\n\n\n\n
Koment\u00e1\u0159<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Nem\u011bli bychom nikomu vnucovat vakc\u00edny proti covidu-19, kdy\u017e d\u016fkazy ukazuj\u00ed, \u017ee p\u0159irozen\u011b z\u00edskan\u00e1 imunita je stejn\u00e1 nebo siln\u011bj\u0161\u00ed a lep\u0161\u00ed ne\u017e st\u00e1vaj\u00edc\u00ed vakc\u00edny. M\u00edsto toho bychom m\u011bli respektovat pr\u00e1vo na t\u011blesnou integritu jednotlivc\u016f, aby se mohli sami rozhodnout.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n P\u0159edstavitel\u00e9 ve\u0159ejn\u00e9ho zdravotnictv\u00ed a\u00a0l\u00e9ka\u0159sk\u00fd establishment s\u00a0pomoc\u00ed zpolitizovan\u00fdch m\u00e9di\u00ed klamou ve\u0159ejnost tvrzen\u00edm, \u017ee o\u010dkov\u00e1n\u00ed covid-19 poskytuje v\u011bt\u0161\u00ed ochranu ne\u017e p\u0159irozen\u00e1 imunita. \u0158editelka CDC Rochelle Walenskyov\u00e1 nap\u0159\u00edklad ve sv\u00e9m prohl\u00e1\u0161en\u00ed zve\u0159ejn\u011bn\u00e9m<\/a> v\u00a0\u0159\u00edjnu 2020 v\u00a0\u010dasopise LANCET klamala, \u017ee \u201eneexistuj\u00ed d\u016fkazy o\u00a0trval\u00e9 ochrann\u00e9 imunit\u011b proti SARS-CoV-2 po\u00a0p\u0159irozen\u00e9 infekci\u201c a\u00a0\u017ee \u201ed\u016fsledek sl\u00e1bnouc\u00ed imunity by p\u0159edstavoval riziko pro zraniteln\u00e9 skupiny obyvatelstva na neur\u010dit\u00e9 \u010dasov\u00e9 obdob\u00ed\u201c.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Imunologie a\u00a0virologie n\u00e1s ji\u017e v\u00edce ne\u017e sto let u\u010d\u00ed, \u017ee p\u0159irozen\u00e1 imunita poskytuje ochranu proti vn\u011bj\u0161\u00edm obalov\u00fdm protein\u016fm respira\u010dn\u00edho viru, a\u00a0nikoli pouze proti jednomu, nap\u0159.\u00a0glykoproteinu hrotu SARS-CoV-2. Existuj\u00ed dokonce siln\u00e9 d\u016fkazy<\/a> o\u00a0p\u0159etrv\u00e1v\u00e1n\u00ed protil\u00e1tek. Dokonce i\u00a0CDC uzn\u00e1v\u00e1 p\u0159irozenou imunitu proti plan\u00fdm ne\u0161tovic\u00edm a\u00a0spalni\u010dk\u00e1m, p\u0159\u00edu\u0161nic\u00edm a\u00a0zard\u011bnk\u00e1m, ale ne proti covidu-19. (zdroj<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n\n\n O\u010dkovan\u00ed vykazuj\u00ed virovou z\u00e1t\u011b\u017e (velmi vysokou) podobnou jako neo\u010dkovan\u00ed (Acharya et al<\/a>. a\u00a0Riemersma et al<\/a>.) a\u00a0o\u010dkovan\u00ed jsou stejn\u011b infek\u010dn\u00ed. Riemersma et al. tak\u00e9 uv\u00e1d\u011bj\u00ed \u00fadaje z\u00a0Wisconsinu, kter\u00e9 potvrzuj\u00ed, jak o\u010dkovan\u00ed jedinci, kte\u0159\u00ed se nakaz\u00ed variantou Delta, mohou potenci\u00e1ln\u011b p\u0159en\u00e1\u0161et (a\u00a0p\u0159en\u00e1\u0161ej\u00ed) virus SARS-CoV-2 na ostatn\u00ed (potenci\u00e1ln\u011b na o\u010dkovan\u00e9 i\u00a0neo\u010dkovan\u00e9). (zdroj<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Paul Elias Alexander<\/a><\/strong> je b\u00fdval\u00fd odborn\u00fd asistent na McMasterov\u011b univerzit\u011b v\u00a0oblasti medic\u00edny zalo\u017een\u00e9 na d\u016fkazech a\u00a0v\u00fdzkumn\u00fdch metod\u00e1ch. Je b\u00fdval\u00fdm poradcem pro synt\u00e9zu d\u016fkaz\u016f v\u00a0r\u00e1mci programu Covid Pandemic pro WHO-PAHO ve Washingtonu, D. C., a\u00a0b\u00fdval\u00fd hlavn\u00ed poradce pro politiku Covid Pandemic ve zdravotnictv\u00ed a\u00a0soci\u00e1ln\u00edch slu\u017eb\u00e1ch (HHS); v\u00a0roce 2008 jmenov\u00e1n ve WHO jako region\u00e1ln\u00ed specialista\/epidemiolog v\u00a0evropsk\u00e9 region\u00e1ln\u00ed kancel\u00e1\u0159i v\u00a0D\u00e1nsku, 12 let pracoval pro kanadskou vl\u00e1du jako epidemiolog, jmenov\u00e1n kanadsk\u00fdm epidemiologem v\u00a0ter\u00e9nu (2002-2004), v\u00a0letech 2017-2019 zam\u011bstn\u00e1n ve spole\u010dnosti Infectious Diseases Society of America jako \u0161kolitel pro synt\u00e9zu d\u016fkaz\u016f metaanal\u00fdzou systematick\u00fdch p\u0159ehled\u016f pro tvorbu pokyn\u016f. V\u00a0sou\u010dasn\u00e9 dob\u011b p\u016fsob\u00ed jako v\u00fdzkumn\u00fd konzultant pro covid-19 ve v\u00fdzkumn\u00e9 skupin\u011b US-C19. Dr. Alexander absolvoval magistersk\u00e9 studium na York University v\u00a0Kanad\u011b a\u00a0magistersk\u00e9 studium epidemiologie na University of Toronto, magistersk\u00e9 studium medic\u00edny zalo\u017een\u00e9 na d\u016fkazech na University of Oxford a\u00a0doktorsk\u00e9 studium medic\u00edny zalo\u017een\u00e9 na d\u016fkazech a\u00a0v\u00fdzkumn\u00fdch metod\u00e1ch na McMaster University v\u00a0Kanad\u011b.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n Tato znepokojiv\u00e1 situace, kdy o\u010dkovan\u00ed jsou infek\u010dn\u00ed a\u00a0p\u0159en\u00e1\u0161ej\u00ed virus, se objevila v\u00a0semin\u00e1rn\u00edch prac\u00edch o\u00a0nozokomi\u00e1ln\u00edch epidemi\u00edch od Chaua et al. (zdroj<\/a>) (HCW ve Vietnamu), o\u00a0epidemii ve finsk\u00e9 nemocnici (zdroj<\/a>) (\u0161\u00ed\u0159en\u00ed mezi HCW a\u00a0pacienty) a\u00a0o\u00a0epidemii v\u00a0izraelsk\u00e9 nemocnici (zdroj<\/a>) (\u0161\u00ed\u0159en\u00ed mezi HCW a\u00a0pacienty). Tyto studie rovn\u011b\u017e odhalily, \u017ee osobn\u00ed ochrann\u00e9 prost\u0159edky a\u00a0masky jsou ve zdravotnick\u00e9m prost\u0159ed\u00ed v\u00a0podstat\u011b ne\u00fa\u010dinn\u00e9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Krom\u011b toho by m\u011bla b\u00fdt p\u0159ed jak\u00fdmkoli o\u010dkov\u00e1n\u00edm posouzena st\u00e1vaj\u00edc\u00ed imunita, a to prost\u0159ednictv\u00edm p\u0159esn\u00e9ho a spolehliv\u00e9ho testu na protil\u00e1tky (nebo testu na T bun\u011b\u010dnou imunitu), nebo by m\u011bla b\u00fdt zalo\u017eena na dokumentaci p\u0159edchoz\u00ed infekce (p\u0159edchoz\u00ed pozitivn\u00ed PCR nebo test na antigen). To by byl d\u016fkaz imunity, kter\u00e1 je rovnocenn\u00e1 imunit\u011b po o\u010dkov\u00e1n\u00ed, a imunita by m\u011bla m\u00edt stejn\u00fd spole\u010densk\u00fd status jako jak\u00e1koli imunita vyvolan\u00e1 o\u010dkov\u00e1n\u00edm. To bude fungovat tak, aby se zm\u00edrnila spole\u010densk\u00e1 \u00fazkost z t\u011bchto vynucen\u00fdch o\u010dkovac\u00edch povinnost\u00ed a spole\u010densk\u00fdch ot\u0159es\u016f v d\u016fsledku ztr\u00e1ty zam\u011bstn\u00e1n\u00ed, odep\u0159en\u00ed spole\u010densk\u00fdch privilegi\u00ed atd. Rozd\u011blov\u00e1n\u00ed o\u010dkovan\u00fdch a neo\u010dkovan\u00fdch ve spole\u010dnosti, jejich odd\u011blov\u00e1n\u00ed, nen\u00ed l\u00e9ka\u0159sky ani v\u011bdecky podlo\u017een\u00e9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Brownstone Institute ji\u017e d\u0159\u00edve zdokumentoval 30 studi\u00ed o p\u0159irozen\u00e9 imunit\u011b ve vztahu ke covid-19. (zdroj<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Tento navazuj\u00edc\u00ed seznam je nejaktu\u00e1ln\u011bj\u0161\u00edm a nejobs\u00e1hlej\u0161\u00edm knihovn\u00edm seznamem 150 nejkvalitn\u011bj\u0161\u00edch, nej\u00fapln\u011bj\u0161\u00edch a nejpodrobn\u011bj\u0161\u00edch v\u011bdeck\u00fdch studi\u00ed a d\u016fkazn\u00edch zpr\u00e1v o p\u0159irozen\u00e9 imunit\u011b ve srovn\u00e1n\u00ed s imunitou vyvolanou vakc\u00ednou na covid-19 a umo\u017en\u00ed v\u00e1m u\u010dinit si vlastn\u00ed z\u00e1v\u011br.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To p\u0159edstavuje posuzovan\u00fd d\u016fv\u011bryhodn\u00fd soubor d\u016fkaz\u016f<\/em>, kter\u00fd zahrnuje recenzovan\u00e9 studie a vysoce kvalitn\u00ed literaturu a zpr\u00e1vy, kter\u00e9 k tomuto souboru d\u016fkaz\u016f p\u0159isp\u00edvaj\u00ed. C\u00edlem je zde sd\u00edlet a informovat pro va\u0161e vlastn\u00ed rozhodov\u00e1n\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n P\u0159i sestavov\u00e1n\u00ed tohoto dokumentu jsem vyu\u017eil p\u0159\u00edsp\u011bvk\u016f mnoha lid\u00ed, zejm\u00e9na sv\u00fdch spoluautor\u016f:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Harvey Risch, MD, PhD (Yale School of Public Health).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Howard Tenenbaum, PhD ( L\u00e9ka\u0159sk\u00e1 fakulta Torontsk\u00e9 univerzity)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Ramin Oskoui, MD (Foxhall Cardiology, Washington)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Peter McCullough, MD (nadace Truth for Health Foundation (TFH), Texas)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Parvez Dara, MD (konzultant, l\u00e9ka\u0159sk\u00fd hematolog a onkolog)<\/p>\n\n\n\n N\u00e1zev studie\/zpr\u00e1vy a p\u0159eva\u017euj\u00edc\u00ed zji\u0161t\u011bn\u00ed o p\u0159irozen\u00e9 imunit\u011b<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201eKumulativn\u00ed v\u00fdskyt covidu-19 byl zkoum\u00e1n u 52 238 zam\u011bstnanc\u016f v americk\u00e9m zdravotnick\u00e9m syst\u00e9mu. Kumulativn\u00ed incidence infekce SARS-CoV-2 z\u016fstala t\u00e9m\u011b\u0159 nulov\u00e1 u d\u0159\u00edve infikovan\u00fdch neo\u010dkovan\u00fdch osob, d\u0159\u00edve infikovan\u00fdch osob, kter\u00e9 byly o\u010dkov\u00e1ny, a d\u0159\u00edve neinfikovan\u00fdch osob, kter\u00e9 byly o\u010dkov\u00e1ny, ve srovn\u00e1n\u00ed s trval\u00fdm n\u00e1r\u016fstem kumulativn\u00ed incidence u d\u0159\u00edve neinfikovan\u00fdch osob, kter\u00e9 z\u016fstaly neo\u010dkov\u00e1ny. U \u017e\u00e1dn\u00e9ho z 1 359 d\u0159\u00edve infikovan\u00fdch subjekt\u016f, kter\u00e9 z\u016fstaly neo\u010dkovan\u00e9, nedo\u0161lo v pr\u016fb\u011bhu trv\u00e1n\u00ed studie k infekci SARS-CoV-2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Jedinci, kte\u0159\u00ed prod\u011blali infekci SARS-CoV-2, pravd\u011bpodobn\u011b nebudou m\u00edt z o\u010dkov\u00e1n\u00ed vakc\u00ednou covid-19 prosp\u011bch\u2026\u201c.<\/p>\n\n\n\n POZN\u00c1MKA:<\/strong> Odkazy na dal\u0161\u00ed studie jsou kv\u016fli obs\u00e1hlosti textu ponech\u00e1ny v p\u016fvodn\u00edm anglick\u00e9m origin\u00e1lu<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cStudied T cell responses against the structural (nucleocapsid (N) protein) and non-structural (NSP7 and NSP13 of ORF1<\/em>) regions of SARS-CoV-2 in individuals convalescing from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (n<\/em> = 36). In all of these individuals, we found CD4 and CD8 T cells that recognized multiple regions of the N protein\u2026showed that patients (n<\/em> = 23) who recovered from SARS possess long-lasting memory T cells that are reactive to the N protein of SARS-CoV 17 years after the outbreak of SARS in 2003; these T cells displayed robust cross-reactivity to the N protein of SARS-CoV-2.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cA retrospective observational study comparing three groups: (1) SARS-CoV-2-na\u00efve individuals who received a two-dose regimen of the BioNTech\/Pfizer mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine, (2) previously infected individuals who have not been vaccinated, and (3) previously infected and<\/em> single dose vaccinated individuals found para a 13 fold increased risk of breakthrough Delta infections in double vaccinated persons, and a 27 fold increased risk for symptomatic breakthrough infection in the double vaccinated relative to the natural immunity recovered persons\u2026the risk of hospitalization was 8 times higher in the double vaccinated (para)\u2026this analysis demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization due to the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cStudied SARS-CoV-2\u2013specific T cells in a cohort of asymptomatic (n<\/em> = 85) and symptomatic (n<\/em> = 75) COVID-19 patients after seroconversion\u2026thus, asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2\u2013infected individuals are not characterized by weak antiviral immunity; on the contrary, they mount a highly functional virus-specific cellular immune response.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cA total of 2,653 individuals fully vaccinated by two doses of vaccine during the study period and 4,361 convalescent patients were included. Higher SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titers were observed in vaccinated individuals (median 1581 AU\/mL IQR [533.8-5644.6]) after the second vaccination, than in convalescent individuals (median 355.3 AU\/mL IQR [141.2-998.7]; p<0.001). In vaccinated subjects, antibody titers decreased by up to 40% each subsequent month while in convalescents they decreased by less than 5% per month\u2026this study demonstrates individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine have different kinetics of antibody levels compared to patients who had been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, with higher initial levels but a much faster exponential decrease in the first group\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers recorded \u201c40 tentative re-infections in 14, 840 COVID-19 survivors of the first wave (0.27%) and 253 581 infections in 8, 885, 640 individuals of the remaining general population (2.85%) translating into an odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of 0.09 (0.07 to 0.13)\u2026relatively low re-infection rate of SARS-CoV-2 in Austria. Protection against SARS-CoV-2 after natural infection is comparable with the highest available estimates on vaccine efficacies.\u201d Additionally, hospitalization in only five out of 14,840 (0.03%) people and death in one out of 14,840 (0.01%) (tentative re-infection).<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cSpike-specific T cells from convalescent vaccinees differed strikingly from those of infection-na\u00efve vaccinees, with phenotypic features suggesting superior long-term persistence and ability to home to the respiratory tract including the nasopharynx. These results provide reassurance that vaccine-elicited T cells respond robustly to the B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants, confirm that convalescents may not need a second vaccine dose.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cMonths after recovering from mild cases of COVID-19, people still have immune cells in their body pumping out antibodies against the virus that causes COVID-19, according to a study from researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Such cells could persist for a lifetime, churning out antibodies all the while. The findings, published May 24 in the journal Nature, suggest that mild cases of COVID-19 leave those infected with lasting antibody protection and that repeated bouts of illness are likely to be uncommon.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cNeutralizing antibody titers against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein persisted for at least 5 months after infection. Although continued monitoring of this cohort will be needed to confirm the longevity and potency of this response, these preliminary results suggest that the chance of reinfection may be lower than is currently feared.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cConcurrently, neutralizing activity in plasma decreases by five-fold in pseudo-type virus assays. In contrast, the number of RBD-specific memory B cells is unchanged. Memory B cells display clonal turnover after 6.2 months, and the antibodies they express have greater somatic hypermutation, increased potency and resistance to RBD mutations, indicative of continued evolution of the humoral response\u2026we conclude that the memory B cell response to SARS-CoV-2 evolves between 1.3 and 6.2 months after infection in a manner that is consistent with antigen persistence.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAssessed the persistence of serum antibodies following WT SARS-CoV-2 infection at 8 and 13 months after diagnosis in 367 individuals\u2026found that NAb against the WT virus persisted in 89% and S-IgG in 97% of subjects for at least 13 months after infection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEleven large cohort studies were identified that estimated the risk of SARS\u2010CoV\u20102 reinfection over time, including three that enrolled healthcare workers and two that enrolled residents and staff of elderly care homes. Across studies, the total number of PCR\u2010positive or antibody\u2010positive participants at baseline was 615,777, and the maximum duration of follow\u2010up was more than 10 months in three studies. Reinfection was an uncommon event (absolute rate 0%\u20131.1%), with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Western Journal-Makary<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Makary writes \u201cit\u2019s okay to have an incorrect scientific hypothesis. But when new data proves it wrong, you have to adapt. Unfortunately, many elected leaders and public health officials have held on far too long to the hypothesis that natural immunity offers unreliable protection against covid-19 \u2014 a contention that is being rapidly debunked by science. More than 15 studies have demonstrated the power of immunity<\/a> acquired by previously having the virus. A 700,000-person study<\/a> from Israel two weeks ago found that those who had experienced prior infectionswere 27 times less likely to get a second symptomatic covid infection than those who were vaccinated. This affirmed a June Cleveland Clinic study<\/a> of health-care workers (who are often exposed to the virus), in which nonewho had previously tested positive for the coronavirus<\/a> got reinfected. The study authors concluded that \u201cindividuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from covid-19 vaccination.\u201d And in May, a Washington University study<\/a> found that even a mild covid infection resulted in long-lasting immunity.\u201d \u201c203 recovered SARS-CoV-2 infected patients in Denmark between April 3rd<\/sup> and July 9th<\/sup> 2020, at least 14 days after COVID-19 symptom recovery\u2026 report broad serological profiles within the cohort, detecting antibody binding to other human coronaviruses\u2026 the viral surface spike protein was identified as the dominant target for both neutralizing antibodies and CD8+<\/sup> T-cell responses. Overall, the majority of patients had robust adaptive immune responses, regardless of their disease severity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAnalyze an updated individual-level database of the entire population of Israel to assess the protection efficacy of both prior infection and vaccination in preventing subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization with COVID-19, severe disease, and death due to COVID-19\u2026 vaccination was highly effective with overall estimated efficacy for documented infection of 92\u00b78% (CI:[92\u00b76, 93\u00b70]); hospitalization 94\u00b72% (CI:[93\u00b76, 94\u00b77]); severe illness 94\u00b74% (CI:[93\u00b76, 95\u00b70]); and death 93\u00b77% (CI:[92\u00b75, 94\u00b77]). Similarly, the overall estimated level of protection from prior SARS-CoV-2 infection for documented infection is 94\u00b78% (CI: [94\u00b74, 95\u00b71]); hospitalization 94\u00b71% (CI: [91\u00b79, 95\u00b77]); and severe illness 96\u00b74% (CI: [92\u00b75, 98\u00b73])\u2026results question the need to vaccinate previously-infected individuals.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEmployees were divided into three groups: (1) SARS-CoV-2 na\u00efve and unvaccinated, (2) previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and (3) vaccinated. Person-days were measured from the date of the employee first test and truncated at the end of the observation period. SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined as two positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests in a 30-day period\u2026 4313, 254 and 739 employee records for groups 1, 2, and 3\u2026previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 were associated with decreased risk for infection or re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 in a routinely screened workforce. The was no difference in the infection incidence between vaccinated individuals and individuals with previous infection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIsraelis who had an infection were more protected against the Delta coronavirus variant than those who had an already highly effective COVID-19 vaccine\u2026the newly released data show people who once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection were much less likely than never-infected, vaccinated people to get Delta, develop symptoms from it, or become hospitalized with serious COVID-19.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cA systematic antigen-specific immune evaluation in 101 COVID-19 convalescents; SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies, and also NAb can persist among over 95% COVID-19 convalescents from 6 months to 12 months after disease onset. At least 19\/71 (26%) of COVID-19 convalescents (double positive in ELISA and MCLIA) had detectable circulating IgM antibody against SARS-CoV-2 at 12m post-disease onset. Notably, the percentages of convalescents with positive SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses (at least one of the SARS-CoV-2 antigen S1, S2, M and N protein) were 71\/76 (93%) and 67\/73 (92%) at 6m and 12m, respectively.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cRecovered individuals developed SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulin (IgG) antibodies, neutralizing plasma, and memory B and memory T cells that persisted for at least 3 months. Our data further reveal that SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG memory B cells increased over time. Additionally, SARS-CoV-2-specific memory lymphocytes exhibited characteristics associated with potent antiviral function: memory T cells secreted cytokines and expanded upon antigen re-encounter, whereas memory B cells expressed receptors capable of neutralizing virus when expressed as monoclonal antibodies. Therefore, mild COVID-19 elicits memory lymphocytes that persist and display functional hallmarks of antiviral immunity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cPerformed multimodal single-cell sequencing on peripheral blood of patients with acute COVID-19 and healthy volunteers before and after receiving the SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine to compare the immune responses elicited by the virus and by this vaccine\u2026both infection and vaccination induced robust innate and adaptive immune responses, our analysis revealed significant qualitative differences between the two types of immune challenges. In COVID-19 patients, immune responses were characterized by a highly augmented interferon response which was largely absent in vaccine recipients. Increased interferon signaling likely contributed to the observed dramatic upregulation of cytotoxic genes in the peripheral T cells and innate-like lymphocytes in patients but not in immunized subjects. Analysis of B and T cell receptor repertoires revealed that while the majority of clonal B and T cells in COVID-19 patients were effector cells, in vaccine recipients clonally expanded cells were primarily circulating memory cells\u2026we observed the presence of cytotoxic CD4 T cells in COVID-19 patients that were largely absent in healthy volunteers following immunization. While hyper-activation of inflammatory responses and cytotoxic cells may contribute to immunopathology in severe illness, in mild and moderate disease, these features are indicative of protective immune responses and resolution of infection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cBone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) are a persistent and essential source of protective antibodies\u2026 durable serum antibody titres are maintained by long-lived plasma cells\u2014non-replicating, antigen-specific plasma cells that are detected in the bone marrow long after the clearance of the antigen \u2026 S-binding BMPCs are quiescent, which suggests that they are part of a stable compartment. Consistently, circulating resting memory B cells directed against SARS-CoV-2 S were detected in the convalescent individuals. Overall, our results indicate that mild infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune memory in humans\u2026overall, our data provide strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans robustly establishes the two arms of humoral immune memory: long-lived bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) and memory B-cells.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation study\u2026 30\u2009625 participants were enrolled into the study\u2026 a previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This time period is the minimum probable effect because seroconversions were not included. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEnrolled 200 patient-facing HCWs between March 26 and April 8, 2020\u2026represents a 13% infection rate (i.e. 14 of 112 HCWs) within the 1 month of follow-up in those with no evidence of antibodies or viral shedding at enrolment. By contrast, of 33 HCWs who tested positive by serology but tested negative by RT-PCR at enrolment, 32 remained negative by RT-PCR through follow-up, and one tested positive by RT-PCR on days 8 and 13 after enrolment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCritical to understand whether infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) protects from subsequent reinfection\u2026 12219 HCWs participated\u2026prior SARS-CoV-2 infection that generated antibody responses offered protection from reinfection for most people in the six months following infection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEvaluate 254 COVID-19 patients longitudinally up to 8 months and find durable broad-based immune responses. SARS-CoV-2 spike binding and neutralizing antibodies exhibit a bi-phasic decay with an extended half-life of >200 days suggesting the generation of longer-lived plasma cells\u2026 most recovered COVID-19 patients mount broad, durable immunity after infection, spike IgG+ memory B cells increase and persist post-infection, durable polyfunctional CD4 and CD8 T cells recognize distinct viral epitope regions.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cUsed single-cell RNA sequencing and functional assays to compare humoral and cellular responses to two doses of mRNA vaccine with responses observed in convalescent individuals with asymptomatic disease\u2026 natural infection induced expansion of larger CD8 T cell clones occupied distinct clusters, likely due to the recognition of a broader set of viral epitopes presented by the virus not seen in the mRNA vaccine.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cSARS-CoV-2 antibody-positive persons from April 16 to December 31, 2020 with a PCR-positive swab \u226514 days after the first-positive antibody test were investigated for evidence of reinfection, 43,044 antibody-positive persons who were followed for a median of 16.3 weeks\u2026reinfection is rare in the young and international population of Qatar. Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for at least seven months.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cConducted a serological study to define correlates of immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Compared to those with mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, individuals with severe disease exhibited elevated virus-neutralizing titers and antibodies against the nucleocapsid (N) and the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein\u2026neutralizing and spike-specific antibody production persists for at least 5\u20137 months\u2026 nucleocapsid antibodies frequently become undetectable by 5\u20137 months.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIn the general population using representative data from 7,256 United Kingdom COVID-19 infection survey participants who had positive swab SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests from 26-April-2020 to 14-June-2021\u2026we estimated antibody levels associated with protection against reinfection likely last 1.5-2 years on average, with levels associated with protection from severe infection present for several years. These estimates could inform planning for vaccination booster strategies.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n and the actual 2008 NATURE journal publication<\/a> by Yu<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cA study of the blood of older people who survived the 1918 influenza pandemic reveals that antibodies to the strain have lasted a lifetime and can perhaps be engineered to protect future generations against similar strains\u2026the group collected blood samples from 32 pandemic survivors aged 91 to 101..the people recruited for the study were 2 to 12 years old in 1918 and many recalled sick family members in their households, which suggests they were directly exposed to the virus, the authors report. The group found that 100% of the subjects had serum-neutralizing activity against the 1918 virus and 94% showed serologic reactivity to the 1918 hemagglutinin. The investigators generated B lymphoblastic cell lines from the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of eight subjects. Transformed cells from the blood of 7 of the 8 donors yielded secreting antibodies that bound the 1918 hemagglutinin.\u201d Yu: \u201chere we show that of the 32 individuals tested that were born in or before 1915, each showed sero-reactivity with the 1918 virus, nearly 90 years after the pandemic. Seven of the eight donor samples tested had circulating B cells that secreted antibodies that bound the 1918 HA. We isolated B cells from subjects and generated five monoclonal antibodies that showed potent neutralizing activity against 1918 virus from three separate donors. These antibodies also cross-reacted with the genetically similar HA of a 1930 swine H1N1 influenza strain.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cNo significant difference was observed between the 20B and 19A isolates for HCWs with mild COVID-19 and critical patients. However, a significant decrease in neutralisation ability was found for 20I\/501Y.V1 in comparison with 19A isolate for critical patients and HCWs 6-months post infection. Concerning 20H\/501Y.V2, all populations had a significant reduction in neutralising antibody titres in comparison with the 19A isolate. Interestingly, a significant difference in neutralisation capacity was observed for vaccinated HCWs between the two variants whereas it was not significant for the convalescent groups\u2026the reduced neutralising response observed towards the 20H\/501Y.V2 in comparison with the 19A and 20I\/501Y.V1 isolates in fully immunized subjects with the BNT162b2 vaccine is a striking finding of the study.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCharacterized SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific humoral and cellular immunity in na\u00efve and previously infected individuals during full BNT162b2 vaccination\u2026results demonstrate that the second dose increases both the humoral and cellular immunity in na\u00efve individuals. On the contrary, the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose results in a reduction of cellular immunity in COVID-19 recovered individuals.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEpidemiologists estimate over 160 million people worldwide<\/a> have recovered from COVID-19. Those who have recovered have an astonishingly low frequency of repeat infection, disease, or death.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cTo evaluate evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection based on diagnostic nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) among patients with positive vs negative test results for antibodies in an observational descriptive cohort study of clinical laboratory and linked claims data\u2026the cohort included 3\u202f257\u202f478 unique patients with an index antibody test\u2026patients with positive antibody test results were initially more likely to have positive NAAT results, consistent with prolonged RNA shedding, but became markedly less likely to have positive NAAT results over time, suggesting that seropositivity is associated with protection from infection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cInvestigated the risk of subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection among young adults (CHARM marine study) seropositive for a previous infection\u2026enrolled 3249 participants, of whom 3168 (98%) continued into the 2-week quarantine period. 3076 (95%) participants\u2026Among 189 seropositive participants, 19 (10%) had at least one positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 during the 6-week follow-up (1\u00b71 cases per person-year). In contrast, 1079 (48%) of 2247 seronegative participants tested positive (6\u00b72 cases per person-year). The incidence rate ratio was 0\u00b718 (95% CI 0\u00b711\u20130\u00b728; p<0\u00b7001)\u2026infected seropositive participants had viral loads that were about 10-times lower than those of infected seronegative participants (ORF1ab gene cycle threshold difference 3\u00b795 [95% CI 1\u00b723\u20136\u00b767]; p=0\u00b7004).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cOf 9,180 individuals with no record of vaccination but with a record of prior infection at least 90 days before the PCR test (group 3), 7694 could be matched to individuals with no record of vaccination or prior infection (group 2), among whom PCR positivity was 1.01% (95% CI, 0.80%-1.26%) and 3.81% (95% CI, 3.39%-4.26%), respectively. The relative risk for PCR positivity was 0.22 (95% CI, 0.17-0.28) for vaccinated individuals and 0.26 (95% CI, 0.21-0.34) for individuals with prior infection compared with no record of vaccination or prior infection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cFollowed up with a subsample of our previous sero-survey participants to assess whether natural immunity against SARS-CoV-2 was associated with a reduced risk of re-infection (India)\u2026 out of the 2238 participants, 1170 were sero-positive and 1068 were sero-negative for antibody against COVID-19. Our survey found that only 3 individuals in the sero-positive group got infected with COVID-19 whereas 127 individuals reported contracting the infection the sero-negative group\u2026from the 3 sero-positives re-infected with COVID-19, one had hospitalization, but did not require oxygen support or critical care\u2026development of antibody following natural infection not only protects against re-infection by the virus to a great extent, but also safeguards against progression to severe COVID-19 disease.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe researchers found durable immune responses in the majority of people studied. Antibodies against the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which the virus uses to get inside cells, were found in 98% of participants one month after symptom onset. As seen in previous studies, the number of antibodies ranged widely between individuals. But, promisingly, their levels remained fairly stable over time, declining only modestly at 6 to 8 months after infection\u2026 virus-specific B cells increased over time. People had more memory B cells six months after symptom onset than at one month afterwards\u2026 levels of T cells for the virus also remained high after infection. Six months after symptom onset, 92% of participants had CD4+ T cells that recognized the virus\u2026 95% of the people had at least 3 out of 5 immune-system components that could recognize SARS-CoV-2 up to 8 months after infection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe seropositive rate in the convalescent individuals was above 95% at all sampling time points for both assays and remained stable over time; that is, almost all convalescent individuals developed antibodies\u2026 results show that SARS-CoV-2 antibodies persisted at least 12 months after symptom onset and maybe even longer, indicating that COVID-19-convalescent individuals may be protected from reinfection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cex vivo assays to evaluate SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses in COVID-19 convalescent patients up to 317 days post-symptom onset (DPSO), and find that memory T cell responses are maintained during the study period regardless of the severity of COVID-19. In particular, we observe sustained polyfunctionality and proliferation capacity of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells. Among SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells detected by activation-induced markers, the proportion of stem cell-like memory T (TSCM) cells is increased, peaking at approximately 120 DPSO.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAnalyzed 42 unexposed healthy donors and 28 mild COVID-19 subjects up to 5 months from the recovery for SARS-CoV-2 specific immunological memory. Using HLA class II predicted peptide megapools, we identified SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive CD4+ T cells in around 66% of the unexposed individuals. Moreover, we found detectable immune memory in mild COVID-19 patients several months after recovery in the crucial arms of protective adaptive immunity; CD4+ T cells and B cells, with a minimal contribution from CD8+ T cells. Interestingly, the persistent immune memory in COVID-19 patients is predominantly targeted towards the Spike glycoprotein of the SARS-CoV-2. This study provides the evidence of both high magnitude pre-existing and persistent immune memory in Indian population.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCurrent evidence points to most individuals developing strong protective immune responses following natural infection with SARSCoV-2. Within 4 weeks following infection, 90-99% of individuals infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus develop detectable neutralizing antibodies. The strength and duration of the immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 are not completely understood and currently available data suggests that it varies by age and the severity of symptoms. Available scientific data suggests that in most people immune responses remain robust and protective against reinfection for at least 6-8 months after infection (the longest follow up with strong scientific evidence is currently approximately 8 months).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe conclude that memory antibodies selected over time by natural infection have greater potency and breadth than antibodies elicited by vaccination\u2026boosting vaccinated individuals with currently available mRNA vaccines would produce a quantitative increase in plasma neutralizing activity but not the qualitative advantage against variants obtained by vaccinating convalescent individuals.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cMeasured antibodies in serum samples from 30,576 persons in Iceland\u2026of the 1797 persons who had recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection, 1107 of the 1215 who were tested (91.1%) were seropositive\u2026results indicate risk of death from infection was 0.3% and that antiviral antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 did not decline within 4 months after diagnosis (para).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAnalyzed multiple compartments of circulating immune memory to SARS-CoV-2 in 254 samples from 188 COVID-19 cases, including 43 samples at \u2265 6 months post-infection\u2026IgG to the Spike protein was relatively stable over 6+ months. Spike-specific memory B cells were more abundant at 6 months than at 1 month post symptom onset.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cFifty-four studies, from 18 countries, with a total of 12 011 447 individuals, followed up to 8 months after recovery, were included. At 6-8 months after recovery, the prevalence of detectable SARS-CoV-2 specific immunological memory remained high; IgG \u2013 90.4%\u2026 pooled prevalence of reinfection was 0.2% (95%CI 0.0 \u2013 0.7, I2 = 98.8, 9 studies). Individuals who recovered from COVID-19 had an 81% reduction in odds of a reinfection (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.1 \u2013 0.3, I2 = 90.5%, 5 studies).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cRetrospective cohort study of one multi-hospital health system included 150,325 patients tested for COVID-19 infection\u2026prior infection in patients with COVID-19 was highly protective against reinfection and symptomatic disease. This protection increased over time, suggesting that viral shedding or ongoing immune response may persist beyond 90 days and may not represent true reinfection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe study results suggest that reinfections are rare events and patients who have recovered from COVID-19 have a lower risk of reinfection. Natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 appears to confer a protective effect for at least a year, which is similar to the protection reported in recent vaccine studies.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe observed no symptomatic reinfections in a cohort of healthcare workers\u2026this apparent immunity to re-infection was maintained for at least 6 months\u2026test positivity rates were 0% (0\/128 [95% CI: 0\u20132.9]) in those with previous infection compared to 13.7% (290\/2115 [95% CI: 12.3\u201315.2]) in those without (P<\/em><0.0001 \u03c72 test).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cUsing HLA class I and II predicted peptide \u201cmegapools,\u201d circulating SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ and CD4+ T cells were identified in \u223c70% and 100% of COVID-19 convalescent patients, respectively. CD4+ T cell responses to spike, the main target of most vaccine efforts, were robust and correlated with the magnitude of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA titers. The M, spike, and N proteins each accounted for 11%\u201327% of the total CD4+ response, with additional responses commonly targeting nsp3, nsp4, ORF3a, and ORF8, among others. For CD8+ T cells, spike and M were recognized, with at least eight SARS-CoV-2 ORFs targeted.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cMuch of the study on the immune response to SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19, has focused on the production of antibodies<\/a>. But, in fact, immune cells known as memory T cells also play an important role in the ability of our immune systems to protect us against many viral infections, including\u2014it now appears\u2014COVID-19.An intriguing new study of these memory T cells suggests they might protect some people newly infected with SARS-CoV-2 by remembering past encounters with other human coronaviruses<\/a>. This might potentially explain why some people seem to fend off the virus and may be less susceptible to becoming severely ill with COVID-19.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cOur study demonstrates that convalescent subjects previously infected with ancestral variant SARS-CoV-2 produce antibodies that cross-neutralize emerging VOCs with high potency\u2026potent against 23 variants, including variants of concern.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cRequiring the vaccine in people who are already immune with natural immunity has no scientific support. While vaccinating those people may be beneficial \u2013 and it\u2019s a reasonable hypothesis that vaccination may bolster the longevity of their immunity \u2013 to argue dogmatically that they must <\/em>get vaccinated has zero clinical outcome data to back it. As a matter of fact, we have data to the contrary: A Cleveland Clinic study<\/a> found that vaccinating people with natural immunity did not add to their level of protection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cScreened 21 well-characterized, longitudinally-sampled convalescent donors that recovered from mild COVID-19\u2026following a typical case of mild COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cells not only persist but continuously differentiate in a coordinated fashion well into convalescence, into a state characteristic of long-lived, self-renewing memory.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCharacterized the profiles of measles vaccine (MV) vaccine-induced antigen-specific T cells over time since vaccination. In a cross-sectional study of healthy subjects with a history of MV vaccination, we found that MV-specific CD4 and CD8 T cells could be detected up to 34 years after vaccination. The levels of MV-specific CD8 T cells and MV-specific IgG remained stable, whereas the level of MV-specific CD4 T cells decreased significantly in subjects who had been vaccinated >21 years earlier.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe success of vaccines is dependent on the generation and maintenance of immunological memory. The immune system can remember previously encountered pathogens, and memory B and T cells are critical in secondary responses to infection. Studies in mice have helped to understand how different memory B cell populations are generated following antigen exposure and how affinity for the antigen is determinant to B cell fate\u2026 upon re-exposure to an antigen the memory recall response will be faster, stronger, and more specific than a na\u00efve response. Protective memory depends first on circulating antibodies secreted by LLPCs. When these are not sufficient for immediate pathogen neutralization and elimination, memory B cells are recalled.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cExamined the magnitude, breadth, and durability of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies in two distinct B-cell compartments: long-lived plasma cell-derived antibodies in the plasma, and peripheral memory B-cells along with their associated antibody profiles elicited after in vitro<\/em> stimulation. We found that magnitude varied amongst individuals, but was the highest in hospitalized subjects. Variants of concern (VoC) -RBD-reactive antibodies were found in the plasma of 72% of samples in this investigation, and VoC-RBD-reactive memory B-cells were found in all but 1 subject at a single time-point. This finding, that VoC-RBD-reactive MBCs are present in the peripheral blood of all subjects including those that experienced asymptomatic or mild disease, provides a reason for optimism regarding the capacity of vaccination, prior infection, and\/or both, to limit disease severity and transmission of variants of concern as they continue to arise and circulate.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cT-cell immunity is important for recovery from COVID-19 and provides heightened immunity for re-infection. However, little is known about the SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell immunity in virus-exposed individuals\u2026report virus-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell memory in recovered COVID-19 patients and close contacts\u2026close contacts are able to gain T-cell immunity against SARS-CoV-2 despite lacking a detectable infection.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe CD4 and CD8 responses generated after natural infection are equally robust, showing activity against multiple \u201cepitopes\u201d (little segments) of the spike protein of the virus. For instance, CD8 cells responds to 52 epitopes<\/a> and CD4 cells respond to 57 epitopes<\/a> across the spike protein, so that a few mutations in the variants cannot knock out such a robust and in-breadth T cell response\u2026only 1 mutation found in Beta variant-spike overlapped with a previously identified epitope (1\/52), suggesting that virtually all anti-SARS-CoV-2 CD8+ T-cell responses should recognize these newly described variants.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cExposure to common cold coronaviruses can teach the immune system to recognize SARS-CoV-2\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cFound that the pre-existing reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 comes from memory T cells and that cross-reactive T cells can specifically recognize a SARS-CoV-2 epitope as well as the homologous epitope from a common cold coronavirus. These findings underline the importance of determining the impacts of pre-existing immune memory in COVID-19 disease severity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cBetter understanding of antibody responses<\/a> against SARS-CoV-2 after natural infection might provide valuable insights into the future implementation of vaccination policies<\/a>. Longitudinal analysis of IgG<\/a> antibody titers<\/a> was carried out in 32 recovered COVID-19 patients based in the Umbria<\/a> region of Italy for 14 months after Mild and Moderately-Severe infection\u2026study findings are consistent with recent studies reporting antibody persistency suggesting that induced SARS-CoV-2 immunity through natural infection, might be very efficacious against re-infection (>90%) and could persist for more than six months. Our study followed up patients up to 14 months demonstrating the presence of anti-S-RBD IgG in 96.8% of recovered COVID-19 subjects.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCharacterized humoral and circulating follicular helper T cell (cTFH) immunity against spike in recovered patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We found that S-specific antibodies, memory B cells and cTFH are consistently elicited after SARS-CoV-2 infection, demarking robust humoral immunity and positively associated with plasma neutralizing activity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201c149 COVID-19-convalescent individuals\u2026antibody sequencing revealed the expansion of clones of RBD-specific memory B cells that expressed closely related antibodies in different individuals. Despite low plasma titres, antibodies to three distinct epitopes on the RBD neutralized the virus with half-maximal inhibitory concentrations (IC50 values) as low as 2 ng ml\u22121.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCOVID-19 patients rapidly generate B cell memory to both the spike and nucleocapsid antigens following SARS-CoV-2 infection\u2026RBD- and NCP-specific IgG and Bmem cells were detected in all 25 patients with a history of COVID-19.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cPeople who recover from mild COVID-19 have bone-marrow cells that can churn out antibodies for decades\u2026the study provides evidence that immunity triggered by SARS-CoV-2 infection will be extraordinarily long-lasting.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In greater Vancouver Canada, \u201cusing a highly sensitive multiplex assay and positive\/negative thresholds established in infants in whom maternal antibodies have waned, we determined that more than 90% of uninfected adults showed antibody reactivity against the spike protein, receptor-binding domain (RBD), N-terminal domain (NTD), or the nucleocapsid (N) protein from SARS-CoV-2.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/pohled.podhrazsky.eu\/subdom\/pohled\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/web_pauleliasalexander-300x300-1.jpg\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nD\u016fkazy o p\u0159irozen\u00e9 imunit\u011b versus imunita navozen\u00e1 vakc\u00ednou covid-19:<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
1) Nutnost o\u010dkov\u00e1n\u00ed proti covid-19 u d\u0159\u00edve infikovan\u00fdch jedinc\u016f<\/a>, Shrestha, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
2) SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell immunity in cases of COVID-19 and SARS, and uninfected controls<\/a>, Le Bert, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n3) Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections<\/a>,Gazit, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
4) Highly functional virus-specific cellular immune response in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection<\/a>, Le Bert, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
5) Large-scale study of antibody titer decay following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine or SARS-CoV-2 infection<\/a>, Israel, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
6) SARS-CoV-2 re-infection risk in Austria<\/a>, Pilz, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
7) mRNA vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells recognize B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants but differ in longevity and homing properties depending on prior infection status<\/a>, Neidleman, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
8) Good news: Mild COVID-19 induces lasting antibody protection<\/a>, Bhandari, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
9) Robust neutralizing antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 infection persist for months<\/a>, Wajnberg, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
10) Evolution of Antibody Immunity to SARS-CoV-2<\/a>, Gaebler, 2020<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
11) Persistence of neutralizing antibodies a year after SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans<\/a>, Haveri, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
12) Quantifying the risk of SARS\u2010CoV\u20102 reinfection over time<\/a>, Murchu, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
13) Natural immunity to covid is powerful. Policymakers seem afraid to say so<\/a>, Makary, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe data on natural immunity are now overwhelming,\u201d Makary told the Morning Wire. \u201cIt turns out the hypothesis that our public health leaders had that vaccinated immunity is better and stronger than natural immunity was wrong. They got it backwards. And now we\u2019ve got data from Israel showing that natural immunity is 27 times more effective than vaccinated immunity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n14) SARS-CoV-2 elicits robust adaptive immune responses regardless of disease severity<\/a>, Nielsen, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
15) Protection of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is similar to that of BNT162b2 vaccine protection: A three-month nationwide experience from Israel<\/a>, Goldberg, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
16) Incidence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 infection among previously infected or vaccinated employees<\/a>, Kojima, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
17) Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine\u2014but vaccination remains vital<\/a>, Wadman, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
18) One-year sustained cellular and humoral immunities of COVID-19 convalescents<\/a>, Zhang, 2021<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
19) Functional SARS-CoV-2-Specific Immune Memory Persists after Mild COVID-19<\/a>, Rodda, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
20) Discrete Immune Response Signature to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination Versus Infection<\/a>, Ivanova, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
21) SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans<\/a>, Turner, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
22) SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN)<\/a>, Jane Hall, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
23) Pandemic peak SARS-CoV-2 infection and seroconversion rates in London frontline health-care workers<\/a>, Houlihan, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
24) Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are associated with protection against reinfection<\/a>, Lumley, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
25) Longitudinal analysis shows durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection with persisting antibody responses and memory B and T cells<\/a>, Cohen, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
26) Single cell profiling of T and B cell repertoires following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine<\/a>, Sureshchandra, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
27) SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positivity protects against reinfection for at least seven months with 95% efficacy<\/a>, Abu-Raddad, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
28) Orthogonal SARS-CoV-2 Serological Assays Enable Surveillance of Low-Prevalence Communities and Reveal Durable Humoral Immunity<\/a>, Ripperger, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
29) Anti-spike antibody response to natural SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population<\/a>, Wei, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
30) Researchers find long-lived immunity to 1918 pandemic virus<\/a>, CIDRAP, 2008<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
31) Live virus neutralisation testing in convalescent patients and subjects vaccinated against 19A, 20B, 20I\/501Y.V1 and 20H\/501Y.V2 isolates of SARS-CoV-2<\/a>, Gonzalez, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
32) Differential effects of the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose on T cell immunity in na\u00efve and COVID-19 recovered individuals<\/a>, Camara, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
33) Op-Ed: Quit Ignoring Natural COVID Immunity<\/a>, Klausner, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
34) Association of SARS-CoV-2 Seropositive Antibody Test With Risk of Future Infection<\/a>, Harvey, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
35) SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity and subsequent infection risk in healthy young adults: a prospective cohort study<\/a>, Letizia, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
36) Associations of Vaccination and of Prior Infection With Positive PCR Test Results for SARS-CoV-2 in Airline Passengers Arriving in Qatar<\/a>, Bertollini, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
37) Natural immunity against COVID-19 significantly reduces the risk of reinfection: findings from a cohort of sero-survey participants<\/a>, Mishra, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
38) Lasting immunity found after recovery from COVID-19<\/a>, NIH, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
39) SARS-CoV-2 Natural Antibody Response Persists for at Least 12 Months in a Nationwide Study From the Faroe Islands<\/a>, Petersen, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
40) SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell memory is sustained in COVID-19 convalescent patients for 10 months with successful development of stem cell-like memory T cells<\/a>, Jung, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
41) Immune Memory in Mild COVID-19 Patients and Unexposed Donors Reveals Persistent T Cell Responses After SARS-CoV-2 Infection<\/a>, Ansari, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
42) COVID-19 natural immunity<\/a>, WHO, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
43) Antibody Evolution after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination<\/a>, Cho, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
44) Humoral Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 in Iceland<\/a>, Gudbjartsson, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
45) Immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2 assessed for up to 8 months after infection<\/a>, Dan, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
46) The prevalence of adaptive immunity to COVID-19 and reinfection after recovery \u2013 a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 011 447 individuals<\/a>, Chivese, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
47) Reinfection Rates among Patients who Previously Tested Positive for COVID-19: a Retrospective Cohort Study<\/a>, Sheehan, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
48) Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection 1 Year After Primary Infection in a Population in Lombardy, Italy<\/a>, Vitale, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
49) Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with protection against symptomatic reinfection<\/a>, Hanrath, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
50) Targets of T Cell Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus in Humans with COVID-19 Disease and Unexposed Individuals<\/a>, Grifoni, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
51) NIH Director\u2019s Blog: Immune T Cells May Offer Lasting Protection Against COVID-19<\/a>, Collins, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
52) Ultrapotent antibodies against diverse and highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants<\/a>, Wang, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
53) Why COVID-19 Vaccines Should Not Be Required for All Americans<\/a>, Makary, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
54) Protracted yet coordinated differentiation of long-lived SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cells during COVID-19 convalescence<\/a>, Ma, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
55) Decrease in Measles Virus-Specific CD4 T Cell Memory in Vaccinated Subjects<\/a>, Naniche, 2004<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
56) Remembrance of Things Past: Long-Term B Cell Memory After Infection and Vaccination<\/a>, Palm, 2019<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
57) SARS-CoV-2 specific memory B-cells from individuals with diverse disease severities recognize SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern<\/a>, Lyski, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
58) Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 generates T-cell memory in the absence of a detectable viral infection<\/a>, Wang, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
59) CD8+ T-Cell Responses in COVID-19 Convalescent Individuals Target Conserved Epitopes From Multiple Prominent SARS-CoV-2 Circulating Variants<\/a>, Redd, 2021and Lee<\/a>, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
60) Exposure to common cold coronaviruses can teach the immune system to recognize SARS-CoV-2<\/a>,La Jolla, Crotty and Sette, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
61) Selective and cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2 T cell epitopes in unexposed humans<\/a>, Mateus, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
62) Longitudinal observation of antibody responses for 14 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection<\/a>, Dehgani-Mobaraki<\/a>, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
63) Humoral and circulating follicular helper T cell responses in recovered patients with COVID-19<\/a>, Juno, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
64) Convergent antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in convalescent individuals<\/a>, Robbiani, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
65) Rapid generation of durable B cell memory to SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid proteins in COVID-19 and convalescence<\/a>, Hartley, 2020<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
66) Had COVID? You\u2019ll probably make antibodies for a lifetime<\/a>, Callaway, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
67) A majority of uninfected adults show preexisting antibody reactivity against SARS-CoV-2<\/a>, Majdoubi, 2021<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n