COVID-19 Reinfection Has Better Outcomes Than the First Infection in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant recipients face an increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and are vulnerable to repeat severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. In nonimmunocompromised individuals, SARS-CoV-2 reinfections are milder likely because of cross-protective immunity. We sought to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 reinfection exhibits milder manifestations than primary infection in transplant recipients. METHODS: Using a large, prospective cohort of adult transplant patients with COVID-19, we identified patients with SARS-CoV-2 reinfections. We performed a 1:1 nearest neighbor propensity score matching to control potential confounders, including the COVID-19 variant. We compared outcomes including oxygen requirement, hospitalization, and intensive care unit admission within 30 d after diagnosis between patients with reinfection and those with the first episode of COVID-19. RESULTS: Between 2020 and 2023, 103 reinfections were identified in a cohort of 1869 transplant recipients infected with SARS-CoV-2 (incidence of 2.7% per year). These included 50 kidney (48.5%), 27 lung (26.2%), 7 heart (6.8%), 6 liver (5.8%), and 13 multiorgan (12.6%) transplants. The median age was 54.5 y (interquartile range [IQR], 40.5-65.5) and the median time from transplant to first infection was 6.6 y (IQR, 2.8-11.2). The time between the primary COVID-19 and reinfection was 326 d (IQR, 226-434). Three doses or more of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine are received by 87.4% of patients. After propensity score matching, reinfections were associated with significantly lower hospitalization (5.8% versus 19.4%; risk ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.12-0.71) and oxygen requirement (3.9% versus 13.6%; risk ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.10-0.84). In a within-patient analysis only in the reinfection group, the second infection was milder than the first (3.9% required oxygen versus 19.4%, P < 0.0001), and severe first COVID-19 was the only predictor of severe reinfection. CONCLUSIONS: Transplant recipients with COVID-19 reinfection present better outcomes than those with the first infection, providing clinical evidence for the development of cross-protective immunity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".