Search

The effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection persist months and years after recovery. We conducted an online survey to assess the health condition of convalescents approximately 5 months following the primary infection of SARS-CoV-2. The study recruited 5,510 individuals who were primary infected, 626 participants who had experienced reinfection, and 521 participants who were without infective history. The most common disorders after the primary infection group were fatigue (15.18 %), memory issue (13.13 %), post-exertional malaise (PEM, 11.68 %), and brain fog (11.29 %) at the time of survey. In addition, SARS-CoV-2 infection had an impact on the reproductive systems. In stepwise logistic regression analysis, smoking currently, with background diseases, and outpatient visits in the acute phase could be associated with moderate / severe disorders. Further analysis of different background diseases showed that allergic rhinitis, hyperlipidemia, cardiovascular disease, autoimmune diseases, neurological diseases, and asthma likely increased the risk of moderate/severe disorders. The probability of developing disorders of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was higher before the secondary infection than uninfected people. Fatigue, PEM, muscle pain/spasms, chills, joint pain, excessive sweating at rest, headache / dizziness, sore throat or foreign body sensation in the throat, cough, expectoration, dry / painful / watery eyes, loss of appetite and constipation were associated with an increased risk of reinfection. It was essential to undertake further research with enhanced randomization in a larger sample in the community, and to strengthen the validation of the research conclusions. The findings of this study contribute to a deeper understanding of the health recovery process among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescents. Moreover, the findings help identify characteristic health risk factors associated with convalescents and highlight the risk of moderate / severe disorders and reinfection. Furthermore, the findings also provide valuable guidance and reference for SARS-CoV-2 rehabilitation strategies and the prevention of reinfection, offering insights for scientific recommendations.

Background: There have been over 670 million confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection globally, resulting in over 6.87 million deaths. With approximately 0.1 %−6.8 % experiencing reinfection. This retrospective cohort study aimed to compare the risk of short-term circulatory and respiratory sequelae between SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and initial infection, and assess the impact of vaccination. Method: Data from the TriNetX US Collaborative network (2020–2022) were used to create two cohorts based on reinfection status. The main outcome assessed were medical utilization, circulatory and respiratory symptoms, and circulatory and respiratory diseases. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the risks between two cohorts. Four subgroup analyses (vaccination status, age, sex, race) and six sensitivity analyses (rigorous definition, modified exclusion criteria, treatment, different COVID-19 variants timeline, address survivorship bias, and E-value calculation) were also conducted. Results: The reinfection cohort showed a significant reduction in medical utilization [ Hazard ratio, HR: 0.867, (95 % confidence interval, CI:0.839–0.896) for hospitalization, 0.488 (0.418–0.570) for critical care services, and 0.476 (0.360–0.629) for mechanical ventilation], lower risk of circulatory diseases [ HR: 0.701 (95 % CI:0.637–0.772), 0.695 (0.583–0.829), 0.660 (0.605–0.719), 0.741 (0.644–0.854), 0.614 (0.535–0.705), and 0.758 (0.656–0.876) for ischemic heart disease, inflammatory heart disease, dysrhythmias, venous thromboembolism, other cardiac disorders, and cerebrovascular diseases, respectively], and lower risk of respiratory diseases such as pneumonia, other acute lower respiratory infections, asthma, and hypoxemia [HR: 0.302 (95 % CI: 0.273–0.333), 0.811 (0.686–0.958), 0.791 (0.735–0.850), and 0.392 (0.338–0.455), respectively]. The vaccinated reinfection cohort showed no significant differences in medical utilization, circulatory diseases, or respiratory conditions but had a higher risk of breathing abnormalities. breathing abnormalities [HR: 1.195 (95 % CI:1.087–1.313)]. Conclusions: The individuals who experienced reinfection exhibited milder short-term sequelae in the circulatory and respiratory systems. Vaccine administration protects against cardiovascular or respiratory systems.

Background: Prior to 2022, Taiwan had effectively contained the domestic COVID-19 epidemic. However, during 2022, the country encountered multiple large outbreaks of COVID-19, with patients experiencing their first or second infection (reinfection) were both predominantly caused by the Omicron variant. Data are lacking on the risk factors and mortality of COVID-19 reinfection in Omicron era. Methods: In this retrospective population-based cohort study, we recruited COVID-19 patients with their first episode confirmed between April 1, 2022 and June 11, 2022. A reinfection patient was defined as an individual who infected again by SARS-CoV-2 with an interval of more than 90 days. Demographic characteristics, severity of underlying diseases, and vaccination status were adjusted to identify risk factors for reinfection and to further evaluate the hazard of all-cause mortality within 30 days between reinfection and non-reinfection patients. Results: There were 28,588 reinfection patients matched with 142,940 non-reinfection patients included in this study. We found that being female, younger in age, having more severe underlying diseases, and not being fully vaccinated against COVID-19 were risk factors for reinfection. After adjusting for confounding factors, reinfection patients were at a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality within 30 days (aHR = 4.29, 95% CI: 3.00–6.12, p

Tuberculosis is a pressing global health concern, particularly pervasive in many developing nations. This study investigates the influence of treatment failure on tuberculosis control strategies, incorporating vaccination interventions using a deterministic compartmental epidemiological model. Mathematical analysis unveils disease-free and endemic equilibrium points, with the control reproduction number determined using next-generation methods. Identifying endemic equilibrium points and determining the control reproduction number provide essential metrics for assessing the effectiveness of control strategies and guiding policy decisions. The model exhibits a backward bifurcation phenomenon, leading to multiple endemic equilibria despite a reproduction number below one due to reinfection. Sensitivity analysis using Latin Hypercube Sampling/Partial Rank Correlation Coefficient elucidates parameter impacts on the control reproduction number. Vaccination efficacy is crucial for quality and validity, with superior quality and longer validity yielding more significant effects. While reinfection may not directly affect the reproduction number, its influence is pivotal in determining tuberculosis persistence or extinction. This study underscores the intricate interplay of factors in tuberculosis control strategies, providing insights vital for effective interventions and policy formulation.

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

Objectives: The predictors of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection are unclear. We examined predictors of reinfection with pre-Omicron and Omicron variants among COVID-19-recovered individuals. Methods: Randomly selected COVID-19-recovered patients (N = 1004) who donated convalescent plasma during 2020 were interviewed between August 2021 and March 2022 regarding COVID-19 vaccination and laboratory-proven reinfection. The sera from 224 (22.3%) participants were tested for antispike (anti-S) immunoglobulin G and neutralizing antibodies. Results: The participants’ median age was 31.1 years (78.6% males). The overall reinfection incidence rate was 12.8%; 2.7% versus 21.6% for the pre-Omicron (mostly Delta) versus Omicron variants. Negative associations were found between fever during the first illness and pre-Omicron reinfection: relative risk 0.29 (95% confidence interval 0.09-0.94), high anti-N level at first illness and Omicron reinfection: 0.53 (0.33-0.85), and overall reinfection: 0.56 (0.37-0.84), as well as between subsequent COVID-19 vaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine and pre-Omicron 0.15 (0.07-0.32), Omicron 0.48 (0.25-0.45), and overall reinfections 0.38 (0.25-0.58). These variables significantly correlated with immunoglobulin G anti-S follow-up levels. High pre-existing anti-S binding and neutralizing antibody levels against the SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan and Alpha strains predicted protection against Omicron reinfections. Conclusion: Strong immune responses after the first COVID-19 infection and subsequent vaccination with the BNT162b2 vaccine provided cross-protection against reinfections with the Delta and Omicron variants.

Background: Mpox re-emerged worldwide with the multi-country outbreaks that occurred in May 2022, threatening the public health of human beings. Methods: This rapid systematic review summarized mpox reinfection cases documented. Electronic databases (PubMed, MedRxiv, and Social Science Research Network) were searched without time limitation, using the keywords “mpox,” “monkeypox,” & “reinfection,” “reoccur,” “reoccurrence,” “episode,” and “relapse”. All laboratory-confirmed cases of mpox reinfection published in the literature were included in this study. Results: A total of seven publications (nine cases) from Africa, Europe, and South America were included. All mpox reinfection cases were male, with a median age of 36; 88.89% of cases had unprotected sexual behaviors with other males before each illness episode. The average onset interval between the two episodes was about 4 months. Perianal lesions and lymphadenopathy were major symptoms in both episodes, and no differences in clinical severity were reported between the two episodes. The mean duration of the two episodes was approximately 22 days and 13 days, respectively; which the mean duration of the second episode was shorter than the first infection (t = 2.17, p = 0.0487). Sexually transmitted infections were commonly concurrent among most cases, accounting for 55.6% and 77.8% in the two episodes, respectively. Full vaccination against mpox was rare among reinfection cases. Conclusion: A second infection is possible even in a short period. Reinforcing monitoring, reducing high-risk behaviors, and heightening health education regarding mpox for high-risk populations are crucial to limit mpox spread, including persons with a history of mpox infection.

Background: Recurrent acute cholangitis (RAC) is a relatively uncommon entity that presents significant management difficulties. We present the case of a patient with RAC in whom the number of episodes was reduced after a novel therapeutic procedure. Case report: A 93-year-old male who in June 2019 was admitted for chills without fever, shivering, epigastric abdominal pain and moderate jaundice. Both abdominal ultrasound and CT scan showed intrahepatic and extrahepatic duct dilatation up to the papilla with no evidence of mass at that level. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was performed and abundant biliary sludge was removed. E. coli was identified as the cause of several of the episodes. Some isolates were shown to produce extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL). Papillotomy was performed and plastic prosthesis and later a metallic prosthesis were implanted. Several months later a surgical bypass of the biliary tract was performed due to persistent episodes of cholangitis. When the chronic suppressive antibiotic treatment subsequently instituted to prevent new episodes of cholangitis failed, it was decided to perform a fecal microbiota transplant from a healthy donor and to suspend the chronic suppressive treatment. Since then, she has not presented new episodes of RAC for more than 10 months of clinical follow-up. BLEE-producing E. coli in the gastrointestinal tract could not be eradicated. Comment: Chronic colonization of the biliary tract by certain enterobacteria such as E. coli has been identified as a relevant pathogenic factor in cases of RAC. FMT may be a promising tool to improve the clinical course of patients with RAC.

Several possible mpox reinfections have been reported, however, the debate on whether these are confirmed reinfections remains open.A 30-year-old male living with HIV and a history of single-dose mpox vaccination, first diagnosed with mpox in September 2022, presented with genital ulcers in March 2023, testing positive for mpox virus. Real-time polymerase chain reaction revealed the presence of viral DNA with cycle threshold values of 24 and 25, respectively. Whole genome sequencing and phylogenetic approach allowed us to classify these viruses as Clade IIb lineage B.1 and Clade IIb lineage B.1.4, respectively. Twelve nucleotide differences were identified. The observed difference was higher than the estimate of mutations/genome/year described.These data confirm that mpox reinfection is possible and reinforces current vaccination campaigns.

Objectives: We investigated the reinfection rate of vaccinated or convalescent immunized SARS-CoV-2 in 952 expatriate workers with SARS-CoV-2 serological antibody (Ab) patterns and surrogate T cell memory at recruitment and follow-up. Methods: Trimeric spike, nucleocapsid, and neutralizing Abs were measured, along with a T cell stimulation assay, targeting SARS-CoV-2 memory in clusters of differentiation (CD) 4+ and CD8+ T cells. The subjects were then followed up for reinfection for up to 6 months. Results: The seroprevalence positivity at enrollment was greater than 99%. The T cell reactivity in this population was 38.2%. Of the 149 (15.9%) participants that were reinfected during the follow-up period (74.3%) had nonreactive T cells at enrollment. Those who had greater than 100 binding Ab units/ml increase from the median concentration of antispike immunoglobulin G Abs had a 6% reduction in the risk of infection. Those who were below the median concentration had a 78% greater risk of infection. Conclusion: Significant immune protection from reinfection was observed in those who retained T cell activation memory. Additional protection was observed when the antispike was greater than the median value.

الملخص: على عكس الأوبئة في الماضي، شهد تفشي مرض كوفيد-19 الذي ينتقل بسرعة في جميع أنحاء العالم نهجا مختلفا تماما للضوابط والتدابير التي تم تنفيذها في جميع البلدان المتضررة. لا يزال عدم فهم الطبيعة الأساسية لتفشي المرض يجعل من كوفيد-19 تحديا لكل من ممارسي الرعاية الصحية والمجتمع العلمي. لا تزال التحديات التي تواجه تطوير اللقاح وتقييمه، والخيارات العلاجية الحصرية، وعلاج البلازما في فترة النقاهة، ومناعة القطيع، فضلا عن ظهور العدوى مرة أخرى والمتغيرات الجديدة، هي العقبات الرئيسية أمام مكافحة كوفيد-19. تناقش هذه المراجعة هذه التحديات في إدارة كوفيد-19 بشكل مفصل وتسلط الضوء على الآليات اللازمة لمساعدتنا على فهم هذا الوباء بشكل أفضل. Abstract: Unlike pandemics in the past, the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which rapidly spread worldwide, was met with a different approach to control and measures implemented across affected countries. The lack of understanding of the fundamental nature of the outbreak continues to make COVID-19 challenging to manage for both healthcare practitioners and the scientific community. Challenges to vaccine development and evaluation, current therapeutic options, convalescent plasma therapy, herd immunity, and the emergence of reinfection and new variants remain the major obstacles to combating COVID-19. This review discusses these challenges in the management of COVID-19 at length and highlights the mechanisms needed to provide better understanding of this pandemic.

Objectives: We examined the incremental protection and durability of infection-acquired immunity against Omicron infection in individuals with hybrid immunity in Ontario, Canada. Methods: We followed up 6 million individuals with at least one multiplex reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction test before November 21, 2021, until an Omicron infection. Protection via infection-acquired immunity was assessed by comparing Omicron infection risk between previously infected individuals and those without documented infection under different vaccination scenarios and stratified by time since the last infection or vaccination. Results: A previous infection was associated with 68% (95% CI 61-73) and 43% (95% CI 27-56) increased protection against Omicron infection in individuals with two and three doses, respectively. Among individuals with two-dose vaccination, the incremental protection of infection-induced immunity decreased from 79% (95% CI 75-81) within 3 months after vaccination or infection to 27% (95% CI 14-37) at 9-11 months. In individuals with three-dose vaccination, it decreased from 57% (95% CI 50-63) within 3 months to 37% (95% CI 19-51) at 3-5 months after vaccination or infection. Conclusion: Previous SARS-CovV-2 infections provide added cross-variant immunity to vaccination. Given the limited durability of infection-acquired protection in individuals with hybrid immunity, its influence on shield-effects at the population level and reinfection risks at the individual level may be limited.

Objectives: To investigate the seroprevalence of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections in young children, the correlation between RSV antibody levels in maternal and cord serum, and to provide evidence of RSV reinfection in Thai children after primary infections. Methods: Serum samples were collected from 302 mothers and 291 children between 2015 and 2021. Maternal and cord blood were collected at birth. Serial serum samples of children were collected at the ages of 2, 7, 18, 19, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months and the presence of anti-RSV immunoglobulin G (IgG) was tested using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results: The cord: maternal serum antibody ratio was 1.09 (95% confidence interval 1.08-1.11). Although >90% of babies at birth were seropositive through transplacental transfer, antibody levels gradually declined, with the highest seronegative rate (91.9%) at 7 months of age. Subsequently, anti-RSV IgG levels increased with age, most likely due to natural infection. One-third of the children showed evidence of reinfection as determined by seroconversion of anti-RSV IgG or increased titers of at least 50 relative units/ml. Conclusion: Waning of RSV antibodies in infants is rapid, and RSV infection subsequently increases anti-RSV IgG titers. RSV vaccination in children before the age of 7 months should be recommended.

Objectives: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination has been shown to reduce infection severity; however, the reinfection frequency among unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, and fully vaccinated individuals remains unclear. This study aims to elucidate the rates of and factors associated with such occurrences. Methods: This retrospective epidemiological report included 1362 COVID-19 reinfection cases in Bahrain between April 2020 and July 2021. We analyzed differences in disease severity and reinfection characteristics among various vaccination statuses: fully vaccinated, interrupted vaccination, one-dose vaccination, postreinfection vaccination, and unvaccinated. Results: Reinfection cases increased from zero per month in April-June 2020 to a sharp peak of 579 in May 2021. A significantly larger proportion of reinfected individuals were male (60.3%, P

Summary: Background: Protection against SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic infection and severe COVID-19 of previous infection, mRNA two-dose vaccination, mRNA three-dose vaccination, and hybrid immunity of previous infection and vaccination were investigated in Qatar for the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants. Methods: Six national, matched, test-negative, case-control studies were conducted between January 18 and December 18, 2021 on a sample of 239,120 PCR-positive tests and 6,103,365 PCR-negative tests. Findings: Effectiveness of previous infection against Alpha, Beta, and Delta reinfection was 89.5% (95% CI: 85.5–92.3%), 87.9% (95% CI: 85.4–89.9%), and 90.0% (95% CI: 86.7–92.5%), respectively. Effectiveness of two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination against Alpha, Beta, and Delta infection was 90.5% (95% CI, 83.9–94.4%), 80.5% (95% CI: 79.0–82.0%), and 58.1% (95% CI: 54.6–61.3%), respectively. Effectiveness of three-dose BNT162b2 vaccination against Delta infection was 91.7% (95% CI: 87.1–94.7%). Effectiveness of hybrid immunity of previous infection and two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination was 97.4% (95% CI: 95.4–98.5%) against Beta infection and 94.5% (95% CI: 92.8–95.8%) against Delta infection. Effectiveness of previous infection and three-dose BNT162b2 vaccination was 98.1% (95% CI: 85.7–99.7%) against Delta infection. All five forms of immunity had >90% protection against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 regardless of variant. Similar effectiveness estimates were observed for mRNA-1273. A mathematical model accurately predicted hybrid immunity protection by assuming that the individual effects of previous infection and vaccination acted independently. Interpretation: Hybrid immunity, offering the strongest protection, was mathematically predicted by assuming that the immunities obtained from previous infection and vaccination act independently, without synergy or redundancy. Funding: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and the Biomathematics Research Core, both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Programme, Qatar University Biomedical Research Center, and Qatar University Internal Grant ID QUCG-CAS-23/24-114.

We report a cluster of 12 cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection in a long-term care facility in South Korea. There were two outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the facility at the beginning and end of October 2021, respectively. All residents in the facility were screened for SARS-CoV-2 infection using RT-PCR as part of the investigation of the second outbreak. Twelve residents, who had infection confirmed during the first outbreak, were found to be re-positive for RT-PCR test at the second outbreak. 8 Of 12 RT-PCR re-positive cases were confirmed as reinfections based on investigation through the whole genome sequencing, viral culture, and serological analysis, despite of the short interval between the first and second outbreaks (29–33 days) and a history of full vaccination for 7 of the 12 re-positive cases. This study suggests that decreased immunity and underlying health condition in older adults makes them susceptible to reinfection, highlighting the importance of prevention and control measures regardless of vaccination status in long-term care settings.

Background: Epidemiological characteristic profile of the reinfection of the influenza virus has not been well described. Methods: This study included all influenza cases of Guangxi, China from January 2011–December 2019 that were recorded in the National Notifiable Infectious Disease Reporting Information System (NIDRIS) within 24 hours after diagnosis. Results: A total of 53,605.6 person-months and the median time of 8.7 months were observed for reinfection. The median age at the first influenza virus infection was 4.5 (interquartile range=2.0–7.5) years. The cumulative reinfection incidence was 2% at 6 months, 4% at 12 months, 5% at 24 months, and 7% after 59 months. Living in the rural area (hazard ratio [HR]=1.37 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-1.45]), age ≤6 years (HR=11.43 [95% CI, 9.47–13.80]) were independent risk factors associated with influenza reinfection. Among 49 patients experiencing two laboratory tests, 32 patients (65.3%) were found to be infected with different virus types. The interval between two consecutive laboratory-confirmed episodes of the four groups differed (p=0.148): the maximum was 72.9 months and the minimum was 1.2 months. Conclusions: The reinfection of the influenza virus in Guangxi was independently and positively associated with living the rural area and younger age. The unusually high frequency of reinfection points to a need for further prospective longitudinal studies to better investigate the sufficient impact on different subtypes.

Background: There are sparse longitudinal data on SARS-CoV-2 infection after previous infection and after partial or full vaccination. Methods: This study of a cohort of healthcare workers used Kaplan-Meier analysis with appropriate definition of events and censoring and used Cox models to assess outcomes, with data cut-off on June 18, 2021. Results: A total of 1806 individuals with median age of 32 (18-64) years, 1483 (82.1%) with at least one vaccine dose, 1085 (60.1%) with 2 vaccine doses, 408 (22.6%) with at least one episode of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 6 (1.47%) with 2 episodes of infection were included in the analysis. At median follow-up of 38.4 weeks after first SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=408), the 52-week probability of reinfection was 2.2% (95% CI, 1.0-4.91%); and at median follow-up of 13.3 weeks after second dose, the 16-week probability of breakthrough infection was 5.6% (95% CI, 4.33-7.23%), which was significantly higher among those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection versus with previous infection (6.4% vs 1.8%, p=0.016, adjusted Cox HR=3.49, 95% CI, 1.09-11.20, p=0.036) and females versus males (7.9% vs 3.8%, p=0.007, adjusted Cox HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19-3.56, p=0.01). Conclusions: There was low probability of reinfection after previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and higher vaccine breakthrough infections among females and those without previous infection.

Objectives: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, cases of reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 have been reported, raising additional public health concerns. SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was assessed in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Tunisia because they are at the greatest exposure to infection by different variants. Methods: We conducted whole-genome sequencing of the viral RNA from clinical specimens collected during the initial infection and the suspected reinfection from 4 HCWs, who were working at the Habib Bourguiba University Hospital (Sfax, Tunisia) and retested positive for SARS-CoV-2 through reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) after recovery from a first infection. A total of 8 viral RNAs from the patients’ respiratory specimens were obtained, which allowed us to characterize the differences between viral genomes from initial infection and positive retest.The serology status for total Ig, IgG, and IgM against SARS-CoV-2 was also determined and followed after the first infection. Results: We confirmed through whole-genome sequencing of the viral samples that all 4 cases experienced a reinfection event. The interval between the 2 infection events ranged between 45 and 141 days, and symptoms were milder in the second infection for 2 patients and more severe for the remaining 2 patients. Reinfection occurred in all 4 patients despite the presence of antibodies in 3 of them. Conclusion: This study adds to the rapidly growing evidence of COVID-19 reinfection, where viral sequences were used to confirm infection by distinct isolates of SARS-CoV-2 in HCWs. These findings suggest that individuals who are exposed to different SARS-CoV-2 variants might not acquire sufficiently protective immunity through natural infection and emphasize the necessity of their vaccination and the regular follow-up of their immune status both in quantitative and qualitative terms.

Background: The purpose of this meta-analysis (PROSPERO number: CRD42021243204) is to perform extensive and penetrating analyses on the risk factors associated with reactivation or reinfection. Methods: We searched PubMed and Embase using search terms. Risk factors (including gender, length of time between first onset and recurrent diagnosis, extrapulmonary tuberculosis, sputum smear, pulmonary cavity, Beijing family strains, diabetes, HIV infection, history of imprisonment, and immigration) were analyzed. The pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with STATA 15.1. Heterogeneity was evaluated by I2 and P values. Results: The meta-analysis included 25 studies with a total of 1,477 recurrent patients. After subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and testing for publication bias, it was concluded that time spanning less than two years (RR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.33-1.85) was a risk factor for endogenous reactivation, whereas coinfection with HIV (RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.63-0.83), Beijing family genotype (RR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.32-0.67), history of imprisonment (RR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.16-0.81), and immigration (RR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.53-0.82) were associated with exogenous reinfection. Conclusions: The recurrence interval is a risk factor for the endogenous reactivation of tuberculosis. Infection with Beijing family strains, coinfection with HIV, imprisonment, and immigration contribute to the risk of exogenous reinfection.

We describe a case of prolonged COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant in a fully vaccinated healthcare worker, 387 days after an infection caused by lineage B.1.1.33. Infections were confirmed by whole-genome sequencing and corroborated by the detection of neutralizing antibodies in convalescent serum samples. Considering the permanent exposure of this healthcare worker to SARS-CoV-2, the waning immunity after the first infection, the low efficacy of the inactivated vaccine at preventing COVID-19, the immune escape of the Gamma variant (VOC), and the burden of post-COVID syndrome, this individual would have benefited from an additional dose of a heterologous vaccine.

Background: As vaccine supply and access remain limited in many parts of the world, understanding the duration of protection from reinfection after natural infection is important. Methods: Distinct individuals testing positive and negative for SARS-CoV-2 between March 6, 2020, and August 31, 2020, in Kentucky, USA, were identified using the Kentucky National Electronic Disease Surveillance System. Individuals were followed for occurrence of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 from 91 days after their initial test result through December 31, 2020. Protection from reinfection provided by a prior infection was calculated and additional analyses evaluated impact of age, sex, symptom status, long-term care facility connection, testing occurrence and frequency, and time from initial infection. Results: The protective effect from prior infection was 80.3% (95% CI, 78.2%–82.2%) for those aged 20–59 years and 67.4% (95% CI, 62.8%–71.4%) for those aged ≥60 years. At 30-day time periods through 270 days (with limited exceptions), protection was estimated to be >75% for those aged 20–59 years and >65% for those aged ≥60 years. Factors associated with repeat positive testing included a connection to a long-term care facility, duration of potential exposure, and absence of symptoms during initial infection. Conclusions: Natural infection provides substantial and persistent immunologic protection for a period of several months for most individuals, although subpopulations may be at greater risk of repeat positive testing and potential poor outcomes associated with reinfection. These subgroups include individuals aged ≥60 years, residents and staff of long-term care facilities, and those who have mild or asymptomatic illness with initial infection. Continued emphasis on vaccination and infection prevention and control strategies remains critically important in reducing the risk of reinfection and associated severe outcomes for these groups.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is spreading worldwide, causing unprecedented epidemic peaks due to its transmissibility and immune evasion. We searched in the archive of the Regional Microbiology Laboratory (Umbria, Italy) for immediate reinfection (i.e. infection occurring 25–60 days from primary infection) among 454,764 RT-PCR tests from 261,217 individuals. Lineage heterogeneity was assessed by S gene target failure phenomenon or whole genome sequencing. We found that BA.1 Omicron variant may cause immediate reinfection of patients just recovered from Delta infection. Immediate reinfection was not observed for any other combination of variants, including Delta over Alpha variant and BA.2 over BA.1 Omicron lineage.

Background: There have been over 670 million confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection globally, resulting in over 6.87 million deaths. With approximately 0.1 %-6.8 % experiencing reinfection. This retrospective cohort study aimed to compare the risk of short-term circulatory and respiratory sequelae between SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and initial infection, and assess the impact of vaccination., Method: Data from the TriNetX US Collaborative network (2020-2022) were used to create two cohorts based on reinfection status. The main outcome assessed were medical utilization, circulatory and respiratory symptoms, and circulatory and respiratory diseases. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the risks between two cohorts. Four subgroup analyses (vaccination status, age, sex, race) and six sensitivity analyses (rigorous definition, modified exclusion criteria, treatment, different COVID-19 variants timeline, address survivorship bias, and E-value calculation) were also conducted., Results: The reinfection cohort showed a significant reduction in medical utilization [ Hazard ratio, HR: 0.867, (95 % confidence interval, CI:0.839-0.896) for hospitalization, 0.488 (0.418-0.570) for critical care services, and 0.476 (0.360-0.629) for mechanical ventilation], lower risk of circulatory diseases [ HR: 0.701 (95 % CI:0.637-0.772), 0.695 (0.583-0.829), 0.660 (0.605-0.719), 0.741 (0.644-0.854), 0.614 (0.535-0.705), and 0.758 (0.656-0.876) for ischemic heart disease, inflammatory heart disease, dysrhythmias, venous thromboembolism, other cardiac disorders, and cerebrovascular diseases, respectively], and lower risk of respiratory diseases such as pneumonia, other acute lower respiratory infections, asthma, and hypoxemia [HR: 0.302 (95 % CI: 0.273-0.333), 0.811 (0.686-0.958), 0.791 (0.735-0.850), and 0.392 (0.338-0.455), respectively]. The vaccinated reinfection cohort showed no significant differences in medical utilization, circulatory diseases, or respiratory conditions but had a higher risk of breathing abnormalities. breathing abnormalities [HR: 1.195 (95 % CI:1.087-1.313)]., Conclusions: The individuals who experienced reinfection exhibited milder short-term sequelae in the circulatory and respiratory systems. Vaccine administration protects against cardiovascular or respiratory systems., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: This work was supported by funding from Chung Shan Medical University Hospital (grant number CSH-2022-A-023, CSH-2023-C-005). The funders had no role in designing and conducting the study, the collection, analysis, interpretation of the data, or the approval of the manuscript., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Understanding the association of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection with subsequent reinfection has public health relevance. Objective: To explore COVID-19 severity and SARS-CoV-2 infection and reinfection rates. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Boston, Massachusetts, during the first COVID-19 surge (01/01/2020–05/31/2020; Period-1) and after the first surge (06/01/2020–02/28/2021; Period-2); Period-2 included the second surge (11/01/2020–02/28/2021). Participants: Patients in an academic medical center and six community health centers who received a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 between 01/01/2020 and 05/31/2020 or SARS-CoV-2 testing between 01/01/2020 and 02/28/2021. Measurements: COVID-19 severity was compared between Period-1 and Period-2. Poisson regression models adjusted for demographic variables, medical comorbidities, and census tract were used to assess reinfection risk among patients with COVID-19 diagnoses or SARS-CoV-2 testing during Period-1 and additional SARS-CoV-2 testing during Period-2. Results: Among 142,047 individuals receiving SARS-CoV-2 testing or clinical diagnoses during the study period, 15.8% were infected. Among COVID-19 patients, 22.5% visited the emergency department, 13% were hospitalized, and 4% received critical care. Healthcare utilization was higher during Period-1 than Period-2 (22.9% vs. 18.9% emergency department use, 14.7% vs. 9.9% hospitalization, 5.5% vs. 2.5% critical care; p

Introduction: We aimed to determine the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among individuals with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection versus vaccinated individuals. Methods: In March 2020, a SARS-CoV-2 testing company began routinely screening its workforce for SARS-CoV-2 with a PCR test. On December 15, 2020, vaccination with either the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines became available. Routine screening has continued through July 2021. We compared the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection between people who were SARS-CoV-2 naïve and unvaccinated, people with prior COVID-19 without vaccination, and people vaccinated without prior COVID-19. Incidence in 100 person-years with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) was calculated with the Poisson Exact equation. The incidence rate ratio (IRR), the ratio of confirmed COVID-19 cases per 100 person-years of follow-up with 95% CIs, was used as a measure of association between groups. Analyses were performed on StataSE. Results: The median age of employees was 29.0 years (interquartile range: 23.6, 39.9). During the observation period, 258 SARS-CoV-2 incident infections were identified. The naïve, unvaccinated group had a SARS-CoV-2 incidence of 25.9 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 22.8-29.3). The previously infected, unvaccinated group had an incidence of 0 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 0-5.0). The vaccinated group had an incidence of 1.6 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 0.04-4.2). Conclusion: We found a strong association between prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 with either the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines and the reduced incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection when compared with those naïve and/or unvaccinated to SARS-CoV-2.

Background: The recent ongoing outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), still is an unsolved problem with a growing rate of infected cases and mortality worldwide. The novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is targeting the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor and mostly causes a respiratory illness. Although acquired and resistance immunity is one of the most important aspects of alleviating the trend of the current pandemic; however, there is still a big gap of knowledge regarding the infection process, immunopathogenesis, recovery, and reinfection. Aim of Review: To answer the questions regarding “the potential and probability of reinfection in COVID-19 infected cases” or “the efficiency and duration of SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced immunity against reinfection” we critically evaluated the current reports on SARS-CoV-2 immunity and reinfection with special emphasis on comparative studies using animal models that generalize their finding about protection and reinfection. Also, the contribution of humoral immunity in the process of COVID-19 recovery and the role of ACE2 in virus infectivity and pathogenesis has been discussed. Furthermore, innate and cellular immunity and inflammatory responses in the disease and recovery conditions are reviewed and an overall outline of immunologic aspects of COVID-19 progression and recovery in three different stages are presented. Finally, we categorized the infected cases into four different groups based on the acquired immunity and the potential for reinfection. Key Scientific Concepts of Review: In this review paper, we proposed a new strategy to predict the potential of reinfection in each identified category. This classification may help to distribute resources more meticulously to determine: who needs to be serologically tested for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies, what percentage of the population is immune to the virus, and who needs to be vaccinated.

Objectives: To date, reported SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases are mainly from strains belonging to different clades. As the pandemic advances, a few lineages have become dominant in certain areas leading to reinfections by similar strains. Here, we report a reinfection case within the same clade of the initial infection in a symptomatic 28-year-old-male in Quito-Ecuador. Methods: Infection was detected by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, and immune response evaluated by antibody testing. Whole-genome sequencing was performed and phylogenetic analysis conducted to determine relatedness. Results: Both the infection and the reinfection strains were assigned as Nextstrain 20B, Pangolin lineage B.1.1 and GISAID clade O. Our analysis indicated 4–6 fold more nucleotide changes than are expected for reactivation or persistence compared with the natural rate of SARS-CoV-2 mutation (∼2–3 nucleotide changes per month), thus supporting reinfection. Furthermore, approximately 3 months after the second infection, COVID-19 antibodies were not detectable in the patient, suggesting potential vulnerability to a third infection. Conclusions: Our results showed evidence of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection within the same clade in Ecuador, indicating that previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 does not guarantee immunity in all cases.

We report a case of reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 with the second virus harboring amino acid changes in the Spike protein (141-143del, D215A, ins215AGY, L452R, D614G), orf1a, helicase, orf3a, and Nucleocapside. The virus associated with the reinfection, from an endemic lineage containing the S:L452R immune escape mutation, was circulating in Panama at the time.

Summary: Background: The level of protection after a SARS-CoV-2 infection against reinfection and COVID-19 disease remains important with much of the world still unvaccinated. Methods: Analysing nationwide, individually referable, Danish register data including RT-PCR-test results, we conducted a cohort study using Cox regression to compare SARS-CoV-2 infection rates before and after a primary infection among still unvaccinated individuals, adjusting for sex, age, comorbidity and residency region. Estimates of protection against infection were calculated as 1 minus the hazard ratio. Estimates of protection against symptomatic infections and infections leading to hospitalisation were also calculated. The prevalence of infections classified as symptomatic or asymptomatic was compared for primary infections and reinfections. The study also assessed protection against each of the main viral variants after a primary infection with an earlier variant by restricting follow-up time to distinct, mutually exclusive periods during which each variant dominated. Findings: Until 1 July 2021 the estimated protection against reinfection was 83.4% (95%CI: 82.2–84.6%); but lower for the 65+ year-olds (72.2%; 95%CI: 53.2–81.0%). Moderately higher estimates were found for protection against symptomatic disease, 88.3% overall (95%CI: 85.9–90.3%). First-time cases who reported no symptoms were more likely to experience a reinfection (odds ratio: 1.48; 95%CI: 1.35–1.62). By autumn 2021, when infections were almost exclusively caused by the Delta variant, the estimated protection following a recent first infection was 91.3% (95%CI: 89.7–92.7%) compared to 71.4% (95%CI: 66.9–75.3%) after a first infection over a year earlier. With Omicron, a first infection with an earlier variant in the past 3-6 months gave an estimated 51.0% (95%CI: 50.1–52.0%) protection, whereas a first infection longer than 12 months earlier provided only 19.0% (95%CI: 17.2–20.5%) protection. Protection by an earlier variant-infection against hospitalisation due to a new infection was estimated at: 86.6% (95%CI: 46.3–96.7%) for Alpha, 97.2% (95%CI: 89.0–99.3%) for Delta, and 69.8% (95%CI: 51.5–81.2%) for the Omicron variant. Interpretation: SARS-CoV-2 infection offered a high level of sustained protection against reinfection, comparable with that offered by vaccines, but decreased with the introduction of new main virus variants; dramatically so when Omicron appeared. Protection was lower among the elderly but appeared more pronounced following symptomatic compared to asymptomatic infections. The level of estimated protection against serious disease was somewhat higher than that against infection and possibly longer lasting. Decreases in protection against reinfection, seemed primarily to be driven by viral evolution. Funding: None.

Recurrent positivity in a patient with COVID-19 may be due to various reasons, not necessarily reinfection. There is concern about the occurrence frequency of reinfection. Five databases and a preprint/preprint repository were searched. All case reports, case series, and observational studies were included. Bias was assessed for each study with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tool and reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA-2020). After eligibility, 77 studies were included for qualitative synthesis (52 case reports, 21 case series, and four case-controls; 1131 patients included). Of these, 16 studies described a second contact with the SARS-CoV-2 positive case, five studies described healthcare profession-related infection, ten studies described that the source of reinfection was likely to be from the community, one study described travel-related infection, nine studies described vulnerability-related infection due to comorbidity. The mean number of days from discharge or negative test to reinfection ranged from 23.3 to 57.6 days across the different included studies. The risk of bias for all case report/series studies was moderate/high. For observational studies, the risk of bias was low. Reinfection of patients with COVID-19 occurs between the first and second month after the first infection, but beyond, and 90 days have been proposed as a point to begin to consider it. The main factor for reinfection is contact with COVID-19 positive cases.

Reinfection and reactivation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have recently raised public health pressing concerns in the fight against the current pandemic globally. In this study, we propose a new dynamic model to study the transmission of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The model incorporates possible relapse, reinfection and environmental contribution to assess the combined effects on the overall transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2. The model’s local asymptotic stability is analyzed qualitatively. We derive the formula for the basic reproduction number (R0) and final size epidemic relation, which are vital epidemiological quantities that are used to reveal disease transmission status and guide control strategies. Furthermore, the model is validated using the COVID-19 reported situations in Saudi Arabia. Moreover, sensitivity analysis is examined by implementing a partial rank correlation coefficient technique to obtain the ultimate rank model parameters to control or mitigate the pandemic effectively. Finally, we employ a standard Euler technique for numerical simulations of the model to elucidate the influence of some crucial parameters on the overall transmission dynamics. Our results highlight that contact rate, hospitalization rate, and reactivation rate are the fundamental parameters that need particular emphasis for the prevention, mitigation and control.

Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is a rare phenomenon. To date, there has been some cases reported from countries such as United States, Ecuador, Hong Kong, the Netherlands and Belgium. This case report presents the first case of reinfection from Saudi Arabia, and probably the first dental student to have been re-infected with COVID-19. A 24-year-old male dental student presents with reinfection after a period of three months since he was first infected with COVID-19. The signs and symptoms reported by the patient were similar in both instances, except that he developed fever only at the time of reinfection. The infection and reinfection were confirmed with a RT-PCR test reports. This report highlights how it is necessary to continue to observe all the prescriptions recently indicated in the literature in order to avoid new contagion for all health workers after healed from covid-19 or asymptomatic positive, since as seen sometimes the infection does not ensures complete immunity in 100% of cases.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-cov-2), first described in December 2019, has now infected more than 28 million cases with almost one million deaths. Reinfection is not definitely established however disease recurrence is increasingly reported. Cases presentation: Four patients presented with a second episode of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) occurring 27–85 following their first illness. The initial episode was mild or asymptomatic while the second attack was severe requiring hospital admission. All four patients had a SARS-CoV-2 PCR test positive in the second episode. The chest-X-ray and/or computerized tomography (CT) scan showed bilateral alveolar shadows. Furthermore, the inflammatory markers were raised in the four patients. Three patients recovered following treatment with favipravir in addition tocilizumab and/or dexamethasone. Conclusion: Covid19 reinfection Recurrent COVID-19 is increasingly reported. However; other etiologies including superadded infection or pulmonary embolism should be ruled out, particularly if recurrence occurs less than 3 weeks.

The Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) includes two main species of non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), M. avium and Mycobacterium intracellulare. These can cause serious disease, especially in immunocompromised patients. Little information is available concerning genetic diversity of NTM. We used multilocus sequence typing (MLST) based on a highly discriminative gene set to analyze MAC serially isolated from patients to determine the rate of MAC reinfection. Genomic DNA was sequenced from 49 MAC isolates (15 cases comprised of 11 true infections and 4 instances of colonization). More than half of the MAC isolates tested were found to be multidrug resistant. The discriminatory power was assessed of 24 house-keeping genes (fusA, atpD, pheT, glnA, topA, secA, argH, glpK, murC, cya, pta, rrl, rrs, hsp65, rpoB, 16S-23S rRNA ITS, recF, lipT, pepB, gnd, aspB, groEL, sodA and est) previously used for genotyping of MAC and other NTM. Seven genes (fusA, secA, rpoB, hsp65, 16S rRNA, 23S rRNA, 16S-23S rRNA ITS) had a discriminatory power index higher than 0.9 and were included in the optimized set that we used. This set was significantly better for genotyping and diagnosis of MAC than previously used 4-gene, 5-gene and 9-gene sets. MLST using our 7-gene set indicated that the rate of reinfection was 54.55% (6/11 cases). Persistent infections (n = 5 cases, 45.45%) were found. A changing of clone in the same patient was found in 1/4 (25%) of the colonization cases. Two small clusters of possible MAC transmission between humans were found. Our study demonstrated that the high frequency of apparent treatment failure of MAC might be artefactual, as a consequence of a high rate of MAC reinfection in Thai population. Our useful highly discriminative gene set for MAC species and clonal strain analysis could be further applied for the diagnosis and patient management.

SUMMARY: The main condemnation reason in the slaughter of German conventional broiler fIocks is cellulitis. This disease is primarily caused by the bacterial pathogen Escherichia coli. Biosecurity is the most important aspect to avoid spreading of diseases, but, increasing farm sizes and a close proximity of broiler houses complicate compliance with appropriate measures. This study aimed to identify the most efficient biosecurity factors for controlling cellulitis in broiler chickens by using a comprehensive questionnaire. Data of the biosecurity management from broiler farms were compared to condemnation ratios of the broiler flocks. It was found that using appropriate farm-specific clothing with changing of shoes and an adequate cleaning of the broiler houses after each grow out period helped to improve outcomes regarding total condemnation ratios as well as condemnation ratios due to cellulitis.

A 7-year-old cystic fibrosis patient with increased cough, new pulmonary infiltrate, and declining pulmonary function was diagnosed with clarithromycin resistant Mycobacterium abscessus infection. Treatment was initiated with clofazimine, linezolid and cefoxitin; she responded well to therapy and achieved microbiological clearance after completion of 12-month treatment. One year later, she had re-emergence of worsening symptoms and her sputum culture again grew clarithromycin resistant M. abscessus. Using a laboratory developed whole genome sequencing (WGS) test, the bacterium was determined to be the same strain with the same resistance mechanisms, indicating a relapse. This was deemed a critical element of clinical information, as the isolation of a genetically distinct organism would have indicated a new infection and would have served as evidence that a 12-month regimen was likely sufficient to achieve eradication. The confirmation of a relapse prompted the prolongation of the therapy plan to a goal of 24 months. Reinfection and relapse are great challenges in patients with cystic fibrosis who may acquire new strain of M. abscessus from the environment, may harbor multiple subpopulations of bacteria, or may have persistent infections but intermittent bacteria shedding that could not be eradicated. WGS has emerged as a powerful molecular tool to accurately differentiate re-infection from relapse thus solving this conundrum.

Background & Aims: In individuals highly exposed to HCV, reinfection is common, suggesting that natural development of sterilising immunity is difficult. In those that are reinfected, some will develop a persistent infection, while a small proportion repeatedly clear the virus, suggesting natural protection is possible. The aim of this study was to characterise immune responses associated with rapid natural clearance of HCV reinfection., Methods: Broad neutralising antibodies (nAbs) and Envelope 2 (E2)-specific memory B cell (MBC) responses were examined longitudinally in 15 individuals with varied reinfection outcomes., Results: Broad nAb responses were associated with MBC recall, but not with clearance of reinfection. Strong evidence of antigen imprinting was found, and the B-cell receptor repertoire showed a high level of clonality with ongoing somatic hypermutation of many clones over subsequent reinfection events. Single-cell transcriptomic analyses showed that cleared reinfections featured an activated transcriptomic profile in HCV-specific B cells that rapidly expanded upon reinfection., Conclusions: MBC quality, but not necessarily breadth of nAb responses, is important for protection against antigenically diverse variants, which is encouraging for HCV vaccine development., Impact and Implications: HCV continues to have a major health burden globally. Limitations in the health infrastructure for diagnosis and treatment, as well as high rates of reinfection, indicate that a vaccine that can protect against chronic HCV infection will greatly complement current efforts to eliminate HCV-related disease. With alternative approaches to testing vaccines, such as controlled human inoculation trials under consideration, we desperately need to identify the correlates of immune protection. In this study, in a small but rare cohort of high-risk injecting drug users who were reinfected multiple times, breadth of neutralisation was not associated with ultimate clearance of the reinfection event. Alternatively, characteristics of the HCV-specific B-cell response associated with B-cell proliferation were. This study indicates that humoral responses are important for protection and suggests that for genetically very diverse viruses, such as HCV, it may be beneficial to look beyond just antibodies as correlates of protection., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Universal screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on admission is reportedly beneficial in preventing nosocomial infections. However, some issues remain, including low positivity rate, cost, and time required for testing. We describe SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for universal screening in asymptomatic patients on planned admissions. In total, 14,574 patients were included between October 12, 2020, and June 23, 2022. The PCR-positive rate for the period was 0.44 % (64/14,574). The PCR positivity for the epidemic period by strain was 0.28 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.12-0.56 %), 0.16 % (95 % CI 0.05-0.37 %), 0.21 % (95 % CI 0.09-0.41 %), and 0.9 % (95 % CI 0.65-1.2 %) for the wild-type strain, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants, respectively. The proportion of Ct values < 30 was higher in the first half of the epidemic (first vs. second, 29.4 % [95 % CI 16.9-44.8 %] vs. 16.7 % [95 % CI 6.0-28.5 %]), whereas that of Ct values ≥ 35 increased significantly in the second half (first vs. second, 32.4 % [95 % CI 19.3-47.8 %] vs. 70.0 % [95 % CI 53.5-83.4 %]). Of all positives, 50 % (32/64) had a coronavirus disease (COVID-19) history before PCR screening, with a median of 28 days (10-105) from COVID-19 onset or positive to PCR screening. PCR screening may help detect positives with high viral loads early in the epidemic for each mutant strain, with an increasing proportion of positives with low viral loads later in the epidemic. PCR testing may be unnecessary for recently diagnosed cases and patients in whom reinfection is unlikely., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2023 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy, Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases, and Japanese Society for Infection Prevention and Control. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Nursing homes are high-risk COVID-19 settings with residents who are typically older and have multiple comorbidities. SARS-CoV-2 testing occurs frequently in nursing homes, with public health guidance suggesting that repeat testing is generally not warranted in the 90 days following initial positive test results. Interpretation of repeat positive tests beyond 90 days is challenging and the consequences of decisions following these tests are significant. Methods: We utilized a surveillance system for COVID-19 to identify Connecticut nursing home residents who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RNA-based testing ≥ 90 days after initial positive results. We analyzed statewide nursing home testing data over a 9-month period, from the first Connecticut nursing home case identified on March 15 through December 15, 2020, when nursing home COVID-19 vaccinations began in Connecticut. Findings: We identified 156 residents (median age 75 years) with positive RNA-based PCR tests occurring ≥90 days after an initial positive test. Residents with repeat positives tests represented approximately 2.6% (156/6,079) of nursing home residents surviving beyond 90 days of their initial SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis statewide since the start of the pandemic, with a median time to repeat positivity of 135 days (range 90–245 days). Deaths were reported in 12.8% (20/156) of residents following the repeat positive test, with 80% (16/20) having one or more intervening negative RT-PCR tests prior to the repeat positive test. Interpretation: Our analysis suggests that repeat positive testing in nursing home populations may exceed those reported in younger age groups. Repeat positive tests beyond 90 days may accompany severe outcomes, and should be prospectively investigated with genomic, virologic and additional data, when feasible. Data shed light on the duration of protective immunity following natural infection in this subset of largely elderly and medically frail individuals. Funding: This work was conducted in the context of the Connecticut DPH COVID-19 response and not supported by specific funding.

Background: Assessment of the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is essential in predicting risk of reinfection and durability of vaccine protection. Methods: This is a prospective, monocentric, longitudinal, cohort clinical study. Healthcare workers (HCW) from Strasbourg University Hospital were enrolled between April 6th and May 7th, 2020 and followed up to 422 days. Serial serum samples were tested for antibodies against the Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) of the spike protein and nucleocapsid protein (N) to characterize the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and the incidence of reinfection. Live-neutralization assays were performed for a subset of samples before and after vaccination to analyze sensitivity to SARS-CoV-2 variants. Findings: A total of 4290 samples from 393 convalescent COVID-19 and 916 COVID-19 negative individuals were analyzed. In convalescent individuals, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies followed a triphasic kinetic model with half-lives at month (M) 11–13 of 283 days (95% CI 231–349) for anti-N and 725 days (95% CI 623–921) for anti-RBD IgG, which stabilized at a median of 1.54 log BAU/mL (95% CI 1.42–1.67). The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections was 12.22 and 0.40 per 100 person-years in COVID-19-negative and COVID-19-positive HCW, respectively, indicating a relative reduction in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection of 96.7%. Live-virus neutralization assay revealed that after one year, variants D614G and B.1.1.7, but less so B.1.351, were sensitive to anti-RBD antibodies at 1.4 log BAU/mL, while IgG ≥ 2.0 log BAU/mL strongly neutralized all three variants. These latter anti-RBD IgG titers were reached by all vaccinated HCW regardless of pre-vaccination IgG levels and type of vaccine. Interpretation: Our study demonstrates a long-term persistence of anti-RBD antibodies that may reduce risk of reinfection. By significantly increasing cross-neutralizing antibody titers, a single-dose vaccination strengthens protection against variants. Fun1ding: None.

While many patients infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) eventually produce neutralising antibodies, the degree of susceptibility of previously infected individuals to reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 is currently unknown. To better understand the impact of the immunoglobulin (IgG) level on reinfection in recovered coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, anti-nucleocapsid IgG levels against SARS-CoV-2 were measured in 829 patients with a previously confirmed infection just after their recovery. Notably, 87 of these patients had no detectable IgG concentration. While there was just one case of asymptomatic reinfection 4.5 months after the initial recovery amongst patients with detectable anti-nucleocapsid IgG levels, 25 of the 87 patients negative for anti-nucleocapsid IgG were reinfected within one to three months after their first infection. Therefore, patients who recover from COVID-19 with no detectable anti-nucleocapsid IgG concentration appear to remain more susceptible to reinfection by SARS-CoV-2, with no apparent immunity. Also, although our results suggest the chance is lower, the possibility for recovered patients with positive anti-nucleocapsid IgG findings to be reinfected similarly exists.

During an ongoing pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, main question which has arisen in everyone's mind is about the immune response that may protect from reinfection. Coronaviruses are known for short-term immunity. Their ability of mutations enables them to escape host immunity, thus increasing chances of reinfection. Here we report two cases of reinfection among health care workers who presented with symptoms of COVID-19 disease, after 3 months of first infectious course. Such documentations are necessary for epidemiological purposes and also to monitor response of virus on re-exposure.

Background: Reinfection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been documented, raising public health concerns. SARS-CoV-2 reinfections were assessed in a cohort of antibody-positive persons in Qatar. Methods: All SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positive persons from April 16 to December 31, 2020 with a PCR-positive swab ≥14 days after the first-positive antibody test were investigated for evidence of reinfection. Viral genome sequencing was conducted for paired viral specimens to confirm reinfection. Incidence of reinfection was compared to incidence of infection in the complement cohort of those who were antibody-negative. Findings: Among 43,044 antibody-positive persons who were followed for a median of 16.3 weeks (range: 0–34.6), 314 individuals (0.7%) had at least one PCR positive swab ≥14 days after the first-positive antibody test. Of these individuals, 129 (41.1%) had supporting epidemiological evidence for reinfection. Reinfection was next investigated using viral genome sequencing. Applying the viral-genome-sequencing confirmation rate, the incidence rate of reinfection was estimated at 0.66 per 10,000 person-weeks (95% CI: 0.56–0.78). Incidence rate of reinfection versus month of follow-up did not show any evidence of waning of immunity for over seven months of follow-up. Meanwhile, in the complement cohort of 149,923 antibody-negative persons followed for a median of 17.0 weeks (range: 0–45.6), incidence rate of infection was estimated at 13.69 per 10,000 person-weeks (95% CI: 13.22–14.14). Efficacy of natural infection against reinfection was estimated at 95.2% (95% CI: 94.1–96.0%). Reinfections were less severe than primary infections. Only one reinfection was severe, two were moderate, and none were critical or fatal. Most reinfections (66.7%) were diagnosed incidentally through random or routine testing, or through contact tracing. Interpretation: Reinfection is rare in the young and international population of Qatar. Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for at least seven months. Funding: Biomedical Research Program, the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Biomathematics Research Core, and the Genomics Core, all at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, the Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, and the Qatar Genome Programme.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected millions of individuals worldwide. In the United States, the rapid transmission of cases has created challenges for healthcare systems across the country. We report a case of a patient who fully recovered from COVID-19 with intermittent negative RT-PCR testing and a symptom free interval who went on to develop a second infection. The patient's second infection resulted in a more severe clinical course. The patient developed Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome resulting in intubation twice and an extensive stay in the intensive care unit. Six weeks post-discharge, the patient was evaluated for continued dyspnea, hypoxia, and continued oxygen dependence. The patient subsequently underwent right heart catherization for further evaluation and was found to have newly developed pulmonary hypertension. Given the possibility of second wave infections this fall and winter, this case highlights the concern that re-infections with COVID-19 could cause substantially worse clinical outcomes and long-term complications. In terms of ongoing vaccine development, the short lived immune response in this case calls into question the ability of a future vaccine to provide long term lasting immunity against COVID-19.

The scientific community has questioned whether reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is possible. Gradually, cases of reinfection have been documented. In Mexico, people with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection have not been officially identified. To allow a retrospective investigation of patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and to identify how reinfected with this virus occurs in a population that requires medical attention. A retrospective search of the epidemiological surveillance system was performed to identify people who met the clinical criteria based on laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 and temporality to identify cases of reinfection. Clinical information was collected from clinical records. Seven people with two separate COVID-19 events were identified in medical units in Quintana Roo, Mexico between April and December 2020. The overall median interval between the two events was 156 days (61–191 days). Six people were health workers, and one was a member of the general population. This is one of the first reports of reinfection in health personnel in Mexico, revealing that the frequency of reinfection is low among positive cases and that the interval between infection episodes was three months. There are several scenarios in the natural history of the disease that must be considered based on adequate anamnesis with a clinical-epidemiological approach to determine the correct diagnostic category.

Objective: There is no firm evidence regarding cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) shunt reimplantation after infection in the pediatric population. The purpose of this study was to compare different criteria and analyze new shunt failure., Methods: A cross-sectional retrospective multicenter study was performed over 6 years to study patients and each infected shunt at diagnosis, reimplantation, and after reimplantation. The patients were divided into 2 groups: group 1 (G1), reimplantation after negative serial CSF cultures during antibiotic treatment; group 2 (G2), reimplantation after negative serial pancultures after completion of antibiotics. The differences were measured with Mann-Whitney and Χ 2 tests; multivariate analysis and associations were calculated using odds ratios (ORs) based on logistic regression., Results: There were 137 shunt infection events in 110 patients: 28 events in G1 and 109 in G2. Significant differences were observed in the diagnosis and reimplantation. Reimplantation dysfunction in G1 was 16 (55.17%) versus 30 (27.78%) in G2 (P = 0.006). The risk of shunt malfunction after reimplantation increased for G1 reimplantation criteria (P = 0.018; OR, 3.34; confidence interval [CI], 1.23-9.05): pleocytosis at diagnosis >17 cells (P = 0.036; OR, 2.41; CI, 1.06-5.47), CSF proteins at diagnosis >182 mg/dL (P = 0.049; OR, 2.21; CI, 1.00-4.89)., Conclusions: G2 reimplantation criteria were related to improved pleocytosis, CSF proteins, and blood neutrophils compared with G1. Mechanical and infectious dysfunction of the new shunt was 3 times more prevalent in G1 than in G2, considering the differences between the groups at diagnosis. Increased parameters of infection at diagnosis were associated with future malfunction more than parameters before reimplantation in both groups., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are highly effective for treating HCV infection even among people who inject drugs (PWID). Yet, little is known about patients' adherence patterns and their association with sustained virologic response (SVR) rates. We aimed to summarize various adherence patterns and determine their associations with SVR., Methods: Electronic blister packs were used to measure daily adherence to once-a-day sofosbuvir/velpatasvir during the 12-week treatment period among active PWIDs. Blister pack data were available for 496 participants who initiated DAAs for whom SVR status was known. Adherence was summarized in multiple patterns, such as total adherent days, consecutive missed days, and early discontinuations. Thresholds for adherence patterns associated with >90% SVR rates were also determined., Results: The overall SVR rate was 92.7%, with a median adherence rate of 75%. All adherence patterns indicating greater adherence were significantly associated with achieving SVR. Participant groups with ≥50% (>42/84) adherent days or <26 consecutive missed days achieved an SVR rate of >90%. Greater total adherent days during 9-12 weeks and no early discontinuation were significantly associated with higher SVR rates only in those with <50% adherence. Participants with first month discontinuation and ≥2 weeks of treatment interruption had low SVR rates, 25% and 85%, respectively. However, greater adherent days were significantly associated with SVR (adjusted odds ratio 1.10; 95% CI 1.04-1.16; p <0.001) even among participants with ≥14 consecutive missed days., Conclusions: High SVR rates can be achieved in the PWID population despite suboptimal adherence. Encouraging patients to take as much medication as possible, with <2 weeks consecutive missed days and without early discontinuation, was found to be important for achieving SVR., Impact and Implications: People who inject drugs can be cured of HCV in >90% of cases, even with relatively low adherence to direct-acting antivirals, but early discontinuations and long treatment interruptions can significantly reduce the likelihood of achieving cure. Clinicians should encourage people who inject drugs who are living with HCV to adhere daily to direct-acting antivirals as consistently as possible, but if any days are interrupted, to continue and complete treatment. These results from the HERO study are important for patients living with HCV, clinicians, experts writing clinical guidelines, and payers., Clinical Trial Number: NCT02824640., (Copyright © 2024 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To describe the dynamics and factors related to natural and hybrid humoral response against the SARS-CoV-2 and risk of reinfection among first-wave patients., Methods: A prospective longitudinal study with periodic serological follow-up after acute onset of all recovered patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection cared in Udine Hospital (March-May 2020). Nucleocapsid (N) protein and spike receptor-binding domain (S-RBD) antibody tests were used to distinguish natural and vaccine-induced response., Results: Overall, 153 patients (66 men, mean age 56 years) were followed for a median of 27.3 (interquartile range 26.9-27.8) months. Seroreversion was 98.5% (95% CI: 96.8-99.4) for SARS-CoV-2-N IgM at 1 year and 57.4% (95% CI: 51.5-63.5) for SARS-CoV-2-N IgG at 2 years. Initial serological response (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.99-0.99, p 0.002 for IgM and HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.97-0.98, p < 0.001 for IgG) and severity of acute infection (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39-0.96, p 0.033 for IgM and HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.37-0.99, p < 0.001 for IgG) were independently associated with persistent SARS-CoV-2-N IgM/IgG response. Older age and smoker status were associated with long-term SARS-CoV-2-N IgM and SARS-CoV-2-N IgG, respectively (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57-0.98, p 0.038; HR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.19-2.61, p 0.004 respectively). All patients maintained SARS-CoV-2-S-RBD IgG response at 24-month follow-up. Reinfections occurred in 25 of 153 (16.3%) patients, mostly during the omicron circulation. Reinfection rates did not differ significantly between SARS-CoV-2-N IgG seronegative and seropositive patients (14/89, 15.7% vs. 10/62, 16.1%, p 0.947). Unvaccinated patients had higher risk of reinfection (4/7, 57.1% vs. vaccinated 21/146, 14.4%, p 0.014)., Discussion: First-wave patients had durable natural humoral immunity in 40% and anti-S-RBD response in 100% up to 2 years after infection. Natural humoral response alone was not protective against reinfections with omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants, whereas vaccination was effective to reduce the risk of a new infection., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)