Humoral Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 in Iceland | NEJM – nejm.org

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), inflicting coronavirus illness 2019 (Covid-19), emerged in December 2019.¹ Seroconversion of most patients with Covid-19 happens between 7 and 14 days after prognosis.^2,3 A search for of 61,000 persons in Spain confirmed that 5% of the population had fashioned antibodies against the spike and nucleoproteins and that roughly one third of contaminated persons were asymptomatic.⁴ It was in actual fact helpful that a worthy allotment of those contaminated change into antibody-adversarial early in the convalescence period.⁵ Several reports maintain reported a elevated incidence⁴ and ranges^3,5 of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in severely ill patients than in those without a or light symptoms.

The infection fatality risk of SARS-CoV-2 is complicated to estimate because the total number of diagnosed and undiagnosed cases is wished because the denominator. The infection fatality risk was reported as 0.4% in a little German town after carnival festivities,⁶ 0.6% on the Diamond Princess cruise ship,⁷ and nil.66% in China.⁸

Smartly-validated serologic assays for SARS-CoV-2 are urgently wished. Several little comparative reports of enterprise SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays were published.^9-12 A highly particular assay is required for screening populations with a low seroprevalence, corresponding to that in Iceland.

The first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Iceland was confirmed on February 28, 2020, and by April 30 the epidemic needed to a large extent receded.¹³ For the length of this era, 1797 cases were diagnosed by quantitative polymerase-chain-response (qPCR), in disagreement with utterly 13 contemporary cases diagnosed between April 30 and June 15. Making an are trying out by qPCR has been intensive in Iceland: 15% of the population (54,436 persons) had been tested with qPCR by June 15.

Figure 1. Figure 1. Schematic Overview of the Eight Pattern Groups Aged in the Notice.

The eight pattern teams are shown in the upper bins, and the arrows internal the upper bins blow their personal horns the principle utility of every pattern series. The two decrease bins assert the six assays that were aged; the arrows exterior the bins point to which assays were aged for the 2 series varieties (no longer obvious by quantitative polymerase-chain-response assay [non–qPCR-positive] and qPCR-obvious). For the Smartly being Care neighborhood, samples were obtained sometime of a consult with to the health care gadget. For the Quarantine neighborhood, all samples were obtained on completion of quarantine. The two teams of samples from persons who tested qPCR-obvious were obtained at assorted occasions sometime of the direction of the illness: the Hospitalized neighborhood includes samples obtained sometime of hospitalization, and the Recovered neighborhood includes samples obtained after restoration. ECLIA denotes electrochemiluminescence immunoassay, and ELISA enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

The aim of this search for was to assess SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the population of Iceland and to assess longitudinal changes in antibody ranges internal the well-known 4 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection and the arrangement in which the changes correlate with intercourse, age, present phenotypes, and Covid-19 symptoms. We screened for SARS-Cov-2 reactive serum antibodies, the utilization of six assorted assays, in two teams of qPCR-obvious persons and 6 teams of persons who had no longer been tested with qPCR or who had been tested and obtained adversarial outcomes (Figure 1; and Tables S1 and S2 in Supplementary Appendix 1, readily accessible with the fleshy text of this article at NEJM.org).

Ethical Concerns

The quest for was well-liked by the National Bioethics Committee of Iceland. The Smartly being Care pattern series was accomplished on behalf of Icelandic health authorities in settlement with the Act no. 19/1997 on Smartly being Security and Communicable Diseases. Members who were a part of the assorted pattern collections equipped written suggested consent.

Antibody Measurements

We measured SARS-CoV-2–particular antibodies in as much as 30,576 persons with six established assays, focusing on pan-immunoglobulin (pan-Ig: IgM, IgG, and IgA) antibodies against the nucleoprotein (N) (Roche); pan-Ig antibodies against the receptor binding enviornment (RBD) in the S1 subunit of the spike protein (pan-Ig anti–S1-RBD) (Wantai); IgM and IgG antibodies against N (IgM anti-N and IgG anti-N) (EDI/Eagle); and IgG and IgA against the S1 subunit of the spike protein (IgG anti-S1 and IgA anti-S1) (Euroimmun). Thresholds for positivity were equipped by the assay producers. We aged the 2 pan-Ig antibody assays to have interaction into story seroprevalence, requiring obvious outcomes for both assays for a check consequence to be regarded as as obvious (Fig. S1 in Supplementary Appendix 1). To quantify antibody ranges amongst qPCR-obvious persons, we assayed antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 the utilization of IgG anti-N, IgM anti-N, IgG anti-S1, and IgA anti-S1.

Pattern Series

We measured antibodies in two teams of qPCR-obvious Icelanders and in six teams who had no longer been qPCR-tested or who had been tested and had obtained a adversarial consequence (Figure 1). We peaceable samples from a neighborhood of hospitalized qPCR-obvious persons and invited all qPCR-obvious persons who had recovered from infection to donate samples, both quickly after restoration and all over again roughly 3 months after restoration (a entire of 2102 samples from 1237 persons). We aged two teams of samples peaceable sooner than the pandemic (in 2017 and in early 2020) to have interaction into story assay specificity and to resolve when the pandemic reached Iceland. We peaceable samples from quarantined persons who had no longer tested qPCR-obvious to have interaction into story infection sometime of quarantine and the cease of publicity form on the possibility of infection. We aged three teams of samples peaceable from persons who had neither tested qPCR-obvious nor been quarantined to have interaction into story seroprevalence exterior quarantine and the unfold of the virus in Iceland (the Smartly being Care, Reykjavik, and Vestmannaeyjar pattern teams, totaling 23,452 persons).

Estimation of An infection Rate

The last observe of those six teams, the Smartly being Care neighborhood, was enriched for older of us. To estimate seroprevalence, we weighted this pattern by web philosophize online, intercourse, and age in the population (learn about Supplementary Appendix 1). To estimate the number of contaminated Icelanders, we added together the number of qPCR-obvious persons, the number of quarantined persons occasions the estimated seroprevalence in this neighborhood, and the number of persons exterior quarantine occasions the estimated seroprevalence exterior quarantine. We estimated the share of Icelanders contaminated by dividing the number of contaminated persons by the number of Icelanders. We estimated the infection fatality risk by dividing the number of deaths from Covid-19 by the number of contaminated persons.

Antibody Ranges, Age, Sex, and Medical Traits

We tested for associations of age, intercourse, preexisting prerequisites (27 phenotypes), and clinical consequence (35 characteristics) with antibody titers (for every of the six assays) in essentially the most most standard samples obtained from persons in the Recovered neighborhood. We recoded categorical clinical characteristics with their ordinal number in the prognosis.

Statistical Diagnosis

We aged a likelihood ratio arrangement to calculate self belief intervals of fractions with the Clopper–Pearson accurate arrangement when the estimated allotment was 0 or 1. To ascertain for affiliation between every clinical characteristic and antibody ranges, we accomplished a pair of regression analyses with the phenotype as a covariate and quantile normalized antibody ranges as a response, adjusting for age, age squared, intercourse, and time since qPCR prognosis, other than for the age and intercourse covariates when attempting out for affiliation with age and intercourse, respectively. We quantile-normalized the antibody ranges by ranking the ranges and transforming them, the utilization of the inverse commonplace remodel of the wicked divided by one plus the number of observations. Effects estimates were reported in the case of commonplace deviations of antibody ranges. We derived P values and self belief intervals from commonplace errors estimated by the a pair of regression. We aged Bonferroni correction to resolve significance, with a threshold for significance of P<[0.05÷6(2+27+35)]=0.00013. For outcomes of the publicity form on the possibility of infection amongst quarantined persons, we aged logistic regression to estimate the self belief intervals of odds ratios. We did no longer adjust self belief intervals for a pair of attempting out.

Specificity of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Assays

Each assays measuring pan-Ig antibodies had low numbers of untrue positives amongst samples peaceable in 2017: there were 0 and 1 untrue positives for the 2 assays amongst 472 samples, outcomes that after in contrast favorably with those obtained with the single IgM anti-N and IgG anti-N assays (Table S3). Thanks to the low incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Iceland, we required obvious outcomes from both pan-Ig antibody assays for a pattern to be regarded as as seropositive (learn about Supplementary Methods in Supplementary Appendix 1). None of the samples peaceable in early 2020 neighborhood were seropositive, which signifies that the virus had no longer unfold widely in Iceland sooner than February 2020.

SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies amongst qPCR-Certain Persons

Figure 2. Figure 2. Antibody Incidence and Titers amongst qPCR-Certain Instances as a Objective of Time since Diagnosis by qPCR.

Confirmed are the possibilities of samples obvious for both pan-Ig antibody assays and the antibody titers. Crimson denotes the rely or share of samples amongst persons sometime of their hospitalization (249 samples from 48 persons), and blue denotes the rely or share of samples amongst persons after they were declared recovered (1853 samples from 1215 persons). Vertical bars denote 95% self belief intervals. The dashed lines indicated the thresholds for a check to be declared obvious. OD denotes optical density, and RBD receptor binding enviornment.

Table 1. Table 1. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies by Pattern Series as Measured by Two Pan-Ig Antibody Assays.

Twenty-5 days after prognosis by qPCR, extra than 90% of samples from recovered persons tested obvious with both pan-Ig antibody assays, and the share of persons attempting out obvious remained stable thereafter (Figure 2 and Fig. S2). Hospitalized persons seroconverted extra frequently and speedy after qPCR prognosis than did nonhospitalized persons (Figure 2 and Fig. S3). Of 1215 persons who had recovered (on the basis of outcomes for essentially the most recently obtained pattern from persons for whom we had a pair of samples), 1107 were seropositive (91.1%; 95% self belief interval [CI], 89.4 to 92.6) (Table 1 and Table S4). Since some diagnoses may perhaps perchance well were made on the basis of untrue obvious qPCR outcomes, we obvious that 91.1% represents the decrease traipse of sensitivity of the mixed pan-Ig tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies amongst recovered persons.

Table 2. Table 2. Outcomes of Repeated Pan-Ig Antibody Assessments amongst Recovered qPCR-Identified Persons.

Among the many 487 recovered persons with two or extra samples, 19 (4%) had assorted pan-Ig antibody check outcomes at assorted time facets (Table 2 and Fig. S4). It is well-known that of the 22 persons with an early pattern that tested adversarial for both pan-Ig antibodies, 19 remained adversarial at essentially the most most standard check date (all over again, for both antibodies). One particular person tested obvious for both pan-Ig antibodies in the well-known check and adversarial for both in essentially the most most standard check.

The longitudinal changes in antibody ranges amongst recovered persons were consistent with the adversarial-sectional outcomes (Fig. S5); antibody ranges were elevated in the last pattern than in the well-known pattern when the antibodies were measured with the 2 pan-Ig assays, a diminutive decrease than in the well-known pattern when measured with IgG anti-N and IgG anti-S1 assays, and considerably decrease than in the well-known pattern when measured with IgM anti-N and IgA anti-S1 assays.

IgG anti-N, IgM anti-N, IgG anti-S1, and IgA anti-S1 antibody ranges were correlated amongst the qPCR-obvious persons (Figs. S5 and S6 and Table S5). Antibody ranges measured with both pan-Ig antibody assays elevated over the well-known 2 months after qPCR prognosis and remained at a plateau over the next 2 months of the hunt for. IgM anti-N antibody ranges elevated at present quickly after prognosis after which fell at present and were in most cases no longer detected after 2 months. IgA anti-S1 antibodies reduced 1 month after prognosis and remained detectable thereafter. IgG anti-N and anti-S1 antibody ranges elevated sometime of the well-known 6 weeks after prognosis after which reduced a diminutive.

SARS-CoV-2 An infection in Quarantine

Table 3. Table 3. SARS-CoV-2 An infection amongst Quarantined Persons Based utterly mostly on Publicity Form and Presence of Symptoms.

Of the 1797 qPCR-obvious Icelanders, 1088 (61%) were in quarantine when SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed by qPCR. We tested for antibodies amongst 4222 quarantined persons who had no longer tested qPCR-obvious (they had obtained a adversarial consequence by qPCR or had simply no longer been tested). Of those 4222 quarantined persons, 97 (2.3%; 95% CI, 1.9 to 2.8) were seropositive (Table 1). Those with household publicity were 5.2 (95% CI, 3.3 to eight.0) occasions extra susceptible to be seropositive than those with assorted kinds of publicity (Table 3); equally, a obvious consequence by qPCR for those with household publicity was 5.2 (95% CI, 4.5 to 6.1) occasions extra seemingly than for those with assorted kinds of publicity. When these two sets of outcomes (qPCR-obvious and seropositive) were mixed, we calculated that 26.6% of quarantined persons with household publicity and 5.0% of quarantined persons without household publicity were contaminated. Those that had symptoms sometime of quarantine were 3.2 (95% CI, 1.7 to 6.2) occasions extra susceptible to be seropositive and 18.2 occasions (95% CI, 14.8 to 22.4) extra susceptible to check obvious with qPCR than those without symptoms.

We also tested persons in two areas of Iceland tormented by cluster outbreaks. In a SARS-CoV-2 cluster in Vestfirdir, 1.4% of residents were qPCR-obvious and 10% of residents were quarantined. We found that no longer among the 326 persons exterior quarantine who had no longer been tested by qPCR (or who tested adversarial) were seropositive. In a cluster in Vestmannaeyjar, 2.3% of residents were qPCR-obvious and 13% of residents were quarantined. Of the 447 quarantined persons who had no longer obtained a qPCR-obvious consequence, 4 were seropositive (0.9%; 95% CI, 0.3 to 2.1). Of the 663 exterior quarantine in Vestmannaeyjar, 3 were seropositive (0.5%; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.2%).

SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in Iceland

None of the serum samples peaceable from 470 healthy Icelanders between February 18 and March 9, 2020, tested obvious for both pan-Ig antibodies, even though four were obvious for the pan-Ig anti-N assay (0.9%), a finding that implies that the virus had no longer unfold widely in Iceland sooner than March 9.

Of the 18,609 persons tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies thru contact with the Icelandic health care gadget for causes assorted than Covid-19, 39 were obvious for both pan-Ig antibody assays (estimated seroprevalence by weighting the pattern on the basis of deliver, intercourse, and 10-year age class, 0.3%; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.4). There were regional variations in the possibilities of qPCR-obvious persons across Iceland that were roughly proportional to the share of of us quarantined (Table S6). On the other hand, after exclusion of the qPCR-obvious and quarantined persons, the share of persons who tested obvious for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies did no longer correlate with the share of those that tested obvious by qPCR. The estimated seroprevalence in the random pattern series from Reykjavik (0.4%; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.6) was equal to that in the Smartly being Care neighborhood (0.3%; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.4) (Table S6).

We calculate that 0.5% of the residents of Iceland maintain tested obvious with qPCR. The two.3% with SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion amongst persons in quarantine extrapolates to 0.1% of Icelandic residents. On the basis of this finding and the seroprevalence from the Smartly being Care neighborhood, we estimate that 0.9% (95% CI, 0.8 to 0.9) of the population of Iceland has been contaminated by SARS-CoV-2. Approximately 56% of all SARS-CoV-2 infections were therefore diagnosed by qPCR, 14% befell in quarantine without needing been diagnosed with qPCR, and the final 30% of infections befell exterior quarantine and weren’t detected by qPCR.

Deaths from Covid-19 in Iceland

In Iceland, 10 deaths were attributed to Covid-19, which corresponds to about a deaths per 100,000 nationwide. Among the many qPCR-obvious cases, 0.6% (95% CI, 0.3 to 1.0) were deadly. The utilization of the 0.9% incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Iceland because the denominator, however, we calculate an infection fatality risk of 0.3% (95% CI, 0.2 to 0.6). Stratified by age, the infection fatality risk was considerably decrease in those 70 years outdated or youthful (0.1%; 95% CI, 0.0 to 0.3) than in those over 70 years of age (4.4%; 95% CI, 1.9 to eight.4) (Table S7).

Age, Sex, Medical Traits, and Antibody Ranges

Table 4. Table 4. Association of Present Prerequisites and Covid-19 Severity with SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Ranges amongst Recovered Persons.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody ranges were elevated in older of us and in those that were hospitalized (Table 4, and Table S8 [described in Supplementary Appendix 1 and available in Supplementary Appendix 2]). Pan-Ig anti–S1-RBD and IgA anti-S1 ranges were decrease in feminine persons. Of the preexisting prerequisites, and after adjustment for a pair of attempting out, we found that physique-mass index, smoking web philosophize online, and spend of antiinflammatory medications were associated with SARS-CoV-2 antibody ranges. Body-mass index correlated positively with antibody ranges; people who smoke and users of antiinflammatory medications had decrease antibody ranges. With respect to clinical characteristics, antibody ranges were most strongly associated with hospitalization and clinical severity, adopted by clinical symptoms corresponding to fever, most temperature reading, cough, and lack of appetite. Severity of those person symptoms, other than for lack of energy, was associated with elevated antibody ranges.

We estimate that every particular person thru the well-known wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the incidence of infection in Iceland was 0.9% (95% CI, 0.8 to 0.9) and the infection fatality risk was 0.3% (95% CI, 0.2 to 0.6). Our estimate of the infection fatality risk is decrease than however consistent with estimates described by others.^6-8 We estimate that of the contaminated persons, 56% had cases beforehand diagnosed by qPCR, 14% had been in quarantine (however either had no longer been qPCR-tested or had tested adversarial), and 30% neither were identified to be qPCR-obvious nor had been placed in quarantine. We therefore execute that, despite intensive screening by qPCR, a worthy allotment of infections weren’t detected, which signifies that many contaminated persons did no longer maintain mountainous symptoms.

The case fatality risk is understated to estimate however may perhaps perchance well range across international locations and over time. An elegant calculation of infection fatality risk requires a sublime estimate of the number of infections, both diagnosed and undiagnosed. In Iceland, the high share of infections identified thru qPCR (56%) as when in contrast with that of varied international locations (to illustrate, roughly 9% in Spain⁴) renders a commensurately elegant estimate of the total number of infections.

Each of the pan-Ig SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays that we aged has high specificity (99.8%, essentially based utterly utterly on the producers’ literature), which raises the seek recordsdata from of of whether the utilization of a single pan-Ig assay would maintain sufficed. One pattern obtained in 2017 was obvious on utterly one pan-Ig antibody assay, a finding that supports the spend of two separate assays to resolve seroprevalence, if the infection rate is under 1%, as in Iceland.

By April 30, a entire of 20,766 Icelanders had been placed in quarantine. Of the 1797 Icelanders who tested obvious by qPCR, 1088 (61%) were in quarantine when tested. Despite mountainous qPCR attempting out of persons in quarantine, 2.3% of persons in quarantine who did no longer receive qPCR-obvious consequence (i.e., a prognosis of infection) developed SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Household publicity was extra susceptible to lead to infection than assorted kinds of publicity, which implies that folks that share a household with an contaminated particular person ought to composed no longer maintain contact sometime of quarantine and that contacts of household members needs to be quarantined. Seroprevalence in the 2 regional scorching spots (Vestfirdir and Vestmannaeyjar) was absent or low exterior quarantine, which signifies that nearly all infections were detected by qPCR screening and that quarantine, social distancing, contact tracing, and boundaries on public gatherings were effective in limiting unfold.

Over 90% of qPCR-obvious persons tested obvious with both pan-Ig SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays and remained seropositive 120 days after prognosis, without a decrease of antibody ranges as detected by the 2 pan-Ig assays. We seen some diminution of antibody titer with about a of the single-Ig assays. Old smaller reports reported reduction of IgG antibodies against the N protein and a peptide representing the S protein internal 21 to 28 days⁵ and against trimeric S protein internal 56 days¹⁴ after a obvious check by qPCR. These discrepancies will seemingly be explained partly by variations in the specificity and sensitivity of the assays aged as successfully as variations in the form and performance of the semiquantitative assays aged, including the antigen centered and the analytic sensitivity and range, as successfully as variations searching for populations. As an illustration, thanks to frequent qPCR attempting out and screening, it’s miles seemingly that the Icelandic qPCR-obvious persons were healthy, as when in contrast with the contributors in assorted reports. Repeated SARS-CoV-2 publicity is unlikely to impress the persistence of antibody ranges in Iceland, given the low incidence of infection. Comparative reports the utilization of validated quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays are wished; those described in the published literature are essentially based utterly utterly on little pattern sizes.^9-12

Of the 22 recovered persons who had a adversarial consequence (the utilization of the mixed pan-Ig antibody tests) for an early pattern and who had one other pattern tested no lower than a month later, 19 (86%) obtained a 2nd adversarial consequence. Thus, either some persons contaminated by SARS-CoV-2 contrivance no antibodies or undetectable ranges of antibodies reactive to the S1 and N proteins, even 3 months after infection, or some qPCR delivered untrue obvious outcomes.

Among recovered persons, antibody ranges are elevated in older persons and in those extra severely tormented by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Ladies folks, who tend to change into less ill than men, had decrease antibody ranges in two spike protein antibody assays. SARS-CoV-2 antibody ranges were decrease in people who smoke. Smoking will enhance the possibility of severe Covid-19 sickness amongst young adults,¹⁵ and smoking has been reported to expand the expression of ACE2,¹⁶ the receptor for cell entry of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

The humoral immune response is severe for the clearance of cytopathic viruses and is commonly significant for the prevention of viral reinfection.¹⁷ A relationship between a humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and protection against reinfection by this virus has been shown in rhesus macaques¹⁸ however has yet to be established in humans. No topic the connection or lack thereof between seropositivity against SARS-CoV-2 and protection against reinfection, the low SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in Iceland signifies that the Icelandic population is weak to a 2nd wave of infection.

Disclosure forms equipped by the authors are readily accessible with the fleshy text of this article at NEJM.org.

This article was published on September 1, 2020, at NEJM.org.

From deCODE Genetics/Amgen (D.F.G., G.L.N., P.M., Ample.G., H.H., A.O.A., Ample. Bjarnadottir, B. Thorsteinsdottir, S.Ample., Ample. Birgisdottir, A.M.Ample., G.A.A., E.V.I., M.A., F.J., A.B.A., J.B., B.E., R.F., E.E.G., S.G., Ample.R.G., A.G., A.H., B.O.J., A.J., H.J., T.Ample., D.N.M., O.T.M., S.R., L.R., A.S., G. Sveinbjornsson, Ample.E.S., E.A.T., B. Thorbjornsson, J.S., G.M., G.G., U.T., I.J., P.S., Ample.S.), the College of Engineering and Pure Sciences (D.F.G., P.M.), the Department of Anthropology (A.H.), the BioMedical Middle (Ample.G.Ample.), and the School of Drugs, College of Smartly being Sciences (M.I.S., M.G., Ample.G.Ample., R.P., U.T., I.J., Ample.S.), College of Iceland, Interior Drugs and Rehabilitation Companies and products (E.E., D.H., R.F.I., M.G., L.B.O., M.Ample., R.P.), the Division of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Drugs (M.I.S.), and the Department of Medical Microbiology (O.S.G., T.R.G., Ample.G.Ample., M.S.), Landspitali–the National College Sanatorium, and the Directorate of Smartly being (G. Sigmundsdottir, M.T., Ample.S.J., A.M., T.G.), Reykjavik, and the Smartly being Care Institution of South Iceland, Selfoss (S.H.Ample.) — all in Iceland.

Take care of reprint requests to Dr. Stefansson at deCODE Genetics–Amgen, Sturlugata 8, Reykjavik 102, Iceland, or at [email protected].

1. 1. Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, et al. Medical aspects of patients contaminated with 2019 original coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet 2020;395: 497–506.

2. 2. Vabret N, Britton GJ, Gruber C, et al. Immunology of COVID-19: contemporary deliver of the science. Immunity 2020;52: 910–941.

3. 3. Zhao J, Yuan Q, Wang H, et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of original coronavirus illness 2019. Clin Infect Dis 2020 March 28 (Epub ahead of print).

4. 4. Pollán M, Pérez-Gómez B, Pastor-Barriuso R, et al. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 in Spain (ENE-COVID): a nationwide, population-essentially based utterly utterly seroepidemiological search for. Lancet 2020;396: 535–544.

5. 5. Long Q-X, Tang X-J, Shi Q-L, et al. Medical and immunological review of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Nat Med 2020;26: 1200–1204.

6. 6. Streeck H, Schulte B, Kuemmerer B, et al. An infection fatality rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a German neighborhood with a clear-spreading event (https://www.medrxiv.org/philosophize material/10.1101/2020.05.04.20090076v2). preprint.

7. 7. Russell TW, Hellewell J, Jarvis CI, et al. Estimating the infection and case fatality ratio for coronavirus illness (COVID-19) the utilization of age-adjusted recordsdata from the outbreak on the Diamond Princess cruise ship, February 2020. Euro Surveill 2020;25(12).

8. 8. Verity R, Okell LC, Dorigatti I, et al. Estimates of the severity of coronavirus illness 2019: a mannequin-essentially based utterly utterly prognosis. Lancet Infect Dis 2020;20: 669–677.

9. 9. GeurtsvanKessel CH, Okba NMA, Igloi Z, et al. An evaluation of COVID-19 serological assays informs future diagnostics and publicity review. Nat Commun 2020;11: 3436–3436.

10. 10. Meyer B, Torriani G, Yerly S, et al. Validation of a commercially readily accessible SARS-CoV-2 serological immunoassay. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020 June 27 (Epub ahead of print).

11. 11. Beavis KG, Matushek SM, Abeleda APF, et al. Evaluation of the EUROIMMUN anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA assay for detection of IgA and IgG antibodies. J Clin Virol 2020;129: 104468–104468.

12. 12. Jääskeläinen AJ, Kuivanen S, Kekäläinen E, et al. Performance of six SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays in comparability with microneutralisation. J Clin Virol 2020;129: 104512–104512.

13. 13. Gudbjartsson DF, Helgason A, Jonsson H, et al. Unfold of SARS-CoV-2 in the Icelandic population. N Engl J Med 2020;382: 2302–2315.

14. 14. Adams ER, Ainsworth M, Anand R, et al. Antibody attempting out for COVID-19: a fable from the National COVID Scientific Advisory Panel (https://www.medrxiv.org/philosophize material/10.1101/2020.04.15.20066407v3). preprint.

15. 15. Adams SH, Park MJ, Schaub JP, Brindis CD, Irwin CE Jr. Medical vulnerability of young adults to severe COVID-19 sickness — recordsdata from the National Smartly being Interview Gaze. J Adolesc Smartly being 2020 July 9 (Epub ahead of print).

16. 16. Leung JM, Yang CX, Tam A, et al. ACE-2 expression in the little airway epithelia of people who smoke and COPD patients: implications for COVID-19. Eur Respir J 2020;55: 2000688–2000688.

17. 17. Dörner T, Radbruch A. Antibodies and B cell memory in viral immunity. Immunity 2007;27: 384–392.

18. 18. Deng W, Bao L, Liu J, et al. Major publicity to SARS-CoV-2 protects against reinfection in rhesus macaques. science 2020;369: 818–823.