Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36442059›Full record

ReviewAnnals of internal medicine2023

Major Update 2: Antibody Response and Risk for Reinfection After SARS-CoV-2 Infection-Final Update of a Living, Rapid Review.

Haley K Holmer, Katherine Mackey, Celia V Fiordalisi, Mark Helfand

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of internal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Seroprevalence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies Following the Omicron BA.1 Wave.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  11. Living, Rapid Reviews in a Rapidly Evolving World.Annals of internal medicine · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Haley K HolmerScientific Resource Center for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Portland, Oregon (H.K.H., C.V.F.).ORCID 0000-0003-4198-8708
Katherine MackeyVA Portland Health Care System, Portland, Oregon (K.M.).ORCID 0000-0003-4749-5664
Celia V FiordalisiScientific Resource Center for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Portland, Oregon (H.K.H., C.V.F.).ORCID 0000-0001-5610-1925
Mark HelfandVA Portland Health Care System and Scientific Resource Center for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Portland, Oregon (M.H.).ORCID 0000-0003-4846-9900
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality · USVA Portland Health Care System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe durability of the antibody response after SARS-CoV-2 infection and the role of antibodies in protection against reinfection are unclear. PURPOSE: To synthesize evidence on the SARS-CoV-2 antibody response and reinfection risk with a focus on gaps identified in our prior reports. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, CINAHL, World Health Organization Research Database, and reference lists from 16 December 2021 through 8 July 2022, with surveillance through 22 August 2022. STUDY SELECTION: English-language, cohort studies evaluating IgG antibody duration at least 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection, the antibody response among immunocompromised adults, predictors of nonseroconversion, and reinfection risk. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators sequentially extracted study data and rated quality. DATA SYNTHESIS: Most adults had IgG antibodies after SARS-CoV-2 infection at time points greater than 12 months (low strength of evidence [SoE]). Although most immunocompromised adults develop antibodies, the overall proportion with antibodies is lower compared with immunocompetent adults (moderate SoE for organ transplant patients and low SoE for patients with cancer or HIV). Prior infection provided substantial, sustained protection against symptomatic reinfection with the Delta variant (high SoE) and reduced the risk for severe disease due to Omicron variants (moderate SoE). Prior infection was less protective against reinfection with Omicron overall (moderate SoE), but protection from earlier variants waned rapidly (low SoE). LIMITATION: Single review for abstract screening and sequential review for study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment.

conclusionEvidence for a sustained antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is considerable for both Delta and Omicron variants. Prior infection protected against reinfection with both variants, but, for Omicron, protection was weaker and waned rapidly. This information may have limited clinical applicability as new variants emerge. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42020207098).

Indexed as

Antibody FormationCOVID-19AdultHumansImmunoglobulin GReinfectionSARS-CoV-2United StatesImmunoglobulin G

Identifiers

PMID36442059
PMCPMC9707440
OpenAlexW4310102556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.