ArticleClinical immunology communications2026
Discordant Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Household Contacts.
Article in Clinical immunology communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: We investigated discordant SARS-CoV-2 infection outcomes among household contacts. Methods: 95 recently-exposed household contacts were recruited from June 2020 to February 2023 in a prospective study of "discordant pairs", where one individual experienced documented SARS-CoV-2 infection while another close contact consistently tested negative despite shared living arrangements. We collected pre- and post-infection samples and analyzed both SARS-CoV-2 and common cold coronavirus (CCC)-specific T cell responses, as well as spike RBD neutralizing and nucleocapsid-binding antibody titers. Results: Antibody and cellular immune responses did not identify a single predominant mechanism explaining discordant outcomes. Instead, we observed distinct immunological patterns that could be associated with protection from infection across different household contacts. In ~40% of cases, uninfected individuals showed pre-existing immunity to non-spike antigens and CCC sequences. Moreover, 30% of uninfected individuals displayed evidence suggestive of abortive infections, characterized by increased T responses without detectable changes in antibody levels. The remaining cases showed no clear changes in immunological patterns. Conclusions: Multiple immunity-associated factors operate in household settings for SARS-CoV-2-exposed individuals who do not develop overt infection, including both pre-existing immunity and abortive or transient infections. Although causality cannot be established without additional functional assays, this diversity of protective immune responses might help explain why some individuals remain uninfected despite close contact with SARS-CoV-2-positive household members.
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.