Search

To study the differences in the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the response to vaccination, we characterized the humoral immune kinetics of these situations. In this prospective longitudinal study, we followed unvaccinated COVID-19-recovered individuals (n = 130) and naïve, two-dose BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals (n = 372) who were age- and BMI-matched for six months during the first pandemic year. Anti-RBD-IgG, neutralizing antibodies (NAbs), and avidity were assessed monthly. For recovered patients, data on symptoms and the severity of the disease were collected. Anti-RBD-IgG and NAbs titers at peak were higher after vaccination vs. after infection, but the decline was steeper (peak log IgG: 3.08 vs. 1.81, peak log NAbs: 5.93 vs. 5.04, slopes: −0.54 vs. −0.26). Peak anti-RBD-IgG and NAbs were higher in recovered individuals with BMI > 30 and in older individuals compared to individuals with BMI < 30, younger population. Of the recovered, 42 (36%) experienced long-COVID symptoms. Avidity was initially higher in vaccinated individuals compared with recovered individuals, though with time, it increased in recovered individuals but not among vaccinated individuals. Here, we show that while the initial antibody titers, neutralization, and avidity are lower in SARS-CoV-2-recovered individuals, they persist for a longer duration. These results suggest differential protection against COVID-19 in recovered-unvaccinated vs. naïve-vaccinated individuals.

Since the beginning of the Sever Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, school closure as a mitigating measure was at the center of a public and professional debate. While the negative effects of school closure cannot be ignored, accumulating data suggested that it is necessary for reducing community transmission. Our study presents an optional strategy for safe school opening during a pandemic, implemented in selected Israeli high schools by a special task force constructed by the Sheba Medical Center (SMC).The study took place between November 2020 and April 2021. Three schools from different areas of Israel were enrolled. The participants were asked to undergo bi-weekly SARS-CoV-2 rapid diagnostic antigen tests (Ag-RDT). Those who tested positive were requested to self-isolate, whereas their school contacts were tested daily by Ag-RDT. Participants with a previously documented SARS-CoV-2 infection or who were found to be SARS-CoV-2 seropositive upon enrollment were exempted from screening.Of a total of 361 participants who enrolled in the study, 12.3% were found to be seropositive. Fourteen SARS-CoV-2 cases were detected (3.5%), 12 of them in one single school located in an endemic area for SARS-CoV-2. The 14 cases resulted in 84 days of COVID-19-related absence from school, comparing with 1775 potential days of COVID-19-related absence under a strategy implementing self-isolation instead of testing.Safe continuation of academic routine during the pandemic is possible when using rapid Ag-RDT as a screening tool, while allowing swab collection by trained students and teachers.

Background Despite high vaccine coverage, an increase in breakthrough coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections, prompted administration of a third BNT162b2 dose to people aged >60 years in Israel since July 2021. Here, we report real-world immunogenicity following third dose. Methods Overall, 208 healthcare workers aged >60 years were included. Paired pre– and post–second and/or third dose immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralizing antibody titers were compared. A subpopulation of low responders to the second dose was also tested for T-cell activation. For 25 paired serum samples, we tested neutralization of wild-type vs neutralization of Delta and Lambda variants, pre– and post–third dose. Active surveillance of vaccine adverse events was conducted through surveys. Results A pronounced immune response was observed following the third dose, including a 33-fold and 51-fold increase in IgG and neutralizing antibody, respectively. The neutralizing antibody levels post–third dose were 9.34 times higher than post–second dose (geometric mean titer, 2598 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2085–3237] vs 207 [95% CI, 126–339]). Nine previously low responders had a significant antibody increase post–third dose, and 7 of 9 showed increase in T-cell activation. Additionally, sera obtained post–third dose highly and comparably neutralized the wild-type and Delta and Lambda variants. Of 1056 responders to the adverse-event survey, none had serious events. Conclusions We demonstrate a rapid and broad immune response to the third BNT162b2 dose in individuals >60 years of age.

We evaluated neutralising antibody titres against wild type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 and four Omicron variants (BA.1, BA.2, BA.5 and BA.2.75) in fully vaccinated (three doses of Comirnaty vaccine) healthcare workers (HCW) in Israel who had breakthrough BA.1/BA5 infections. Omicron breakthrough infections in vaccinated individuals resulted in increased neutralising antibodies against the WT and Omicron variants compared with vaccinated uninfected HCW. HCW who recovered from BA.1 or BA.5 infections showed similar neutralising antibodies levels against BA.2.75.

Background Despite the high efficacy of the BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), rare breakthrough infections have been reported, including infections among health care workers. Data are needed to characterize these infections and define correlates of breakthrough and infectivity. Methods At the largest medical center in Israel, we identified breakthrough infections by performing extensive evaluations of health care workers who were symptomatic (including mild symptoms) or had known infection exposure. These evaluations included epidemiologic investigations, repeat reverse-transcriptase–polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) assays, antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic testing (Ag-RDT), serologic assays, and genomic sequencing. Correlates of breakthrough infection were assessed in a case–control analysis. We matched patients with breakthrough infection who had antibody titers obtained within a week before SARS-CoV-2 detection (peri-infection period) with four to five uninfected controls and used generalized estimating equations to predict the geometric mean titers among cases and controls and the ratio between the titers in the two groups. We also assessed the correlation between neutralizing antibody titers and N gene cycle threshold (Ct) values with respect to infectivity. Results Among 1497 fully vaccinated health care workers for whom RT-PCR data were available, 39 SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections were documented. Neutralizing antibody titers in case patients during the peri-infection period were lower than those in matched uninfected controls (case-to-control ratio, 0.361; 95% confidence interval, 0.165 to 0.787). Higher peri-infection neutralizing antibody titers were associated with lower infectivity (higher Ct values). Most breakthrough cases were mild or asymptomatic, although 19% had persistent symptoms (>6 weeks). The B.1.1.7 (alpha) variant was found in 85% of samples tested. A total of 74% of case patients had a high viral load (Ct value

We assess the immunogenicity and efficacy of Spikevax and Comirnaty as fourth dose COVID-19 vaccines. Six months post-fourth-dose, IgG levels were higher than pre-fourth dose at 1.58-fold (95% CI: 1.27–1.97) in Spikevax and 1.16-fold (95% CI: 0.98–1.37) in Comirnaty vaccinees. Nearly 60% (159/274) of vaccinees contracted SARS-CoV-2. Infection hazard ratios (HRs) for Spikevax (0.82; 95% CI: 0.62–1.09) and Comirnaty (0.86; 95% CI: 0.65–1.13) vaccinees were similar, as were substantial-disease HRs, i.e. 0.28 (95% CI: 0.13–0.62) and 0.51 (95% CI: 0.27–0.96), respectively.

ImportanceThe BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine (BioNTech/Pfizer) has high effectiveness that wanes within several months. The third dose is effective in mounting a significant immune response, but its durability is unknown.ObjectiveTo compare antibody waning after second and third doses and estimate the association of antibody kinetics with susceptibility to infection with the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn a prospective longitudinal cohort study in a tertiary medical center in Israel, health care workers who received the BNT162b2 vaccine were followed up monthly for IgG and neutralizing antibody levels. Linear mixed models were used to compare antibody titer waning of second and third doses and to assess whether antibody dynamics were associated with Omicron transmission. Avidity, T cell activation, and microneutralization of sera against different variants of concern were assessed for a subgroup.ExposureVaccination with a booster dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the rate of antibody titer change over time, and the secondary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection, as confirmed by reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction.ResultsOverall, 4868 health care workers (mean [SD] age, 46.9 [13.7] years; 3558 [73.1%] women) and 3972 health care workers (mean [SD] age, 48.5 [14.1] years; 996 [74.9%] women) were followed up for 5 months after their second and third vaccine doses, respectively. Waning of IgG levels was slower after the third compared with the second dose (1.32%/d [95% CI, 1,29%/d to 1.36%/d] vs 2.26% [95% CI, 2.13%/d 2.38%/d]), as was waning of neutralizing antibody levels (1.32%/d [95% CI, 1.21%/d to 1.43%/d] vs 3.34%/d [95% CI, 3.11%/d to 3.58%/d]). Among 2865 health care workers assessed for Omicron incidence during an additional 2 months of follow-up, lower IgG peak (ratio of means 0.86 [95% CI, 0.80-0.91]) was associated with Omicron infection, and among participants aged 65 years and older, faster waning of IgG and neutralizing antibodies (ratio of mean rates, 1.40; [95% CI, 1.13-1.68] and 3.58 [95% CI, 1.92-6.67], respectively) were associated with Omicron infection. No waning in IgG avidity was observed 112 days after the third dose. Live neutralization of Omicron was lower compared with previous strains, with a geometric mean titer at the peak of 111 (95% CI, 75-166), compared with 942 (95% CI, 585-1518) for WT, 410 (95% CI, 266-634) for Delta; it demonstrated similar waning to 26 (95% CI, 16-42) within 4 months. Among 77 participants tested for T cell activity, mean (SD) T cell activity decreased from 98 (5.4) T cells/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells to 59 (9.3) T cells/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells.Conclusions and RelevanceThis study found that the third vaccine dose was associated with greater durability than the second dose; however, Omicron was associated with greater resistance to neutralization than wild type and Delta variants of concern. Humoral response dynamics were associated with susceptibility to Omicron infection.

Booster doses for the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic are under consideration in many countries. We report a three-month follow-up of 700 participants in a fourth vaccine dose study, comparing BNT162b2 and mRNA1273, administered four months after a third BNT162b2 dose. Waning of the immune response was evident during follow-up, with an 11% (ß=0.89, 95% CI, 0.88–0.9) and 21% (ß=0.79, 95% CI, 0.76–0.82) multiplicative decay per week of IgG and neutralizing antibodies, respectively, in the mRNA1273 group, and of 14% (ß=0.86, 95% CI, 0.86–0.87) and 26% (ß=0.74, 95% CI, 0.72–0.76), respectively, in the BNT162b2 group. Direct neutralization of Omicron variants was low relative to ancestral strains. Cumulatively over the study period, both vaccines showed little efficacy against infection but were highly efficacious against substantial disease [89% [(IRR 0.11, 95% CI, 0.02–0.37) and 71% (IRR 0.29, 95% CI, 0.13–0.57) for mRNA1273 and BNT162b2, respectively]. These results are informative for further boosting policy-making.

ImportanceA correlation between antibody levels and risk of infection has been demonstrated for the wild-type, Alpha, and Delta SARS-COV-2 variants. High rates of breakthrough infections by the Omicron variant emphasized the need to investigate whether the humoral response elicited by mRNA vaccines is also associated with reduced risk of Omicron infection and disease.ObjectiveTo investigate whether the high antibody levels in individuals who have received at least 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine are associated with reduced risk of Omicron infection and disease.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis prospective cohort study used serial real time–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and serological test data from January and May 2022 to assess the association of preinfection immunoglobin G (IgG) and neutralizing antibody titers with incidence of Omicron variant infection, incidence of symptomatic disease, and infectivity. Participants included health care workers who had received 3 or 4 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Data were analyzed from May to August 2022.ExposuresLevels of SARS-CoV-2 anti–receptor binding domain IgG and neutralizing antibodies.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcomes were incidence of Omicron infection, incidence of symptomatic disease, and infectivity. Outcomes were measured using SARS-COV-2 PCR and antigen testing and daily online surveys regarding symptomatic disease.ResultsThis study included 3 cohorts for 3 different analyses: 2310 participants were included in the protection from infection analysis (4689 exposure events; median [IQR] age, 50 [40-60] years; 3590 [76.6%] among female health care workers), 667 participants (median [IQR] age, 46.28 (37.44,54.8); 516 [77.4%] female) in the symptomatic disease analysis, and 532 participants (median [IQR] age, 48 [39-56] years; 403 [75.8%] female) in the infectivity analysis. Lower odds of infection were observed for each 10-fold increase in preinfection IgG (odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.90) and for each 2-fold increase in neutralizing antibody titers (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.95). The odds of substantial symptomatic disease were reduced for each 10-fold increase in IgG levels (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.29-0.78) and for each 2-fold increase in neutralizing antibodies levels (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.96). Infectivity, assessed by mean cycle threshold value, was not significantly decreased with increasing IgG or neutralizing antibodies titers.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of vaccinated health care workers, IgG and neutralizing antibody titer levels were associated with protection against infection with the Omicron variant and against symptomatic disease.

This work evaluated neutralising antibody titres against wild type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 and four Omicron variants (BA.1, BA.2, BA.4 and BA.5) in healthcare workers who had breakthrough BA.1 infection. Omicron breakthrough infection in individuals vaccinated three or four times before infection resulted in increased neutralising antibodies against the WT virus. The fourth vaccine dose did not further improve the neutralising efficiency over the third dose against all Omicron variants, especially BA.4 and BA.5. An Omicron-specific vaccine may be indicated.

Anticipating the need for a COVID-19 treatment centre in Israel, a designated facility was established at Sheba Medical Center—a quaternary referral centre. The goals were diagnosis and treatment of patients with COVID-19 while protecting patients and staff from infection and ensuring operational continuity and treatment of patients with non-COVID. Options considered included adaptation of existing wards, building a tented facility and converting a non-medical structure. The option chosen was a non-medical structure converted to a hospitalisation facility suited for COVID-19 with appropriate logistic and organisational adaptations. Operational principles included patient isolation, unidirectional workflow from clean to contaminated zones and minimising direct contact between patients and caregivers using personal protection equipment (PPE) and a multimodal telemedicine system. The ED was modified to enable triage and treatment of patients with COVID-19 while maintaining a COVID-19-free environment in the main campus. This system enabled treatment of patients with COVID-19 while maintaining staff safety and conserving the operational continuity and the ability to continue delivery of treatment to patients with non-COVID-19.

Background Healthcare workers (HCW) treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients face high levels of psychological stress. We aimed to compare mental health outcomes, risk and protective factors for posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS), probable depression, and anxiety between HCW working in COVID‐19 and non‐COVID‐19 wards. Methods A self‐report survey, administered in a large tertiary hospital in Israel during the peak of the COVID‐19 outbreak was completed by 828 HCW (42.2% physicians, 57.8% nurses. Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System; the Patient Health Questionnaire‐9; the Primary Care‐Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Screen for DSM‐5 (PC‐PTSD‐5) were used for assessing anxiety, depression, and PTSS, respectively. Pandemic‐related stress factors, negative experiences, and potential protective factors were also assessed. Results Median PC‐PTSD scores differed significantly between study teams (χ 2 [5] = 17.24; p = .004). Prevalence of probable depression and anxiety were similar in both groups. Risk factors for mental health outcomes included mental exhaustion, anxiety about being infected and infecting family. Overall, higher proportion of the COVID‐19 team witnessed patient deaths as compared to the non‐COVID‐19 team (50.2% vs. 24.7%). Witnessing patient death at the COVID‐19 wards was associated with a four‐fold increased likelihood of PTSS (odds ratio [OR] = 3.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58–9.99; p = .0007), compared with the non‐COVID‐19 wards (OR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.51–1.61; p = .43). Conclusions Witnessing patient death appears to be a risk factor for PTSS unique to HCW directly engaged in treating patients with COVID‐19. Our findings suggest that helping HCW cope with COVID‐19 related deaths might reduce their risk of posttraumatic stress.

Objective: To assess the validity of Antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 as decision support tool in various hospital-based clinical settings. Design: Retrospective cohort study among symptomatic and asymptomatic patients and Healthcare workers (HCW). Setting: A large tertiary teaching medical center serving as a major COVID-19 hospitalizing facility. Participants and Methods: Ag-RDTs’ performance was assessed in three clinical settings: 1. Symptomatic patients and HCW presenting at the Emergency Departments 2. Asymptomatic patients screened upon hospitalization 3. HCW of all sectors tested at the HCW clinic following exposure. Results: We obtained 5172 samples from 4595 individuals, who had both Ag-RDT and quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) results available. Of these, 485 samples were positive by qRT-PCR. The positive percent agreement (PPA) of Ag-RDT was greater for lower cycle threshold (Ct) values, reaching 93% in cases where Ct-value was Conclusions: Ag-RDT are highly sensitive to the infectious stage of COVID-19 manifested by either high viral load (lower Ct) or proximity to infection, whether patient is symptomatic or asymptomatic. Thus, this simple-to-use and inexpensive detection method can be used as a decision support tool in various in-hospital clinical settings, assisting patient flow and maintaining sufficient hospital staffing.

BACKGROUNDFollowing the emergence of the Omicron variant of concern, we investigated immunogenicity, efficacy and safety of BNT162b2 or mRNA1273 fourth dose in an open-label, clinical intervention trial.METHODSPrimary end-points were safety and immunogenicity and secondary end-points were vaccine efficacy in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 symptomatic disease. The two intervention arms were compared to a matched control group. Eligible participants were healthcare-workers (HCW) vaccinated with three BNT162b2 doses, and whose IgG antibody levels were ≤700 BAU (40-percentile). IgG and neutralizing titers, direct neutralization of live VOCs, and T-cell activation were assessed. All participants were actively screened for SARS-CoV-2 infections on a weekly basis.RESULTSOf 1050 eligible HCW, 154 and 120 were enrolled to receive BNT162b2 and mRNA1273, respectively, and compared to 426 age-matched controls. Recipients of both vaccine types had a ∼9-10-fold increase in IgG and neutralizing titers within 2 weeks of vaccination and an 8-fold increase in live Omicron VOC neutralization, restoring titers to those measured after the third vaccine dose. Breakthrough infections were common, mostly very mild, yet, with high viral loads. Vaccine efficacy against infection was 30% (95%CI:-9% to 55%) and 11% (95%CI:-43% to +43%) for BNT162b2 and mRNA1273, respectively. Local and systemic adverse reactions were reported in 80% and 40%, respectively.CONCLUSIONSThe fourth COVID-19 mRNA dose restores antibody titers to peak post-third dose titers. Low efficacy in preventing mild or asymptomatic Omicron infections and the infectious potential of breakthrough cases raise the urgency of next generation vaccine development.Trial registration numberclicaltrials.gov: NCT05231005, NCT05230953

As the effectiveness of a two-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine regimen decreases with time, a third dose has been recommended. Here, we assessed immunogenicity, vaccine effectiveness and safety of the third BNT162b2 vaccine dose in a prospective cohort study of 12,413 healthcare workers (HCWs). Anti-RBD immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels were increased 1.7-fold after a third dose compared with following the second dose. Increased avidity from 61.1% (95% confidence interval (CI), 56.1-66.7) to 96.3% (95% CI, 94.2-98.5) resulted in a 6.1-fold increase in neutralization titer. Peri-infection humoral markers of 13 third-dose Delta variant of concern (VOC) breakthrough cases were lower compared with 52 matched controls. Vaccine effectiveness of the third dose relative to two doses was 85.6% (95% CI, 79.2-90.1). No serious adverse effects were reported. These results suggest that the third dose is superior to the second dose in both quantity and quality of IgG antibodies and safely boosts protection from infection.

The durability of the immune response following the 3-dose BNT162b2 vaccination is unknown. The complexity of the situation is enhanced by the threat that highly transmissible variants may further accelerate the decline in the protection afforded by mRNA vaccines.One hundred and three 3-dose-vaccinated heart transplant recipients were longitudinally assessed for the kinetics of variant-specific neutralization (Cohort 1, n = 60) and SARS-CoV-2-specific-T-cell response (Cohort 2, n = 54) over 6 months. Neutralization and T-cell responses were compared between paired samples at 2 time points, using the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Dunn's multiple comparison test for continuous variables and McNemar's test for dichotomous variables. The Bonferroni method of p values adjustment for multiple comparison was applied.The third dose induced high neutralization of the wild-type virus and delta variant (geometric mean titer [GMT], 137.2 [95% CI, 84.8-221.9] and 80.6, [95% CI, 49.3-132.0], respectively), and to a lesser degree of the omicron variant (GMT, 10.3 [95% CI, 5.9-17.9]). At 6 months, serum neutralizing activity declined but was still high for the wild-type virus and for the delta variant (GMTs 38.1 [95% CI, 21.2-69.4], p = 0.011; and 28.9 [95% CI, 16.6-52.3], p = 0.022, respectively), but not for the omicron variant (GMT 5.9 [95% CI, 3.4-9.8], p = 0.463). The percentages of neutralizing sera against the wild-type virus, delta and omicron variants increased from 70%, 65%, and 38%, before the third dose, to 93% (p0.001), 88% (p0.001), and 48% (p = 0.021) at 3 weeks after, respectively; and remained high through the 6 months for the wild-type (80%, p = 0.06) and delta (77%, p = 0.102). The third dose induced the development of a sustained SARS-CoV-2-specific-T-cell population, which persisted through 6 months.The third BNT162b2 dose elicited a durable SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell response and induced effective and durable neutralization of the wild-type virus and the delta variant, and to a lesser degree of the omicron variant.

Using isolates of SARS-CoV-2 WT, Beta, Delta and most importantly Omicron we studied the capability of the BNT162b2 vaccine given in two or three doses to neutralize major SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC).We demonstrate low neutralization efficiency against delta and wild-type for vaccines with more than 5 months following the second BNT162b2 dose, with no neutralization efficiency against Omicron. We demonstrate the importance of a third dose, by showing a 100-fold increase in neutralization efficiency of Omicron following a third dose, with a 4-fold reduced neutralization compared to that against the Delta VOC. The durability of the effect of the third dose is yet to be determined.

In a prospective cohort study involving 12,413 Health Care Workers (HCW), we assessed immunogenicity, vaccine-effectiveness (VE) and safety of the third BNT162b2 vaccine dose. One month after third dose, anti-RBD-IgG were induced 1.7-folds compared to one month after the second. A significant increase in avidity from 61.1% (95%CI:56.1-66.7) to 96.3% (95%CI:94.2-98.5) resulted in a 6.1-folds neutralizing antibodies induction. Linear mixed model demonstrated that the third dose elicited a greater response among HCW≥60 or those with ≥two comorbidities who had a lower response following the second dose. VE of the third dose relative to two doses was 85.6% (95% CI, 79.2-90.1%). No serious adverse effects were reported. These results suggest that the third dose is superior to the second dose in both quantity and quality of IgG-antibodies and safely boosts protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection by generating high avidity antibodies to levels that are not significantly different between healthy and vulnerable populations.

ObjectiveTo identify COVID-19 work-related stressors and experiences associated with sleep difficulties in HCW, and to assess the role of depression and traumatic stress in this association.MethodsA cross-sectional study of HCW using self-report questionnaires, during the first peak of the pandemic in Israel (April 2020), conducted in a large tertiary medical center in Israel. Study population included 189 physicians and nurses working in designated COVID-19 wards and a comparison group of 643 HCW. Mean age of the total sample was 41.7 ± 11.1, 67% were female, 42.1% physicians, with overall mean number of years of professional experience 14.2 ± 20. The exposure was working in COVID-19 wards and related specific stressors and negative experiences. Primary outcome measurement was the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). Secondary outcomes included the Primary Care-Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Screen (PC-PTSD-5); the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for depression; the anxiety module of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS); Pandemic-Related Stress Factors (PRSF) and witnessing patient suffering and death.ResultsCompared with non-COVID-19 HCW, COVID-19 HCW were more likely to be male (41.3% vs. 30.7%) and younger (36.91 ± 8.81 vs. 43.14 ± 11.35 years). COVID-19 HCW reported higher prevalence of sleep difficulties: 63% vs. 50.7% in the non-COVID group (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.15–2.29, p = 0.006), mostly difficulty maintaining sleep: 26.5% vs. 18.5% (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.11–2.44, p = 0.012). Negative COVID-19 work-related experiences, specifically witnessing patient physical suffering and death, partially explained the association. Although past psychological problems and current depression and PTSD were associated with difficulty maintaining sleep, the main association remained robust also after controlling for those conditions in the full model.Conclusion and RelevanceCOVID-19 frontline HCW were more likely to report sleep difficulties, mainly difficulty maintaining sleep, as compared with non-COVID-19 HCW working at the same hospital. Negative patient-care related experiences likely mediated the increased probability for those difficulties. Future research is needed to elucidate the long-term trajectories of sleep difficulties among HCW during large scale outbreaks, and to identify risk factors for their persistence.

BACKGROUND The repeated waves of the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted the necessity to optimize vaccine responses in immunocompromised populations. We investigated the safety and immunogenicity of a third, booster, dose of the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine in heart transplant (HT) patients. METHODS The cohort comprised 96 adult HT patients who received a third homologous dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine 168 days after the second dose. The vaccine-induced antibody responses of both receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG and neutralizing antibodies were assessed in all patients, with a positive antibody response being defined as the presence of either IgG anti-RBD or neutralizing antibodies. For a subset of patients, T cell response was also studied. RESULTS The third dose was associated with a low rate of adverse events, mostly mild pain at the injection site. No serious adverse events were recorded, and there were no episodes of rejection. At 18 days following the third dose of the vaccine, the positive antibody response increased from 23% to 67%, with a corresponding increase in neutralizing capacity. The third dose elicited SARS-CoV-2 neutralization titers >9-fold and IgG anti-RBD antibodies >3-fold of the range achieved after the two primary doses. Mycophenolate use, lower eGFR and higher C-reactive protein were independently associated with a reduced likelihood of generating an immune response. Importantly, a specific T-cell response following the third dose was evident in the majority of transplant recipients. CONCLUSIONS An homologous third booster dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine gave overall consistent tolerability and a good safety profile, while eliciting humoral and cellular immune responses.

Background: BNT162b2 was shown to be 92% effective in preventing COVID-19. Prioritizing vaccine rollout, and achievement of herd immunity depend on SARS-CoV-2 transmission reduction. The vaccine's effect on infectivity is thus a critical priority. Methods: Among all 9650 HCW of a large tertiary medical center in Israel, we calculated the prevalence of positive SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR cases with asymptomatic presentation, tested following known or presumed exposure and the infectious subset (N-gene-Ct-value

Summary Background Concurrent with the Pfizer–BioNTech BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine roll-out in Israel initiated on Dec 19, 2020, we assessed the early antibody responses and antibody kinetics after each vaccine dose in health-care workers of different ages and sexes, and with different comorbidities. Methods We did a prospective, single-centre, longitudinal cohort study at the Sheba Medical Centre (Tel-Hashomer, Israel). Eligible participants were health-care workers at the centre who had a negative anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay before receiving the first dose of the intramuscular vaccine, and at least one serological antibody test after the first dose of the vaccine. Health-care workers with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test before vaccination, a positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG serology test before vaccination, or infection with COVID-19 after vaccination were excluded from the study. Participants were followed up weekly for 5 weeks after the first vaccine dose; a second dose was given at week 3. Serum samples were obtained at baseline and at each weekly follow-up, and antibodies were tested at 1–2 weeks after the first vaccine dose, at week 3 with the administration of the second vaccine dose, and at weeks 4–5 (ie, 1–2 weeks after the second vaccine dose). Participants with comorbidities were approached to participate in an enriched comorbidities subgroup, and at least two neutralising assays were done during the 5 weeks of follow-up in those individuals. IgG assays were done for the entire study population, whereas IgM, IgA, and neutralising antibody assays were done only in the enriched comorbidities subgroup. Concentrations of IgG greater than 0·62 sample-to-cutoff (s/co) ratio and of IgA greater than 1·1 s/co, and titres of neutralising antibodies greater than 10 were considered positive. Scatter plot and correlation analyses, logistic and linear regression analyses, and linear mixed models were used to investigate the longitudinal antibody responses. Findings Between Dec 19, 2020, and Jan 30, 2021, we obtained 4026 serum samples from 2607 eligible, vaccinated participants. 342 individuals were included in the enriched comorbidities subgroup. The first vaccine dose elicited positive IgG and neutralising antibody responses at week 3 in 707 (88·0%) of 803 individuals, and 264 (71·0%) of 372 individuals, respectively, which were rapidly increased at week 4 (ie, 1 week after the second vaccine dose) in 1011 (98·4%) of 1027 and 357 (96·5%) of 370 individuals, respectively. Over 4 weeks of follow-up after vaccination, a high correlation (r=0·92) was detected between IgG against the receptor-binding domain and neutralising antibody titres. First-dose induced IgG response was significantly lower in individuals aged 66 years and older (ratio of means 0·25, 95% CI 0·19–0·31) and immunosuppressed individuals (0·21, 0·14–0·31) compared with individuals aged 18·00–45·99 years and individuals with no immunosuppression, respectively. This disparity was partly abrogated following the second dose. Overall, endpoint regression analysis showed that lower antibody concentrations were consistently associated with male sex (ratio of means 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·89), older age (ie, ≥66 years; 0·64, 0·58–0·71), immunosuppression (0·44, 0·33–0·58), and other specific comorbidities: diabetes (0·88, 0·79–0·98), hypertension (0·90, 0·82–0·98), heart disease (0·86, 0·75–1·00), and autoimmune diseases (0·82, 0·73–0·92). Interpretation BNT162b2 vaccine induces a robust and rapid antibody response. The significant correlation between receptor-binding domain IgG antibodies and neutralisation titres suggests that IgG antibodies might serve as a correlate of neutralisation. The second vaccine dose is particularly important for older and immunosuppressed individuals, highlighting the need for timely second vaccinations and potentially a revaluation of the long gap between doses in some countries. Antibody responses were reduced in susceptible populations and therefore they might be more prone to breakthrough infections. Funding Sheba Medical Center, Israel Ministry of Health.

Purpose Remote Ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) involves deliberate, brief interruptions of blood flow to increase the tolerance of distant critical organs to ischemia. This study tests the effects of limb RIPC in a porcine model of controlled hemorrhage without replacement therapy simulating an extreme field situation of delayed evacuation to definitive care.Methods Twenty-eight pigs (47±6kg) were assigned to: (1) control, no procedure (n=7); (2) HS=hemorrhagic shock (n=13); and (3) RIPC+HS=remote ischemic preconditioning followed by hemorrhage (n=8). The animals were observed for 7 hours after bleeding without fluid replacement. Results Survival rate between animals that underwent RIPC before bleeding and those bled without prior RIPC were similar (HS, 6 of 13[46%]-vs-RIPC+HS, 4 of 8[50%], p=0.86 by Chi-square). Animals with prior RIPC had faster recovery of mean arterial pressure and developed higher heart rates without complications. Those with RIPC had less decrease in pH and bicarbonate, and the increase in lactate began later. Global oxygen delivery was higher, and tissue oxygen extraction ratio lower, in animals bled after RIPC. Conclusions These improvements after RIPC in hemodynamic and metabolic status provide essential substrates for improved cellular response after hemorrhage and reduction of the likelihood of potentially catastrophic consequences of the accompanying ischemia.

BackgroundSeveral uses of Antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) have been suggested. Analytical studies reported high specificity yet with lower sensitivity for detecting SARS-CoV-2 compared to qRT-PCR. Here, we present the use of these tests as a decision support tool in several settings.MethodsSamples were collected for both Ag-RDT and qRT-PCR in three different clinical settings; 1. Symptomatic patients presenting at the Emergency Departments 2. Asymptomatic patients screened upon hospitalization and 3. Health-care workers (HCW) following SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA), positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. To estimate the association between Ct value, Ag-RDT and the number of days since SARS-CoV-2 exposure or symptomatic COVID-19, a mixed model was applied.ResultsA total of 5172 samples were obtained from 4595 individuals, with Ag-RDT and qRT-PCR results. Of these, 485 samples were positive by qRT-PCR. The PPA of Ag-RDT was greater for lower Ct values, reaching 93% in cases where Ct value was lower than 25 and 85% where Ct value was lower than 30. PPA was similar between symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. The NPV and PPV were 96.8% and 99.1%, respectively. We observed a significant correlation between Ct value and time from infection onset (pConclusionsAg-RDT can be used as a decision support tool in various clinical settings and play a major role in early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals, highly specific and with high sensitivity to the infectious stage of disease, whether symptomatic or asymptomatic.

Background: BNT162b2 was shown to be 92% effective in preventing COVID-19. Prioritizing vaccine rollout, and achievement of herd immunity depend on SARS-CoV-2 transmission reduction. The vaccine’s effect on infectivity is thus a critical priority. Methods: In a cohort of all 9650 HCW of a large single tertiary medical center, we calculated the prevalence of positive SAR-CoV-2 qRT-PCR cases with an asymptomatic presentation, tested following known or presumed exposure and the infectious subset (N-gene-Ct-value

Background: Concurrent to BNT162b2 vaccine rollout in Israel, we performed a longitudinal prospective cohort study to assess the early antibody response and antibody kinetics after each vaccine dose among health care workers (HCW) of different ages, gender and co-morbidities. Methods: Overall 2,607 vaccinated HCW were followed for five weeks after vaccination and Immunoglobulin (Ig)M, IgA, IgG and neutralizing antibodies were measured by Beckman-coulter SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG, ELISA-RBD and pseudo-virus neutralization assays. Scatter plot and correlation analyses, logistic and linear regression analyses and linear mixed models were used to investigate the longitudinal antibody response. Findings: The first vaccine dose elicited low IgG and neutralizing antibody response in the majority of HCW which were rapidly induced 10 and 32 folds, respectively following the second vaccine dose. High (r=0.92) correlation was detected between IgG and neutralizing titers. First dose induced IgG response was significantly lower in older (>65, Ratio of means=0.25 95%CI 0.19-0.31) and immunosuppressed (0.21 95%CI 0.14-0.31) individuals. Yet, this was partially abrogated following the second dose. Overall, lower antibody levels were consistently associated with males (0.84 95%CI 0.80-0.89), older age (>65, 0.64 95%CI 0.58-0.71), immunosuppression (0.44 95%CI 0.33-0.58), and other specific comorbidities (diabetes (0.88 95%CI 0.79-0.98), hypertension (0.90 95%CI 0.82-0.98), heart disease (0.86 95%CI 0.75-0.99) and autoimmune diseases (0.82 95%CI 0.73-0.92). Interpretation: BNT162b2 vaccine induces a strong and rapid antibody response. The significant correlation between IgG antibodies and neutralization titers, suggest that IgG antibodies may serve as a correlate of neutralization. The second vaccine dose is significantly more important for older and immunosuppressed individuals. Antibody responses were reduced in vulnerable populations and therefore they may be more prone to breakthrough infections. Declaration of interests: None to declare. Ethics statement: The protocol and informed consent were approved by the Institutional review 125 board of the Sheba Medical Center. Written informed consent was obtained from all 126 participants. Funding: MOH and Sheba medical Center, Israel