The outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection seems to depend more on the quality of early innate immunity (pDC + NK cells) than on the strength of the antibody response.
A 2026 immunology study helps explain why.🧵
The authors compared two immune profiles:
Hospitalized COVID-19 patients
PCR-confirmed infection, mild to severe disease
Healthcare workers without proof of infection
PCR-negative and seronegative (IgM/IgG), unvaccinated (2020)
The study was conducted before vaccines were available.
So
any antibodies detected came only from infection
absence of antibodies means no detectable systemic infection,
not absolute proof that the virus never entered the body
What exposure actually means here
The control group (low susceptibility) was defined as healthcare workers who
reported at least three high-risk exposures,
remained repeatedly PCR-negative and IgM/IgG-negative,
described exposures such as -
aerosol-generating procedures,
close contact without a mask,
contact with confirmed COVID-19 patients.
We do not know whether these healthcare workers
were briefly infected below detection thresholds,
had only local mucosal replication,
or were never infected at all.
That uncertainty is real - and acknowledged.
The study contrasts -
a profile seen in established, systemic COVID-19,
vs
a profile seen when exposure does not progress to detectable infection.
That distinction matters.
Immune pattern in hospitalized COVID-19 -
patients with active COVID-19 showed
↓ plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs),
↓ functional NK cell subsets,
↑ plasmablast expansion,
↑ neutralizing antibodies.
This looks like
delayed early control - high viral burden - strong but late antibody response.
Immune pattern in healthcare workers without proof of infection -
relatively preserved pDC levels,
more intact NK cell profiles,
very low plasmablast activity,
no detectable antibodies.
Interpretation -
whatever happened early, it did not escalate into systemic infection.
The sickest patients often had more antibodies, not fewer.
That doesn’t mean antibodies are useless.
It means - antibodies reflect how much infection already happened
This study suggests -
early innate immunity (interferon signaling via pDCs, NK function)
may shape whether infection escalates.
Antibodies describe the past infection. Early innate immunity shapes whether infection escalates at all.
That’s the signal - with all limitations openly stated.
Laura Martín-Pedraza at al., Contrasting immune responses in COVID-19: insights from healthcare workers and infected patients on plasmablast, pDC, and NK cell dynamics. Frontiers in Immunology 2026. frontiersin.org/journals/immun…
Why this matters for reinfections?
Every new exposure -
re-tests early innate immune responses,
may fail if interferon/NK responses are impaired.
That helps explain why
reinfections are common,
antibody presence ≠ sterilizing immunity,
early immune dysfunction may accumulate risk.
Why this matters biologically?
SARS-CoV-2 is not a passive virus.
It actively interferes with early antiviral defenses.
The virus is known to
suppress type I interferon signaling,
impair plasmacytoid dendritic cell (pDC) function,
and promote NK cell dysfunction and exhaustion during infection.
So the immune pattern seen in reinfected -
reflects mechanisms the virus itself exploits once infection escalates.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Which brain circuits were most affected in this study - and what might that mean in everyday life?
The study shows something fundamental - reduced regulatory capacity of the brain. The problem is coordination, not character🧵
The most affected system was the salience network
(insula + anterior cingulate cortex).
Think of it as the brain’s regulatory switch.
It evaluates what is important, controls attention, and shifts the brain between rest and performance modes.
When this network becomes dysregulated, the result is reduced capacity to regulate mental load.
Faster overload, lower tolerance to distraction, increased irritability under fatigue, and difficulty sensing internal limits.
With longer duration of Long COVID, some key brain connections become weaker - especially those linked to prefrontal regulatory areas.
At the same time, other connections become stronger.
A new fMRI study shows this reflects a progressive reorganization of how brain networks communicate🧵
The study didn’t just look at isolated brain regions.
It examined how entire brain networks coordinate during cognitive effort - because performance depends less on single areas and more on how well networks synchronize
That synchronization was disrupted in Long COVID.
The main problem wasn’t damage to one function, but impaired regulation - the brain’s ability to detect what matters and shift efficiently into task-focused mode.
A new macaque study looked at how immune memory forms after infections with different SARS-CoV-2 variants.
The main pattern is familiar from other viruses -
immune imprinting tends to stay biased toward earlier variants, even after later infections.🧵
The model is useful because it allows sequential infections under controlled conditions (Wuhan - Delta - Omicron), something that’s hard to observe clearly in humans.
Omicron as a primary infection = relatively weak new immune imprint
After first Omicron infection in macaques -
variant-specific anti-Omicron RBD antibodies developed slowly
overall immunogenicity was lower
T-cell responses were also weaker.
A new study in Neuron links nuclear pore breakdown to TDP-43 pathology in ALS and related dementias.
This pathway is especially relevant because SARS-CoV-2 can both cleave TDP-43 and disrupt nuclear transport - potentially hitting the same vulnerability from two directions.🧵
The nuclear pore is a critical cellular gate.
It regulates the movement of RNA and proteins between the nucleus and cytoplasm.
In ALS and some dementias, this gate is known to fail - and TDP-43 leaves the nucleus and accumulates in toxic aggregates.
But why the pore breaks down has been unclear.
The study identifies a key player - VCP.
Normally, it acts as a cellular cleanup system, removing damaged proteins.
The problem arises when it becomes overactive.
A new study in Frontiers in Medicine analyzed 959 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (pre-vaccination).
It shows that T cell counts at admission strongly predict severe outcomes and mortality.
This isn’t just about inflammation - adaptive immunity is central🧵
Patients with CD3 T cells ≤ 666/mm³ had
2.3× higher risk of needing ventilatory support
2.4× higher risk of in-hospital death
CD4 ≤ 359/mm³ was associated with
2.8× higher risk of death
These associations remained independent after adjustment.
The study supports a model in which
T-cell responses (especially CD3/CD4) are weakened
Adaptive immunity fails to adequately control the virus
The body compensates through hyperactivation of innate immunity
The result is severe disease
This study suggests that in some patients, COVID-19 triggers a long-term process of vascular and cardiac injury that can gradually increase pulmonary pressure, strain the right ventricle, and raise the risk of death in the following years🧵
The study followed 480 hospitalized patients (240 moderate, 240 severe) for one year after discharge. It assessed heart function using echocardiography and measured biomarkers of vascular inflammation.
In severe COVID-19, right-ventricular function was already significantly worse at the first study examination. Over the following year, pulmonary artery pressure increased by 17.8% in severe cases and 7.1% in moderate cases!