Serum antibody response in COVID-19-recovered patients who retested positive.
COVID-19
RT-PCR
SARS-CoV-2
false-negative
reinfection
retesting
Journal
Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada
ISSN: 1188-4169
Titre abrégé: Can Commun Dis Rep
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 9303729
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 May 2021
07 May 2021
Historique:
entrez:
26
5
2021
pubmed:
27
5
2021
medline:
27
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Research studies comparing antibody response from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases that retested positive (RP) using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and those who did not retest positive (NRP) were used to investigate a possible relationship between antibody response and retesting status. Seven data bases were searched. Research criteria included cohort and case-control studies, carried out worldwide and published before September 9, 2020, that compared the serum antibody levels of hospitalized COVID-19 cases that RP after discharge to those that did NRP. There is some evidence that immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody levels in RP cases were lower compared with NRP cases. The hypothesis of incomplete clearance aligns with these findings. The possibility of false negative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR test results during viral clearance is also plausible, as concentration of the viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) in nasopharyngeal and fecal swabs fluctuate below the limits of RT-PCR detection during virus clearance. The probability of reinfection was less likely to be the cause of retesting positive because of the low risk of exposure where cases observed a 14 day-quarantine after discharge. More studies are needed to better explain the immune response of recovered COVID-19 cases retesting positive after discharge.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Research studies comparing antibody response from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases that retested positive (RP) using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and those who did not retest positive (NRP) were used to investigate a possible relationship between antibody response and retesting status.
METHODS
METHODS
Seven data bases were searched. Research criteria included cohort and case-control studies, carried out worldwide and published before September 9, 2020, that compared the serum antibody levels of hospitalized COVID-19 cases that RP after discharge to those that did NRP.
RESULTS
RESULTS
There is some evidence that immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody levels in RP cases were lower compared with NRP cases. The hypothesis of incomplete clearance aligns with these findings. The possibility of false negative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR test results during viral clearance is also plausible, as concentration of the viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) in nasopharyngeal and fecal swabs fluctuate below the limits of RT-PCR detection during virus clearance. The probability of reinfection was less likely to be the cause of retesting positive because of the low risk of exposure where cases observed a 14 day-quarantine after discharge.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
More studies are needed to better explain the immune response of recovered COVID-19 cases retesting positive after discharge.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34035665
doi: 10.14745/ccdr.v47i04a03
pii: 470403
pmc: PMC8127687
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
195-201Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None to declare.
Références
JAMA. 2020 Apr 7;323(13):1239-1242
pubmed: 32091533
Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 17;10(1):11887
pubmed: 32681141
Nature. 2020 May;581(7809):465-469
pubmed: 32235945
J Clin Lab Anal. 2020 Jul;34(7):e23392
pubmed: 32506726
J Med Virol. 2020 Nov;92(11):2384-2386
pubmed: 32470172
Radiology. 2020 Sep;296(3):E145-E155
pubmed: 32301646
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020 Dec;9(1):2368-2378
pubmed: 33151135
JAMA. 2020 Apr 21;323(15):1502-1503
pubmed: 32105304
J Infect Dis. 2020 Nov 9;222(11):1784-1788
pubmed: 32491178
EBioMedicine. 2020 Sep;59:102960
pubmed: 32853988