ArticleThe Lancet. Respiratory medicine2021
SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and subsequent infection risk in healthy young adults: a prospective cohort study.
Article in The Lancet. Respiratory medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 107 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
107 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 170 citations in OpenAlex.
- Protective effectiveness of previous infection against subsequent SARS-Cov-2 infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- The Protection of Naturally Acquired Antibodies Against Subsequent SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Emerging microbes & infections · 2022Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of the Protective Effect of Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection on Repeat Infection.Evaluation & the health professions · 2021Pooled it
- Live microbials to boost Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity clinical trial (Live BASIC trial): a triple-blind randomized controlled trial.Infection · 2026Trial
- Antibody therapy reverses biological signatures of COVID-19 progression.Cell reports. Medicine · 2022Trial
- Durability of Functional SARS-CoV-2-Specific Immunological Memory and T Cell Response up to 8-9 Months Postrecovery From COVID-19.Journal of immunology research · 2025Article
- Trends in Testing for SARS-CoV-2 Among Healthcare Workers in a Canadian Cohort Study During the COVID-19 Pandemic, June 2020 to November 2023.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2025Article
- Post-COVID-19 manifestations among college students: shedding the light on young adults' health.BMC public health · 2024Article
- A SARS-CoV-2 minimum data standard to support national serology reporting.Annals of clinical biochemistry · 2024Article
- Clinical and functional assessment of SARS-CoV-2 sequelae among young marines - a panel study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2024Article
- Insights from an N3C RECOVER EHR-based cohort study characterizing SARS-CoV-2 reinfections and Long COVID.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- Effectiveness and safety of immune response to SARS‑CoV‑2 vaccine in patients with chronic kidney disease and dialysis: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.Biomedical reports · 2024Article
- High diagnostic accuracy of quantitative SARS-CoV-2 spike-binding-IgG assay and correlation withHeliyon · 2024Article
- Protection from prior natural infection vs. vaccination against SARS-CoV-2-a statistical note to avoid biased interpretation.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Longitudinal fecal shedding of SARS-CoV-2, pepper mild mottle virus, and human mitochondrial DNA in COVID-19 patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Evaluating the risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection with the Omicron or Delta variant in Wales, UK.PloS one · 2024Article
- Integrated epigenomic exposure signature discovery.Epigenomics · 2024Article
- Distinct receptor binding domain IgG thresholds predict protective host immunity across SARS-CoV-2 variants and time.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Article
- Studying temporal titre evolution of commercial SARS-CoV-2 assays reveals significant shortcomings of using BAU standardization for comparison.Virology journal · 2023Article
47 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
35 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhether young adults who are infected with SARS-CoV-2 are at risk of subsequent infection is uncertain. We investigated the risk of subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection among young adults seropositive for a previous infection.
methodsThis analysis was performed as part of the prospective COVID-19 Health Action Response for Marines study (CHARM). CHARM included predominantly male US Marine recruits, aged 18-20 years, following a 2-week unsupervised quarantine at home. After the home quarantine period, upon arrival at a Marine-supervised 2-week quarantine facility (college campus or hotel), participants were enrolled and were assessed for baseline SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity, defined as a dilution of 1:150 or more on receptor-binding domain and full-length spike protein ELISA. Participants also completed a questionnaire consisting of demographic information, risk factors, reporting of 14 specific COVID-19-related symptoms or any other unspecified symptom, and brief medical history. SARS-CoV-2 infection was assessed by PCR at weeks 0, 1, and 2 of quarantine and participants completed a follow-up questionnaire, which included questions about the same COVID-19-related symptoms since the last study visit. Participants were excluded at this stage if they had a positive PCR test during quarantine. Participants who had three negative swab PCR results during quarantine and a baseline serum serology test at the beginning of the supervised quarantine that identified them as seronegative or seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 then went on to basic training at Marine Corps Recruit Depot-Parris Island. Three PCR tests were done at weeks 2, 4, and 6 in both seropositive and seronegative groups, along with the follow-up symptom questionnaire and baseline neutralising antibody titres on all subsequently infected seropositive and selected seropositive uninfected participants (prospective study period).
findingsBetween May 11, 2020, and Nov 2, 2020, we enrolled 3249 participants, of whom 3168 (98%) continued into the 2-week quarantine period. 3076 (95%) participants, 2825 (92%) of whom were men, were then followed up during the prospective study period after quarantine for 6 weeks. Among 189 seropositive participants, 19 (10%) had at least one positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 during the 6-week follow-up (1·1 cases per person-year). In contrast, 1079 (48%) of 2247 seronegative participants tested positive (6·2 cases per person-year). The incidence rate ratio was 0·18 (95% CI 0·11-0·28; p<0·001). Among seropositive recruits, infection was more likely with lower baseline full-length spike protein IgG titres than in those with higher baseline full-length spike protein IgG titres (hazard ratio 0·45 [95% CI 0·32-0·65]; p<0·001). Infected seropositive participants had viral loads that were about 10-times lower than those of infected seronegative participants (ORF1ab gene cycle threshold difference 3·95 [95% CI 1·23-6·67]; p=0·004). Among seropositive participants, baseline neutralising titres were detected in 45 (83%) of 54 uninfected and in six (32%) of 19 infected participants during the 6 weeks of observation (ID50 difference p<0·0001).
interpretationSeropositive young adults had about one-fifth the risk of subsequent infection compared with seronegative individuals. Although antibodies induced by initial infection are largely protective, they do not guarantee effective SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation activity or immunity against subsequent infection. These findings might be relevant for optimisation of mass vaccination strategies.
fundingDefense Health Agency and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.