1/x If this holds up, it's very concerning. medrxiv.org/content/10.110… It means people might be at risk for relapse or reinfection with #COVID19. &/or that the presence of antibodies doesn't mean what we think it might.
2/x "Elderly & middle-age patients had significantly higher
plasma neutralizing antibody titers (P<0.0001) and spike-binding antibodies (P=0.0003) than young patients."
plasma neutralizing antibody titers (P<0.0001) and spike-binding antibodies (P=0.0003) than young patients."
3/x "The neutralizing antibody titers were positively correlated with plasma CRP levels but negatively correlated with the lymphocyte counts of patients at the time of admission, indicating an association between humoral response and cellular immune response."
4/x It appears that higher neutralizing antibody titers are associated with worse disease. Could antibodies be potentiating worse disease? Or they were people with worse disease more likely to have higher antibody titers on recovery?
5/x Note that patients in the ICU (with the worst disease) were excluded.
6/x Low levels of antibodies in younger people, who tend to have less severe disease. Might also argue for a role of antibodies in potentiating worse disease?
7/x Might cellular immunity be more important in terms of long-term immunity? And humoral immunity (antibodies) be more important in immune dysfunction? Important to understand as we develop vaccines.
8/x Important to know whether antibodies represent true immunity. Many of us have been hoping that antibody testing could determine who's safe to return to work & stop social distancing (the theory being they're not at risk for reinfection & wouldn't contribute to transmission).
