New Paper (Other): Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection

[marouenbg]

Title: Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection

General Information

Please paste a link to the paper or a citation here:

Link: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/early/2021/01/06/science.abf4063.full.pdf

What is the paper's Manubot-style citation?

Citation: [@doi:10.1126/science.abf4063]

Is this paper primarily relevant to Background or Pathogenesis?

• [ ] Background
• [x] Pathogenesis
• [ ] Methods

Please list some keywords (3-10) that help identify the relevance of this paper to COVID-19

• keyword 1 reinfection
• keyword 2 SARS-CoV-2
• keyword 3 immunity

Please note the publication / review status

• [ ] Pre-print
• [x] New Peer-Reviewed Paper
• [ ] Peer-Reviewed Paper Pre-2020

Which areas of expertise are particularly relevant to the paper?

• [ ] virology
• [ ] epidemiology
• [ ] biostatistics
• [x] immunology
• [ ] pharmacology
• [ ] other:

[marouenbg]

Summary

Suggested questions to answer about each paper:

• What did they analyze? This paper analyzed multiple compartments of circulating immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 in 254 samples from 188 COVID-19 cases, including 43 samples at ≥ 6 months post-infection

• What methods did they use? The study integrated the following measurements: IgG to the Spike protein levels, Spike-specific memory B cells, as well as SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells. The strategy consisting of taking several orthogonal measurements seems in line with recent work advocating for this practice #765 . The cohort was comprised of 188 individuals with COVID-19. Subjects (80 male, 108 female) represented a range of asymptomatic, mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19 cases, and were recruited from multiple sites throughout the United States. The majority of subjects were from California or New York.

• Does this paper study COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, or a related disease and/or virus? Yes, this is a study about SARS-CoV-2 reinfections.

• What is the main finding (or a few main takeaways)? Overall, the makers of anti SARS-CoV-2 immunity after infection seem to be active for up to 8 months after infection. Specifically, IgG to the Spike protein was relatively stable over 6+ months. Spike-specific memory B cells were more abundant at 6 months than at 1 month post symptom onset. SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells declined with a half-life of 3-5 months.

• What does this paper tell us about the background and/or diagnostics/therapeutics for COVID-19 / SARS-CoV-2? This study addresses the shortcomings of the SIREN study #766 by 1) using more than one immunity biomarker and 2) by using a diverse pool of patients as opposed to the SIREN study that did a follow up for healthcare workers who were mainly women < 60 years old.. In fact, most subjects had a “mild” case of COVID-19, not requiring hospitalization. 93% of subjects were never hospitalized for COVID-19; 7% of subjects were hospitalized, some of whom required intensive care unit (ICU) care. This case severity distribution was consistent with the general distribution of symptomatic disease severity among COVID-19 cases in the USA.

• Do you have any concerns about methodology or the interpretation of these results beyond this analysis? None.

Any comments or notes?

This study is in agreement with the recent SIREN study that found that reinfection rates among healthcare workers were very low for up to six months. This study uses four clinical biomarkers as opposed to using only IgG anti spike, and extended the surveillance period for up to eight months.