 0.446). Boosted patients had longer time to reinfection (439 [IQR 372-467] vs 324 [IQR 256-414] days, p < 0.001) and were less likely to be symptomatic (26.8% vs 38%, p = 0.002) compared to unboosted patients. Rates of hospitalization, progression to critical illness and LOS were not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Natural and hybrid immunity provided protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and hospitalization. However, hybrid immunity conferred stronger protection against symptomatic disease and progression to critical illness and was associated with longer time to reinfection. The stronger protection conferred by hybrid immunity against severe outcomes due to COVID-19 should be emphasized with the public to further the vaccination effort, especially in high-risk individuals.
Topics: Humans; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Critical Illness; Reinfection; Retrospective Studies; Adaptive Immunity
PubMed: 37302273
DOI: 10.1016/j.jiph.2023.06.003 -
Emerging Microbes & Infections Dec 2023Limited follow-up data is available on the recovery of Omicron COVID-19 patients after acute illness. It is also critical to understand persistence of neutralizing...
Limited follow-up data is available on the recovery of Omicron COVID-19 patients after acute illness. It is also critical to understand persistence of neutralizing antibody (NAb) and of T-cell mediated immunity and the role of hybrid immunity in preventing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. This prospective cohort study included Omicron COVID-19 individuals from April to June 2022 in Shanghai, China, during a large epidemic caused by the Omicron BA.2 variant. A total of 8945 patients from three medical centres were included in the follow up programme from November 2022 to February 2023. Of 6412 individuals enrolled for the long COVID analysis, 605 (9.4%) individuals experienced at least one sequelae, mainly had fatigue and mental symptoms specific to Omicron BA.2 infection compared with other common respiratory tract infections. During the second-visit, 548 (12.1%) cases of Omicron reinfection were identified. Hybrid immunity with full and booster vaccination had reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection by 0.29-fold (95% CI: 0.63-0.81) and 0.23-fold (95% CI: 0.68-0.87), respectively. For 469 participants willing to the hospital during the first visit, those who received full (72 [IQR, 36-156]) or booster (64 [IQR, 28-132]) vaccination had significantly higher neutralizing antibody titers than those with incomplete vaccination (36 [IQR, 16-79]). Moreover, non-reinfection cases had higher neutralizing antibody titers (64 [IQR, 28-152]) compared to reinfection cases (32 [IQR, 20-69]).
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Follow-Up Studies; SARS-CoV-2; China; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome; Prospective Studies; Reinfection; Antibodies, Neutralizing; Antibodies, Viral
PubMed: 37732336
DOI: 10.1080/22221751.2023.2261559 -
Scientific Reports Dec 2022Some persistent infections provide a level of immunity that protects against reinfection with the same pathogen, a process referred to as concomitant immunity. To...
Some persistent infections provide a level of immunity that protects against reinfection with the same pathogen, a process referred to as concomitant immunity. To explore the phenomenon of concomitant immunity during Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, we utilized HostSim, a previously published virtual host model of the immune response following Mtb infection. By simulating reinfection scenarios and comparing with data from non-human primate studies, we propose a hypothesis that the durability of a concomitant immune response against Mtb is intrinsically tied to levels of tissue resident memory T cells (Trms) during primary infection, with a secondary but important role for circulating Mtb-specific T cells. Further, we compare HostSim reinfection experiments to observational TB studies from the pre-antibiotic era to predict that the upper bound of the lifespan of resident memory T cells in human lung tissue is likely 2-3 years. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first estimate of resident memory T-cell lifespan in humans. Our findings are a first step towards demonstrating the important role of Trms in preventing disease and suggest that the induction of lung Trms is likely critical for vaccine success.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Reinfection; Thorax; Tuberculosis
PubMed: 36456599
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-24516-8 -
BMC Public Health Apr 2023In December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged with a high transmissibility rate and resulted in numerous negative impacts on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged with a high transmissibility rate and resulted in numerous negative impacts on global life. Preventive measures such as face masks, social distancing, and vaccination helped control the pandemic. Nonetheless, the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, such as Omega and Delta, as well as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reinfection, raise additional concerns. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the overall prevalence of reinfection on global and regional scales.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted across three databases, PubMed, Scopus, and ProQuest Central, including all articles pertaining to COVID-19 reinfection without language restriction. After critical appraisal and qualitative synthesis of the identified relevant articles, a meta-analysis considering random effects was used to pool the studies.
RESULTS
We included 52 studies conducted between 2019 and 2022, with a total sample size of 3,623,655 patients. The overall prevalence of COVID-19 reinfection was 4.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.7-4.8%; n = 52), with high heterogeneity between studies. Africa had the highest prevalence of 4.7% (95% CI: 1.9-7.5%; n = 3), whereas Oceania and America had lower estimates of 0.3% (95% CI: 0.2-0.4%; n = 1) and 1% (95% CI: 0.8-1.3%; n = 7), respectively. The prevalence of reinfection in Europe and Asia was 1.2% (95% CI: 0.8-1.5%; n = 8) and 3.8% (95% CI: 3.4-4.3%; n = 43), respectively. Studies that used a combined type of specimen had the highest prevalence of 7.6% (95% CI: 5.8-9.5%; n = 15) compared with those that used oropharyngeal or nasopharyngeal swabs only that had lower estimates of 6.7% (95% CI: 4.8-8.5%; n = 8), and 3.4% (95% CI: 2.8-4.0%; n = 12) respectively.
CONCLUSION
COVID-19 reinfection occurs with varying prevalence worldwide, with the highest occurring in Africa. Therefore, preventive measures, including vaccination, should be emphasized to ensure control of the pandemic.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Prevalence; Reinfection
PubMed: 37118717
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-15626-7 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023With the continuous progress of the epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and the constant mutation of the virus strain, reinfection occurred in...
BACKGROUND
With the continuous progress of the epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and the constant mutation of the virus strain, reinfection occurred in previously infected individuals and caused waves of the epidemic in many countries. Therefore, we aimed to explore the characteristics of COVID-19 reinfection during the epidemic period in Yangzhou and provide a scientific basis for assessing the COVID-19 situation and optimizing the allocation of medical resources.
METHODS
We chose previously infected individuals of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reported locally in Yangzhou city from January 2020 to November 30, 2022. A telephone follow-up of cases was conducted from February to March 2023 to collect the COVID-19 reinfection information. We conducted a face-to-face survey on that who met the definition of reinfection to collect information on clinical symptoms, vaccination status of COVID-19, and so on. Data were analyzed using SPSS 19.0.
RESULTS
Among the 999 eligible respondents (92.24% of all the participants), consisting of 42.28% males and 57.72% females, the reinfection incidence of females was significantly higher than that of male cases (χ = 5.197, < 0.05); the ages of the respondents ranged from 1 to 91 years, with the mean age of 42.28 (standard deviation 22.73) years; the most of the sufferers were infected initially with Delta variant (56.88%), followed by the Omicron subvariants BA.1/BA.2 (39.52%). Among all the eligible respondents, 126 (12.61%) reported COVID-19 reinfection appearing during the epidemic period, and the intervals between infections were from 73 to 1,082 days. The earlier the initial infection occurred, the higher the reinfection incidence and the reinfection incidence was significantly increased when the interval was beyond 1 year ( < 0.01) .119 reinfection cases (94.4%) were symptomatic when the most common symptoms included fever (65.54%) and cough (61.34%); compared with the initial infection cases, the proportion of clinical symptoms in the reinfected cases was significantly higher ( < 0.01). The reinfection incidence of COVID-19 vaccination groups with different doses was statistically significant ( < 0.01). Fewer reinfections were observed among the respondents with three doses of COVID-19 vaccination compared to the respondents with two doses (χ = 14.595, < 0.001) or without COVID-19 vaccination (χ =4.263, = 0.039).
CONCLUSION
After the epidemic period of COVID-19, the reinfection incidence varied with different types of SARS-CoV-2 strains. The reinfection incidence was influenced by various factors such as virus characteristics, vaccination, epidemic prevention policies, and individual variations. As the SARS-CoV-2 continues to mutate, vaccination and appropriate personal protection have practical significance in reducing the risk of reinfection.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Adult; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Reinfection; COVID-19 Vaccines
PubMed: 37780420
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1256768 -
Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome 2021Reinfection is gradually being recognised after symptomatic or asymptomatic COVID-19 infection. We try to elucidate various explanations behind COVID-19 reinfection and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Reinfection is gradually being recognised after symptomatic or asymptomatic COVID-19 infection. We try to elucidate various explanations behind COVID-19 reinfection and suggest possible strategies to counteract this threat.
METHODS
We carried out a comprehensive review of the literature using suitable keywords such as 'COVID-19', 'Pandemics', 'Reinfection', 'Vaccines' and 'India' on the search engines of PubMed, SCOPUS, Google Scholar and Research Gate in March 2021 and first half of April 2021 during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Epidemiology, risk factors and trends of reinfection were assessed.
RESULTS
A multitude of factors have been associated with rising incidence of COVID-19 reinfection in India and across the world. Emergence of 'Variants of Concern (VOC)', pandemic fatigue and disregard of infection prevention strategies appear to be the most obvious reasons.
CONCLUSIONS
COVID-19 reinfection is an emerging concern amongst the worldwide population with newer mutant strains demonstrating increasing transmissibility and responsible for continuing waves of the pandemic. COVID Appropriate Behaviour (CAB), improvised vaccines and enhanced vaccination drives are necessary to mitigate global threat.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Humans; Incidence; India; Pandemics; Reinfection; Risk Factors; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 33989898
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2021.05.008 -
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... May 2022Despite decades of interventions, 240 million people have schistosomiasis. Infections cannot be directly observed, and egg-based Kato-Katz thick smears lack sensitivity,...
BACKGROUND
Despite decades of interventions, 240 million people have schistosomiasis. Infections cannot be directly observed, and egg-based Kato-Katz thick smears lack sensitivity, affected treatment efficacy and reinfection rate estimates. The point-of-care circulating cathodic antigen (referred to from here as POC-CCA+) test is advocated as an improvement on the Kato-Katz method, but improved estimates are limited by ambiguities in the interpretation of trace results.
METHOD
We collected repeated Kato-Katz egg counts from 210 school-aged children and scored POC-CCA tests according to the manufacturer's guidelines (referred to from here as POC-CCA+) and the externally developed G score. We used hidden Markov models parameterized with Kato-Katz; Kato-Katz and POC-CCA+; and Kato-Katz and G-Scores, inferring latent clearance and reinfection probabilities at four timepoints over six-months through a more formal statistical reconciliation of these diagnostics than previously conducted. Our approach required minimal but robust assumptions regarding trace interpretations.
RESULTS
Antigen-based models estimated higher infection prevalence across all timepoints compared with the Kato-Katz model, corresponding to lower clearance and higher reinfection estimates. Specifically, pre-treatment prevalence estimates were 85% (Kato-Katz; 95% CI: 79%-92%), 99% (POC-CCA+; 97%-100%) and 98% (G-Score; 95%-100%). Post-treatment, 93% (Kato-Katz; 88%-96%), 72% (POC-CCA+; 64%-79%) and 65% (G-Score; 57%-73%) of those infected were estimated to clear infection. Of those who cleared infection, 35% (Kato-Katz; 27%-42%), 51% (POC-CCA+; 41%-62%) and 44% (G-Score; 33%-55%) were estimated to have been reinfected by 9-weeks.
CONCLUSIONS
Treatment impact was shorter-lived than Kato-Katz-based estimates alone suggested, with lower clearance and rapid reinfection. At 3 weeks after treatment, longer-term clearance dynamics are captured. At 9 weeks after treatment, reinfection was captured, but failed clearance could not be distinguished from rapid reinfection. Therefore, frequent sampling is required to understand these important epidemiological dynamics.
Topics: Animals; Antigens, Helminth; Child; Feces; Humans; Prevalence; Reinfection; Schistosoma mansoni; Schistosomiasis mansoni; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 34358299
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciab679 -
European Journal of Clinical... Aug 2023To determine the clinical characteristics of and risk factors for suspected reinfection with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). This was a retrospective cohort study using...
To determine the clinical characteristics of and risk factors for suspected reinfection with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). This was a retrospective cohort study using population-based notification records of residents in Kyoto City (1.4 M) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection between 1 March 2020 and 15 April 2022. Reinfection was defined by two or more positive COVID-19 test results ≧ 90 days apart. Demographic characteristics, the route and timing of infection and history of vaccination were analysed to identify risk factors for reinfection. Among the cohort of 107,475 patients, reinfection was identified in 0.66% (n = 709). The age group with the highest reinfection rate was 18-39 years (1.06%), followed by 40-59 years (0.58%). Compared to the medical and nursing professionals, individuals who worked in the construction and manufacturing industry (odds ratio [OR]: 2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.66-4.92) and hospitality industry (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.28-.31) were more likely to be reinfected. Symptomatic cases at initial infection, receiving more than 2 doses of vaccination and risk factors for severe infection at initial infection were protective factors against reinfection. Of the reinfected individuals, the reinfection route was unknown in 65%. Reinfection with COVID-19 is uncommon, with suspected reinfections more likely in adults, those with high exposure and unvaccinated individuals; the reinfection route was unknown in the majority of cases. This study confirmed the need to continue with self-protection efforts and to implement vaccination programs in high-risk populations.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Adolescent; Young Adult; Reinfection; Incidence; Retrospective Studies; COVID-19; Risk Factors
PubMed: 37273038
DOI: 10.1007/s10096-023-04625-6