Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 train machine learning to assign likelihood of past infection during virus emergence in Sweden
Castro Dopico, X.; Hanke, L.; Sheward, D. J.; Muschiol, S.; Aleman, S.; Grinberg, N. F.; Christian, M.; Adori, M.; Perez Vidakovics, L.; Chang Il, K.; Khoenkhoen, S.; Pushparaj, P.; Moliner Morro, A.; Mandolesi, M.; Ahl, M.; Forsell, M.; Coquet, J.; Corcoran, M.; Rorbach, J.; Dillner, J.; Bogdanovic, G.; Mcinerney, G.; Allander, T.; Wallace, C.; Murrell, B.; Albert, J.; Karlsson Hedestam, G. B.
Show abstract
Serological studies are critical for understanding pathogen-specific immune responses and informing public health measures1,2. Here, we evaluate tandem IgM, IgG and IgA responses in a cohort of individuals PCR+ for SARS-CoV-2 RNA (n=105) representing different categories of disease severity, including mild and asymptomatic infections. All PCR+ individuals surveyed were IgG-positive against the virus spike (S) glycoprotein. Elevated Ab levels were associated with hospitalization, with IgA titers, increased circulating IL-6 and strong neutralizing responses indicative of intensive care status. Additional studies of healthy blood donors (n=1,000) and pregnant women (n=900), sampled weekly during the initial outbreak in Stockholm, Sweden (weeks 14-25, 2020), demonstrated that anti-viral IgG titers differed over 1,000-fold between seroconverters, highlighting the need for careful evaluation of assay cut-offs for individual measurements and accurate estimates of seroprevalence (SP). To provide a solution to this, we developed probabilistic machine learning approaches to assign likelihood of past infection without setting an assay cut-off, allowing for more quantitative individual and population-level Ab measures. Using these tools, that considered responses against both S and RBD, we report SARS-CoV-2 S-specific IgG in 6.8% of blood donors and pregnant women two months after the peak of spring COVID-19 deaths, with the SP curve and country death rate following similar trajectories.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Immune response to SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern in vaccinated individuals 96%
- Cross-reactive serum and memory B cell responses to spike protein in SARS-CoV-2 and endemic coronavirus infection 96%
- Seven-month kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and protective role of pre-existing antibodies to seasonal human coronaviruses on COVID-19 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Fusogenicity and neutralization sensitivity of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta sublineage AY.4.2 95%
- Characterising heterogeneity and sero-reversion in antibody responses to mild SARS⍰CoV-2 infection: a cohort study using time series analysis and mechanistic modelling 95%
- Follow-up study in the ski-resort Ischgl: Antibody and T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 persisted for up to 8 months after infection and transmission of virus was low even during the second infection wave in Austria 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Novel SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody and neutralization assays reveal wide range of humoral immune response during COVID-19 97%
- Limited window for donation of convalescent plasma with high live-virus neutralizing antibodies for COVID-19 immunotherapy 96%
- Sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion by flow cytometry reveals the presence of nucleoprotein-reactive antibodies in unexposed individuals 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Non-severe SARS-CoV-2 infection is characterised by very early T cell proliferation independent of type 1 interferon responses and distinct from other acute respiratory viruses 95%
- Antibody escape drives emergence of diverse spike haplotypes resembling variants of concern in persistent SARS-CoV-2 infections 95%
- COVID-19 convalescents exhibit deficient humoral and T cell responses to variant of concern Spike antigens at 12 month post-infection 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.