2022
DOI: 10.1101/2022.12.30.22284061
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bridging the gap – estimation of 2022/2023 SARS-CoV-2 healthcare burden in Germany based on multidimensional data from a rapid epidemic panel

Abstract: Throughout the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, Germany lacked an adaptive population panel for epidemic diseases and a modelling platform to rapidly incorporate panel estimates. We evaluated how a cross-sectional analysis of 9922 participants of the MuSPAD study in June/July 2022 combined with a newly developed modelling platform could bridge the gap and analyzed antibody levels, neutralizing serum activity and interferon-gamma release response of serum samples. We categorized the population into four groups with differi… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

2
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Having determined that RSV antibody titers appear stable from age 5 onwards, we next assessed long-term antibody presence by evaluating a longitudinal cohort of 190 individuals who donated samples in 2021 and 2022 (separated by 13-15 months) from the MuSPAD cohort, a German supraregional population-based cohort [25], adapted as an epidemic panel [26, 27]. To avoid including any individuals who had experienced infections between samplings, we excluded anyone who had a change in titer greater than 25% from 2021 to 2022 for both post-F and N (9% of samples).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Having determined that RSV antibody titers appear stable from age 5 onwards, we next assessed long-term antibody presence by evaluating a longitudinal cohort of 190 individuals who donated samples in 2021 and 2022 (separated by 13-15 months) from the MuSPAD cohort, a German supraregional population-based cohort [25], adapted as an epidemic panel [26, 27]. To avoid including any individuals who had experienced infections between samplings, we excluded anyone who had a change in titer greater than 25% from 2021 to 2022 for both post-F and N (9% of samples).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To avoid including any individuals who had experienced infections between samplings, we excluded anyone who had a change in titer greater than 25% from 2021 to 2022 for both post-F and N (9% of samples). Overall, both post-F and N titers were highly stable, decreasing by 8.6% (0.5 – 15.4) and 9.5% (1.7 – 19.2),[26] respectively ( Figure 4c and d ). There was no significant effect of age upon rate of decay for either post-F or N (all p=0.99, Figure 4e and f ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, such analyses were within the scope of some of the participating studies. There, an increasing activity of neutralising antibodies against the S-antigen for Wuhan and BA.5 variants could be detected with higher categories of the combined endpoint (26). The extent to which an antibody response is actually associated with a protective effect against infection or a severe course after infection is strongly dependent on the SARS-CoV-2 variant circulating.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%