scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Ryan R Adyniec

Bio: Ryan R Adyniec is an academic researcher from University of Wisconsin-Madison. The author has contributed to research in topics: Vaccination. The author has co-authored 1 publications.
Topics: Vaccination

Papers
More filters
Posted ContentDOI
08 Nov 2021-medRxiv
TL;DR: In this article, the authors demonstrate that anti-membrane IgG is a sensitive and specific marker of past COVID-19 infection and persists at least one year, while anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) Ig is a long-lasting, sensitive, and specific indicator of past infection and vaccination.
Abstract: The consequences of past COVID-19 infection for personal health and long-term population immunity are only starting to be revealed. Unfortunately, detecting past infection is currently a challenge, limiting clinical and research endeavors. Widely available anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests cannot differentiate between past infection and vaccination given vaccine-induced anti-spike antibodies and the rapid loss of infection-induced anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. Anti-membrane antibodies develop after COVID-19, but their long-term persistence is unknown. Here, we demonstrate that anti-membrane IgG is a sensitive and specific marker of past COVID-19 infection and persists at least one year. We also confirm that anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) Ig is a long-lasting, sensitive, and specific marker of past infection and vaccination, while anti-nucleocapsid IgG lacks specificity and quickly declines after COVID-19. Thus, a combination of anti-membrane and anti-RBD antibodies can accurately differentiate between distant COVID-19 infection, vaccination, and naive states to advance public health, individual healthcare, and research goals.

5 citations


Cited by
More filters
Posted ContentDOI
02 Apr 2022-medRxiv
TL;DR: Estimates of time-varying and static epidemiological quantities that were derived from the estimates published by ONS are presented, indicating that repeated cross-sectional studies make it possible to estimate epidemiological parameters from population-level models.
Abstract: Background Repeated measurements of cross-sectional prevalence of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) positivity or seropositivity provide rich insight into the dynamics of an infection. The UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) Community Infection Survey publishes such measurements for SARS-CoV-2 on a weekly basis based on testing enrolled households, contributing to situational awareness in the country. Here we present estimates of time-varying and static epidemiological quantities that were derived from the estimates published by ONS. Methods We used a gaussian process to model the incidence of infections and then estimated observed PCR prevalence by convolving our modelled incidence estimates with a previously published PCR detection curve describing the probability of a positive test as a function of the time since infection. We refined our incidence estimates using time-varying estimates of antibody prevalence combined with a model of antibody positivity and waning that moved individuals between compartments with or without antibodies based on estimates of new infections, vaccination, probability of seroconversion and waning. Results We produced incidence curves of infection describing the UK epidemic from late April 2020 until early 2022. We used these estimates of incidence to estimate the time-varying growth rate of infections and combined them with estimates of the generation interval to estimate time-varying reproduction numbers. Biological parameters describing seroconversion and waning, while based on a simple model, were broadly in line with plausible ranges from individual-level studies. Conclusions Beyond informing situational awareness and allowing for estimates using individual-level data, repeated cross-sectional studies make it possible to estimate epidemiological parameters from population-level models. Studies or public health surveillance methods based on similar designs offer opportunities for further improving our understanding of the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 or other pathogens and their interaction with population-level immunity.

5 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: ELISA and ELISA-based methods aided the area of immunology against infectious diseases and is still relevant, for example, as a promising approach to study the differences between natural and vaccine-induced immune responses against SARS-CoV-2.
Abstract: The Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay is a versatile technique, which can be used for several applications. It has enormously contributed to the study of infectious diseases. This review highlights how this methodology supported the science conducted in COVID-19 pandemics, allowing scientists to better understand the immune response against SARS-CoV-2. ELISA can be modified to assess the functionality of antibodies, as avidity and neutralization, respectively by the standardization of avidity-ELISA and surrogate-neutralization methods. Cellular immunity can also be studied using this assay. Products secreted by cells, like proteins and cytokines, can be studied by ELISA or its derivative Enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assay. ELISA and ELISA-based methods aided the area of immunology against infectious diseases and is still relevant, for example, as a promising approach to study the differences between natural and vaccine-induced immune responses against SARS-CoV-2.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the seroprevalence of infection-induced antibodies among unvaccinated children and adolescents aged 2-17 years in North Carolina increased from 15.2% in May 2021 to 54.1% by October 2021, indicating an average infection-to-reported-case ratio of 5.7-61.1.
Abstract: Few prospective studies have documented the seropositivity among those children infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. From 2 April 2021 to 24 June 2021, we prospectively enrolled children between the ages of 2 and 17 years at three North Carolina healthcare systems. Participants received at least four at-home serological tests detecting the presence of antibodies against, but not differentiating between, the nucleocapsid or spike antigen. A total of 1,058 participants were enrolled in the study, completing 2,709 tests between 1 May 2021 and 31 October 2021. Using multilevel regression with poststratification techniques and considering our assay sensitivity and sensitivity, we estimated that the seroprevalence of infection-induced antibodies among unvaccinated children and adolescents aged 2-17 years in North Carolina increased from 15.2% (95% credible interval, CrI 9.0-22.0) in May 2021 to 54.1% (95% CrI 46.7-61.1) by October 2021, indicating an average infection-to-reported-case ratio of 5. A rapid rise in seropositivity was most pronounced in those unvaccinated children aged 12-17 years, based on our estimates. This study underlines the utility of serial, serological testing to inform a broader understanding of the regional immune landscape and spread of infection.
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the seroprevalence of infection-induced antibodies among unvaccinated children and adolescents aged 2-17 years in North Carolina increased from 15.2% (95% credible interval, CrI 9.0-22.0) in May 2021 to 54.1% ( 95% CrI 46.7-61.1) by October 2021, indicating an average infection-toreported-case ratio of 5.5%.
Abstract: Abstract Few prospective studies have documented the seropositivity among those children infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. From 2 April 2021 to 24 June 2021, we prospectively enrolled children between the ages of 2 and 17 years at three North Carolina healthcare systems. Participants received at least four at-home serological tests detecting the presence of antibodies against, but not differentiating between, the nucleocapsid or spike antigen. A total of 1,058 participants were enrolled in the study, completing 2,709 tests between 1 May 2021 and 31 October 2021. Using multilevel regression with poststratification techniques and considering our assay sensitivity and sensitivity, we estimated that the seroprevalence of infection-induced antibodies among unvaccinated children and adolescents aged 2–17 years in North Carolina increased from 15.2% (95% credible interval, CrI 9.0–22.0) in May 2021 to 54.1% (95% CrI 46.7–61.1) by October 2021, indicating an average infection-to-reported-case ratio of 5. A rapid rise in seropositivity was most pronounced in those unvaccinated children aged 12–17 years, based on our estimates. This study underlines the utility of serial, serological testing to inform a broader understanding of the regional immune landscape and spread of infection.
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , a living systematic review of COVID-19 was conducted and the authors found that there was a lower risk of hospital admission in patients with non-severe COVID19 when treated with mAB therapy compared to standard care alone.
Abstract: of the studyThis is the latest iteration of a living systematic review, published Sept 23rd, 2021, meaning that updates are integrated with each iteration of literature searches. Daily searches are made by the WHO, including over 25 “bibliographic and grey literature sources” found in the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) COVID-19 Research Articles Downloadable Database. Study selection included preprints—primary research articles that have been released to the public before peer review. Preprints were tracked until publication, and changes were made to the guidelines if discrepancies existed between the preprint and peer-reviewed versions.Trial characteristics, patient demographics, donor characteristics and clinically important outcomes were recorded for each selected article. Outcomes for patients with severe and non-severe disease were studied separately. This severity was determined by the WHO severity scale: non-severe disease mandated that patients have O2 sats > 90% on room air, no signs of pneumonia, and no other clinical signs or symptoms of respiratory distress.Outcomes of interest were decided upon by a team of clinical experts, and included: mortality, mechanical ventilation, adverse events leading to discontinuation within 28 days, viral clearance, TRALI, TACO, infusion reactions, admission to hospital, hospital stay time, ICU length of stay, time to symptom resolution, time to viral clearance. Importantly, side effects of mABs not addressed in these outcomes may include anaphylaxis and sequelae of allergic reactions. mAB infusion may also induce bleeding, soreness, or infection at the site of administration.Fourteen different antibody or cellular treatments were evaluated for the treatment of COVID-19. This review focuses only on the evaluation of 12 studies of 5 monoclonal antibody therapies: bamlanivimab (LY-CoV555; 4 trials), casirivimab-imdevimab (REGEN-COV; 4 trials), bamlanivimab-etesevimab (2 trials), sotrovimab (1 trial), and CT-P59 monoclonal antibody (1 trial). 54.5% of these were preprints. Once preprints were published, there were no statistically significant differences in either outcomes or patient characteristics when comparing the preprint and peer-reviewed publication.There was a lower risk of hospital admission in patients with non-severe COVID-19 when treated with mAB therapy compared to standard care alone: casirivimab-imdevimab odds ratio (OR) 0.29 (95% CI 0.17–0.47); bamlanivimab OR 0.24 (95% CI 0.06–0.86), bamlanivimab-etesevimab OR 0.31 (95% CI 0.11–0.81), sotrovimab OR 0.17 (95% CI 0.04–0.57) and CT-P59 OR 0.48 (95% CI 0.14–1.60). Only casirivimab-imdevimab was shown to have moderate certainty evidence for this outcome; others were rated lower due to small numbers of events. With an assumed hospitalization rate for COVID-19 of 2.1% [2], the number needed to treat (NNT) for casirivimab-imdevimab to reduce the risk of hospital admission was 67 (Calculated separate from publication; OR = 0.29, PEER = 0.021).Only casirivimab-imdevimab (ratio of means 0.72; 95% CI 0.58–0.92, moderate certainty) was shown to reduce duration of symptoms of non-severe COVID-19. Bamlanivimab (ratio of means 0.92; 95% CI 0.64–1.32, low certainty), bamlanivimab-etesevimab (ratio of means 0.89; 95% CI 0.68–1.16, moderate certainty), and CT-P59 (ratio of means 0.66; 95% CI 0.42–1.05, moderate certainty) did not reduce symptom duration.None of the mABs studied showed a difference in mortality for non-severe COVID-19: casirivimab-imdevimab OR 0.58 (95% CI 0.26–1.22), bamlanivimab OR 0.46 (95% CI 0.01–27.79), bamlanivimab-etesevimab OR 0.05 (95% CI 0.00–1.01), sotrovimab OR 0.33 (95% CI 0.01–10.16), CT-P59 OR 0.51 (95% CI 0.01–30.40). Non-severe disease has an inherently low risk of mortality, which may have impacted these outcomes.