Hybrid immunity from SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in Canadian adults: cohort study
Abstract
Background: Few national-level studies have evaluated the impact of 'hybrid' immunity (vaccination coupled with recovery from infection) from the Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2.
Methods: From May 2020 to December 2022, we conducted serial assessments (each of ~4000-9000 adults) examining SARS-CoV-2 antibodies within a mostly representative Canadian cohort drawn from a national online polling platform. Adults, most of whom were vaccinated, reported viral test-confirmed infections and mailed self-collected dried blood spots to a central lab. Samples underwent highly sensitive and specific antibody assays to spike and nucleocapsid protein antigens, the latter triggered only by infection. We estimated cumulative SARS-CoV-2 incidence prior to the Omicron period and during the BA.1/1.1 and BA.2/5 waves. We assessed changes in antibody levels and in age-specific active immunity levels.
Results: Spike levels were higher in infected than in uninfected adults, regardless of vaccination doses. Among adults vaccinated at least thrice and infected more than six months earlier, spike levels fell notably and continuously for the nine months post-vaccination. By contrast, among adults infected within six months, spike levels declined gradually. Declines were similar by sex, age group, and ethnicity. Recent vaccination attenuated declines in spike levels from older infections. In a convenience sample, spike antibody and cellular responses were correlated. Near the end of 2022, about 35% of adults above age 60 had their last vaccine dose more than six months ago, and about 25% remained uninfected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection rose from 13% (95% CI 11-14%) before omicron to 78% (76-80%) by December 2022, equating to 25 million infected adults cumulatively. However, the COVID-19 weekly death rate during the BA.2/5 waves was less than half of that during the BA.1/1.1 wave, implying a protective role for hybrid immunity.
Conclusions: Strategies to maintain population-level hybrid immunity require up-to-date vaccination coverage, including among those recovering from infection. Population-based, self-collected dried blood spots are a practicable biological surveillance platform.
Funding: Funding was provided by the COVID-19 Immunity Task Force, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Pfizer Global Medical Grants, and St. Michael's Hospital Foundation. PJ and ACG are funded by the Canada Research Chairs Program.
Data availability
Ab-C data will be made available publicly through the COVID-19 Immunity Task Force (CITF) Databank. To access the data, please create an account on the CITF Databank portal and submit an application to use the data. Your application will be reviewed by the CITF Databank team. The data access procedure is described in detail at https://www.covid19immunitytaskforce.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/data-access-diagram-en.pdf. This process is free of charge.Analytical code will be available on request in accordance with the Ab-C study's data governance plan. Please email the corresponding author, Dr. Jha at prabhat.jha@utoronto.ca to request the code. The CITF data team harmonizes data from multiple studies funded by CITF, including the Ab-C study. As a result, variable names and labels may change after the harmonization. To minimize confusion when using the code, it's best to have some contact with us when using the harmonized data.
Article and author information
Author details
Funding
COVID-19 Immunity Task Force (2021-HQ-000139)
- Anne-Claude Gingras
- Prabhat Jha
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (EG2-179433)
- Prabhat Jha
Pfizer Global Medical Grants (61608943)
- Prabhat Jha
St. Michael's Hospital Foundation
- Prabhat Jha
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Ethics
Human subjects: The Ab-C study was approved by the Unity Health Toronto Research Ethics Board (REB # 20-107 and 21-213). All participants provided informed consent to be included in the study.
Copyright
© 2024, Brown et al.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 922
- views
-
- 112
- downloads
-
- 0
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Further reading
-
- Cancer Biology
- Epidemiology and Global Health
Cancer is considered a risk factor for COVID-19 mortality, yet several countries have reported that deaths with a primary code of cancer remained within historic levels during the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we further elucidate the relationship between cancer mortality and COVID-19 on a population level in the US. We compared pandemic-related mortality patterns from underlying and multiple cause (MC) death data for six types of cancer, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s. Any pandemic-related changes in coding practices should be eliminated by study of MC data. Nationally in 2020, MC cancer mortality rose by only 3% over a pre-pandemic baseline, corresponding to ~13,600 excess deaths. Mortality elevation was measurably higher for less deadly cancers (breast, colorectal, and hematological, 2–7%) than cancers with a poor survival rate (lung and pancreatic, 0–1%). In comparison, there was substantial elevation in MC deaths from diabetes (37%) and Alzheimer’s (19%). To understand these differences, we simulated the expected excess mortality for each condition using COVID-19 attack rates, life expectancy, population size, and mean age of individuals living with each condition. We find that the observed mortality differences are primarily explained by differences in life expectancy, with the risk of death from deadly cancers outcompeting the risk of death from COVID-19.
-
- Epidemiology and Global Health
Background:
The associations of age at diagnosis of breast cancer with incident myocardial infarction (MI) and heart failure (HF) remain unexamined. Addressing this problem could promote understanding of the cardiovascular impact of breast cancer.
Methods:
Data were obtained from the UK Biobank. Information on the diagnosis of breast cancer, MI, and HF was collected at baseline and follow-ups (median = 12.8 years). The propensity score matching method and Cox proportional hazards models were employed.
Results:
A total of 251,277 female participants (mean age: 56.8 ± 8.0 years), of whom 16,241 had breast cancer, were included. Among breast cancer participants, younger age at diagnosis (per 10-year decrease) was significantly associated with elevated risks of MI (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19–1.56, p<0.001) and HF (HR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.18–1.46, p<0.001). After propensity score matching, breast cancer patients with younger diagnosis age had significantly higher risks of MI and HF than controls without breast cancer.
Conclusions:
Younger age at diagnosis of breast cancer was associated with higher risks of incident MI and HF, underscoring the necessity to pay additional attention to the cardiovascular health of breast cancer patients diagnosed at younger age to conduct timely interventions to attenuate the subsequent risks of incident cardiovascular diseases.
Funding:
This study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82373665 and 81974490), the Nonprofit Central Research Institute Fund of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (2021-RC330-001), and the 2022 China Medical Board-open competition research grant (22-466).