MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3123545247 · doi:10.1101/2021.01.22.21249865

Longevity of SARS-CoV-2 immune responses in haemodialysis patients and protection against reinfection

2021· preprint· en· W3123545247 on OpenAlexaff
Candice Clarke, Maria Prendecki, Amrita Dhutia, Claire Edwards, Virginia Prout, Liz Lightstone, Eleanor Parker, Federica Marchesin, Megan Griffith, Rawya Charif, Graham Pickard, Alison D. Cox, Myra O. McClure, Richard S. Tedder, Paul Randell, Louise Greathead, Mary Guckian, Stephen P. McAdoo, Peter Kelleher, Michelle Willicombe

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersImperial College Healthcare NHS TrustImperial College LondonNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineAsymptomaticSerologyAntibodyInternal medicineImmunologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Patients with end stage kidney disease (ESKD) receiving in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD) have had high rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Following infection, ICHD patients frequently develop serological evidence of infection, even with asymptomatic disease. The aim of this study is to investigate the durability and functionality of immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection in ICHD patients. Methods Three hundred and fifty-six ICHD patients were longitudinally screened for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and underwent routine PCR-testing for symptomatic and asymptomatic infection. Patients were screened for nucleocapsid protein (anti-NP) and receptor binding domain (anti-RBD) antibodies. Patients who became seronegative at 6 months were investigated for SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cell responses. Results One hundred and twenty-nine (36.2%) patients had detectable antibody to anti-NP at Time 0, of which 127 (98.4%) also had detectable anti-RBD. At 6 months, of 111 patients tested, 71(64.0%) and 97 (87.4%) remained anti-NP and anti-RBD seropositive respectively, p<0.001. For patients who retained antibody, both anti-NP and anti-RBD levels reduced significantly after 6 months. Ten patients who were anti-NP and anti-RBD seropositive at Time 0, had no detectable antibody at 6 months; of which 8 were found to have SARS-CoV-2 antigen specific T cell responses. Independent of antibody status at 6 months, patients with baseline positive SARS-CoV-2 serology were significantly less likely to have PCR confirmed infection over the following 6 months. Conclusions ICHD patients mount durable immune responses 6 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection, with <3% of patients showing no evidence of humoral or cellular immunity. These immune responses are associated with a reduced risk of subsequent reinfection. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Following infection with SARS-CoV-2, patients with end stage kidney disease (ESKD) frequently develop serological evidence of infection, even with asymptomatic disease. Patients with ESKD receiving in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD) have had high rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection. What is not known is how durable the serological responses in ESKD patients are or whether evidence of prior immune responses protect patients from reinfection. In this study of 356 ICHD patients, at 6 months following the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, fewer than 3% of patients lacked evidence of either humoral or cellular immunity. Furthermore, patients with serological evidence of infection had a significantly lower risk of being diagnosed with subsequent infection or ‘reinfection’, suggesting functional immune protection.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research→French-language works237,207→