RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Estimating protection afforded by prior infection in preventing reinfection: Applying the test-negative study design
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.01.02.22268622
DO 10.1101/2022.01.02.22268622
A1 Houssein H. Ayoub
A1 Milan Tomy
A1 Hiam Chemaitelly
A1 Heba N. Altarawneh
A1 Peter Coyle
A1 Patrick Tang
A1 Mohammad R. Hasan
A1 Zaina Al Kanaani
A1 Einas Al Kuwari
A1 Adeel A. Butt
A1 Andrew Jeremijenko
A1 Anvar Hassan Kaleeckal
A1 Ali Nizar Latif
A1 Riyazuddin Mohammad Shaik
A1 Gheyath K. Nasrallah
A1 Fatiha M. Benslimane
A1 Hebah A. Al Khatib
A1 Hadi M. Yassine
A1 Mohamed G. Al Kuwari
A1 Hamad Eid Al Romaihi
A1 Hanan F. Abdul-Rahim
A1 Mohamed H. Al-Thani
A1 Abdullatif Al Khal
A1 Roberto Bertollini
A1 Laith J. Abu-Raddad
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/01/03/2022.01.02.22268622.abstract
AB Background The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted an urgent need to use infection testing databases to rapidly estimate effectiveness of prior infection in preventing reinfection (PES) by novel variants of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Methods Mathematical modeling was used to demonstrate the applicability of the test-negative, case-control study design to derive PES. Modeling was also used to investigate effects of bias in PES estimation. The test-negative design was applied to national-level testing data in Qatar to estimate PES for SARS-CoV-2 infection and to validate this design.Results Apart from the very early phase of an epidemic, the difference between the test-negative estimate for PES and the true value of PES was minimal and became negligible as the epidemic progressed. The test-negative design provided robust estimation of PES even when PES began to wane after prior infection. Assuming that only 25% of prior infections are documented, misclassification of prior infection status underestimated PES, but the underestimate was considerable only when >50% of the population was ever infected. Misclassification of latent infection, misclassification of current active infection, and scale-up of vaccination all resulted in negligible bias in estimated PES. PES against SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and Beta variants was estimated at 97.0% (95% CI: 93.6-98.6) and 85.5% (95% CI: 82.4-88.1), respectively. These estimates were validated using a cohort study design.Conclusions The test-negative design offers a feasible, robust method to estimate protection from prior infection in preventing reinfection.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementHHA acknowledges the joint support of Qatar University and Marubeni M-QJRC-2020-5. The authors are grateful for support from the Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Biomathematics Research Core, both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, as well as for support provided by the Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, and Sidra Medicine. The authors are also grateful for the Qatar Genome Programme and Qatar University Biomedical Research Center for institutional support for the reagents needed for the viral genome sequencing. Statements made herein are solely the responsibility of the authors. The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the article. The developed mathematical models were made possible thanks to modeling infrastructure developed through NPRP grant number 9-040-3-008 (Principal investigator: LJA) and NPRP grant number 12S-0216-190094 (Principal investigator: LJA) from the Qatar National Research Fund (a member of Qatar Foundation; https://www.qnrf.org). The statements made herein are solely the responsibility of the authors. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was approved by the Hamad Medical Corporation and Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar Institutional Review Boards with waiver of informed consent.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe dataset of this study is a property of the Qatar Ministry of Public Health that was provided to the researchers through a restricted-access agreement that prevents sharing the dataset with a third party or publicly. Future access to this dataset can be considered through a direct application for data access to Her Excellency the Minister of Public Health (https://www.moph.gov.qa/english/Pages/default.aspx). Aggregate data are available within the manuscript and its Supplementary information.