Protective effectiveness of previous infection against subsequent SARS-Cov-2 infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The protective effectiveness provided by naturally acquired immunity against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection remain controversial.
Objective: To systematically evaluate the protective effect of natural immunity against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection with different variants.
Methods: We searched for related studies published in seven databases before March 5, 2023. Eligible studies included in the analysis reported the risk of subsequent infection for groups with or without a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was the overall pooled incidence rate ratio ( IRR ) of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection/infection between the two groups. We also focused on the protective effectiveness of natural immunity against reinfection/infection with different SARS-CoV-2 variants. We used a random-effects model to pool the data, and obtained the bias-adjusted results using the trim-and-fill method. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was performed by excluding included studies one by one to evaluate the stability of the results.
Results: We identified 40 eligible articles including more than 20 million individuals without the history of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The bias-adjusted efficacy of naturally acquired antibodies against reinfection was estimated at 65% (pooled IRR  = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.26-0.47), with higher efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 cases (pooled IRR  = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.08-0.26) than asymptomatic infection (pooled IRR  = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.29-0.54). Meta-regression revealed that SARS-CoV-2 variant was a statistically significant effect modifier, which explaining 46.40% of the variation in IRR s. For different SARS-CoV-2 variant, the pooled IRRs for the Alpha (pooled IRR  = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.06-0.19), Delta (pooled IRR  = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.15-0.24) and Omicron (pooled IRR  = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.42-0.87) variant were higher and higher. In other subgroup analyses, the pooled IRR s of SARS-CoV-2 infection were statistically various in different countries, publication year and the inclusion end time of population, with a significant difference ( p  = 0.02, p  < 0.010 and p  < 0.010), respectively. The risk of subsequent infection in the seropositive population appeared to increase slowly over time. Despite the heterogeneity in included studies, sensitivity analyses showed stable results.
Conclusion: Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection provides protection against pre-omicron reinfection, but less against omicron. Ongoing viral mutation requires attention and prevention strategies, such as vaccine catch-up, in conjunction with multiple factors.
Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
(Copyright © 2024 Hu, Cai, Yan, Wang, Sun, Wei and Hao.)