Estimated SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in the US as of September 2020

Bajema, Kristina L.; Wiegand, Ryan E.; Cuffe, Kendra M.; Patel, Sadhna; Iachan, Ronaldo; Lim, Travis; Lee, Adam F.; Moyse, Davia; Havers, Fiona; Harding, Lee E.; Fry, Alicia M.; Hall, Aron J.; Martin, Kelly J.; Biel, Marjorie; Deng, Yangyang; Meyer, William A.; Mathur, Mohit; Kyle, Tonja M.; Gundlapalli, Adi V.; Thornburg, Natalie J.; Petersen, Lyle R.; Edens, Chris

doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.7976

Cited by 301 publications

(387 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

337

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Especially among older adults, it is often safe to assume that they have already encountered certain antigens and therefore mount a secondary immune response ( Cohen et al, 2001 ). This is a key consideration for the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, given that around 10% of Americans had prior exposure as of September 2020 ( Bajema et al, 2020 ). Many more have had exposure to other coronaviruses, which may influence immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 ( Poland et al, 2020 ), and some of the current vaccine candidates require multiple doses.…”

Section: The Immune System’s Immediate and Delayed Vaccine Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological and Behavioral Predictors of Vaccine Efficacy: Considerations for COVID-19

Madison

Shrout

Renna

2021

Perspect Psychol Sci

155

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine candidates are being evaluated, with the goal of conferring immunity on the highest percentage of people who receive the vaccine as possible. It is noteworthy that vaccine efficacy depends not only on the vaccine but also on characteristics of the vaccinated. Over the past 30 years, a series of studies has documented the impact of psychological factors on the immune system’s vaccine response. Robust evidence has demonstrated that stress, depression, loneliness, and poor health behaviors can impair the immune system’s response to vaccines, and this effect may be greatest in vulnerable groups such as the elderly. Psychological factors are also implicated in the prevalence and severity of vaccine-related side effects. These findings have generalized across many vaccine types and therefore may be relevant to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. In this review, we discuss these psychological and behavioral risk factors for poor vaccine responses, their relevance to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as targeted psychological and behavioral interventions to boost vaccine efficacy and reduce side effects. Recent data suggest these psychological and behavioral risk factors are highly prevalent during the COVID-19 pandemic, but intervention research suggests that psychological and behavioral interventions can increase vaccine efficacy.

show abstract

Section: The Immune System’s Immediate and Delayed Vaccine Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological and Behavioral Predictors of Vaccine Efficacy: Considerations for COVID-19

Madison

Shrout

Renna

2021

Perspect Psychol Sci

155

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, serologic assays to detect specific antibodies against SARS-CoV‑2 can better evaluate the number of infections and identify subjects who may still contribute to ongoing virus transmission. Results from seroprevalence studies in the general population suggest that most persons remained uninfected during the first epidemic wave, far away from reaching herd immunity [ 12 , 13 ]. In the present study, we report the first follow-up results of the efficacy of longitudinal preventive measures as well as the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV‑2 IgG antibodies in cancer patients on active treatment from a tertiary care hospital in northern Italy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the longitudinal effectiveness of preventive measures against COVID-19 and seroprevalence of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in cancer outpatients and healthcare workers

Fong¹,

Nicolò²,

Alber³

et al. 2021

Wien Klin Wochenschr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background It has been assumed that cancer patients, especially those undergoing chemotherapy, are at increased risk for infection and severe illness from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) compared to the general population. After the first alert message from the local healthcare service, a series of drastic measures were taken at our outpatient clinic to contain the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods In this retrospective study, all consecutive cancer outpatients completed a baseline SARS-CoV-2 test via real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from 15 March to 26 May 2020. In the later phase, after the peak of the pandemic, patients as well as healthcare workers were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Results Between 15 March and 26 May 2020, 0.78% (N = 5/640) cancer patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Between 22 June and 17 July 2020, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies were detected in 2 out of 250 (0.8%) cancer patients and 2 out of 36 (5.5%) healthcare workers. In only 1 out of 4 cancer patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, could SARS-CoV-2 antibodies be detected. Conclusion Our findings suggest that the majority of our patients and healthcare workers had not been infected with SARS-CoV-2 and rapidly implemented measures were effective. Maintenance of preventive Data availability The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

show abstract

“…While population based surveillance is getting some attention 32 – 34 , the need to understand how asymptomatic patients transmit the virus, and whether they sustain any cryptic physiological damage has driven scientists to random sampling of the population to identify these subjects 35 , 36 . While the range of physiological impact is being expanded, most such studies are focused on staging for identifying treatment efficacy of disease 37 – 40 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lies, Gosh Darn Lies, and not enough good statistics: why epidemic model parameter estimation fails

Platt

Parida

Zalloua

2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We sought to investigate whether epidemiological parameters that define epidemic models could be determined from the epidemic trajectory of infections, recovery, and hospitalizations prior to peak, and also to evaluate the comparability of data between jurisdictions reporting their statistics. We found that, analytically, the pre-peak growth of an epidemic underdetermines the model variates, and that the rate limiting variables are dominated by the exponentially expanding eigenmode of their equations. The variates quickly converge to the ratio of eigenvector components of the positive growth mode, which determines the doubling time. Without a sound epidemiological study framework, measurements of infection rates and other parameters are highly corrupted by uneven testing rates, uneven counting, and under reporting of relevant values. We argue that structured experiments must be performed to estimate these parameters in order to perform genetic association studies, or to construct viable models accurately predicting critical quantities such as hospitalization loads.

show abstract

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in the US as of September 2020

Cited by 301 publications

References 43 publications

Psychological and Behavioral Predictors of Vaccine Efficacy: Considerations for COVID-19

Psychological and Behavioral Predictors of Vaccine Efficacy: Considerations for COVID-19

Evaluating the longitudinal effectiveness of preventive measures against COVID-19 and seroprevalence of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in cancer outpatients and healthcare workers

Lies, Gosh Darn Lies, and not enough good statistics: why epidemic model parameter estimation fails

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About