Serological anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies association to live virus neutralizing test titers in COVID-19 paucisymptomatic/symptomatic patients and vaccinated subjects

The Evolution of Serological Assays during Two Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic: From an Easy-to-Use Screening Tool for Identifying Current Infections to Laboratory Algorithms for Discovering Immune Protection and Optimizing Vaccine Administration

The emergence of COVID-19 has evolved into a global pandemic, causing an unprecedented public health crisis marked by unprecedented levels of morbidity never seen in the recent past. Considerable research efforts have been made in the scientific community to establish an optimal method to identify severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and to understand the induced immune response. This review examined the development of serological tests during the COVID-19 pandemic, considering the factors affecting sensitivity and specificity, which are key to promote an efficient vaccination strategy for public health. The market has witnessed the introduction of various serological tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, such as the chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), which emerged as a powerful and rapid tool to monitor the antibody response before and after vaccination or infection. Therefore, developing serological tests by studying antibody trends and persistence is essential for creating long-term strategies. Our analysis underscores the multifaceted applications of serological tests in pandemic management with a focus on the critical insights they provide into antibody dynamics that help in managing the ongoing pandemic and shaping future public health initiatives, providing a basis for optimizing the future response to viral threats.

Clinical and laboratory considerations: determining an antibody-based composite correlate of risk for reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 or severe COVID-19

Much of the global population now has some level of adaptive immunity to SARS-CoV-2 induced by exposure to the virus (natural infection), vaccination, or a combination of both (hybrid immunity). Key questions that subsequently arise relate to the duration and the level of protection an individual might expect based on their infection and vaccination history. A multi-component composite correlate of risk (CoR) could inform individuals and stakeholders about protection and aid decision making. This perspective evaluates the various elements that need to be accommodated in the development of an antibody-based composite CoR for reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 or development of severe COVID-19, including variation in exposure dose, transmission route, viral genetic variation, patient factors, and vaccination status. We provide an overview of antibody dynamics to aid exploration of the specifics of SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. We further discuss anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays, sample matrices, testing formats, frequency of sampling and the optimal time point for such sampling. While the development of a composite CoR is challenging, we provide our recommendations for each of these key areas and highlight areas that require further work to be undertaken.

Inflammatory and cytotoxic mediators in COVID-19 patients and in ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine recipients

Immunological and cytotoxic mediators are induced in natural infection and are essential for the effectiveness of vaccination. Vaccination is useful to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and limit the morbidity/mortality of COVID-19. ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 is one of the most widespread vaccines in the world. We compared the detection of anti-S1 SARS-CoV2 IgG and the profile of inflammatory and cytotoxic responses of patients who developed different clinical outcomes of COVID-19 with individuals previously exposed or not to the virus received the first and booster doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Plasma from 35 patients with COVID-19 and 11 vaccinated were evaluated by multiplex assay. Here, no vaccinated subjects had serious adverse effects. Those vaccinated with a booster dose had higher anti-S1 IgG than mild/moderate and recovered patients. Critically ill and deceased patients had IgG levels like those immunized. By univariate analysis, IL-2, IL-17, and perforin do not differentiate between patients and vaccinated individuals. Granzyme A increased at dose 1, while patients had their levels reduced. High levels of granulysin, sFas, and IL-6 were detected in the deaths, but after vaccination, all were declined. The multivariate analysis supports the role of IL-6 and granulysin as associated and non-confounding variables related to the worst clinical outcome of COVID-19, but not sFas. Our data confirm the ability of the ChAdOx1 vaccine to produce specific antibody levels up to booster time. Furthermore, our data suggest that the vaccine can regulate both the hyper-production and the kinetics of the production of inflammatory and cytotoxic mediators involved in the cytokine storm, such as granulysin and IL-6.

The Antibodies' Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination: 1-Year Follow Up

The use of vaccines has allowed the containment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at a global level. The present work aims to add data on vaccination by evaluating the level of neutralizing antibodies in individuals who have received a three-vaccination series. For this purpose, we ran a surveillance program directed at measuring the level of IgG Abs against the Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) and surrogate virus neutralizing Ab (sVNT) anti-SARS-CoV-2 in the serum of individuals undergoing vaccination. This study was performed on employees from the University of Rome Tor Vergata and healthcare workers from the University Hospital who received the Vaxzevria vaccine (n = 56) and Comirnaty vaccine (n = 113), respectively. After the second dose, an increase in both RBD and sVNT Ab values was registered. In individuals who received the Comirnaty vaccine, the antibody titer was about one order of magnitude higher after 6 months from the first dose. All participants in this study received the Comirnaty vaccine as the third dose, which boosted the antibody response. Five months after the third dose, nearly one year from the first injection, the antibody level was >1000 BAU/mL (binding antibody units/mL). According to the values reported in the literature conferring protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, our data indicate that individuals undergoing three vaccine doses present a low risk of infection.

Hybrid Immunity Provides the Best COVID-19 Humoral Response in Immunocompromised Patients with or without SARS-CoV-2 Infection History

Immunization against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has significantly limited the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and reduced the associated complications, especially mortality. To prolong immunity, an immune booster was implemented. We evaluated the role of SARS-CoV-2 infection history in the vaccination schedules of kidney and liver transplant recipients and patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). To this end, we retrospectively analyzed the data of 78 solid organ transplantation (SOT) recipients and 40 patients with immunoglobulin A (IgA) nephropathy as representatives of the CKD group. Patients received two or three doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. At the follow-up, antibody (Ab) titer, graft function, COVID-19 history, and patients' clinical condition were assessed. Ab level was higher after two doses in patients with a COVID-19 history over three doses in patients with no COVID-19 history. Compared to three doses, subjects who were administered two doses had a longer median time to infection. Positive antibodies, in response to the third dose, were not observed in up to 8.4% of SOT patients. The results show that the vaccination schedule should take into account the vaccine response rate and COVID-19 history. So-called hybrid immunity appears to be most efficient at providing humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised patients.

Assessment of the Immune Response in Patients with Insulin Resistance, Obesity, and Diabetes to COVID-19 Vaccination

The SARS-CoV-19 pandemic overwhelmed multiple healthcare systems across the world. Patients with underlying medical conditions such as obesity or diabetes were particularly vulnerable, had more severe symptoms, and were more frequently hospitalized. To date, there have been many studies on the severity of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with metabolic disorders, but data on the efficiency of vaccines against COVID-19 are still limited. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in individuals with diabetes, insulin resistance, and obesity. A comparison is made between the immune response after vaccination in patients with and without metabolic comorbidities. Additionally, an attempt is made to highlight the mechanisms of immune stimulation affected by SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and how metabolic comorbidities modulate these mechanisms. The focus is on the most common COVID-19 vaccines, which include mRNA vaccines such as Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, as well as viral vector vaccines such as AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson. Furthermore, an effort is made to clarify how the functional differences between these vaccines may impact the response in individuals with metabolic disorders, drawing from available experimental data. This review summarizes the current knowledge regarding the post-vaccination response to COVID-19 in the context of metabolic comorbidities such as diabetes, insulin resistance, and obesity.

Comparing SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody levels in convalescent unvaccinated, convalescent vaccinated, and naive vaccinated subjects

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 and spread rapidly. The purpose of this study was to compare neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) following the original booster vaccine in convalescent and naive vaccinated individuals and in a third comparison group consisting of unvaccinated convalescent plasma donors.

Methods

We assessed NAbs before and 2 months after a booster vaccine in 68 adults who had completed the initial vaccine series for SARS-CoV-2. Of these subjects, 58 had no history of prior infection (naïve vaccinated group) and 10 had been infected with SARS-COV-2 prior to the completing the first vaccine series (convalescent vaccinated group). A third comparison group included unvaccinated convalescent plasma donors (n = 55) from an earlier study with NAbs assessed approximately 2 months after a positive test for SARS-CoV-2.

Results

Prior to the booster, convalescent vaccinated subjects had higher NAbs compared to naive vaccinated subjects (p = 0.02). Two months following the booster, NAbs increased in both vaccinated groups. The naive vaccinated group increased more than the convalescent vaccinated group (p = 0.02). NAbs in the naive vaccinated group were almost four times higher than NAbs in the 55 unvaccinated subjects, while the convalescent vaccinated group had levels 2.5 times higher p < 0.01.

Conclusion

NAbs in both vaccinated/boosted groups were significantly higher than in the convalescent unvaccinated group (p < 0.01). Our data indicates that subjects with a single infection with SARS-CoV-2 did not have the same levels of neutralizing antibodies that we observed in subjects who were either in the convalescent vaccinated or the naive vaccinated groups.

Evaluation of the accuracy in the mucosal detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in nasal secretions and saliva

COVID-19 vaccination with mRNA vaccines induces immune responses capable of neutralizing SARS-CoV-2. Commercially available serological anti-SARS-CoV-2 quantitative and neutralizing assays are essential for the determination of immune responses to vaccines. Nevertheless, at present there is a lack of validated tests to assess the mucosal response to COVID-19 vaccination and standardized analytic and pre-analytic methods have not yet been defined. The aim of our study was to evaluate the accuracy of two diagnostic immunoassays for COVID-19 (ELISA for IgA-S1 and chemiluminescent assay for IgG-RBD) on serum, saliva, and nasal secretions, by the enrollment of three study populations (healthy controls, vaccinated subjects, and subjects recovered from COVID-19 infection). In order to obtain an appropriate cut-off value for the biological matrices studied, ROC curve analyses were performed. Data demonstrate that the analytical and pre-analytical method we have developed can provide accurate and reliable results for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mucosal specific antibodies (IgA-S1 and IgG-RBD) on saliva and, as a novelty, on nasal secretions, either after COVID-19 infection or in vaccinated subjects.

Protective roles and protective mechanisms of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 infection and their potential clinical implications

Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) are central players in the humoral immunity that defends the body from SARS-CoV-2 infection by blocking viral entry into host cells and neutralizing their biological effects. Even though NAbs primarily work by neutralizing viral antigens, on some occasions, they may also combat the SARS-CoV-2 virus escaping neutralization by employing several effector mechanisms in collaboration with immune cells like natural killer (NK) cells and phagocytes. Besides their prophylactic and therapeutic roles, antibodies can be used for COVID-19 diagnosis, severity evaluation, and prognosis assessment in clinical practice. Furthermore, the measurement of NAbs could have key implications in determining individual or herd immunity against SARS-CoV-2, vaccine effectiveness, and duration of the humoral protective response, as well as aiding in the selection of suitable individuals who can donate convalescent plasma to treat infected people. Despite all these clinical applications of NAbs, using them in clinical settings can present some challenges. This review discusses the protective functions, possible protective mechanisms against SARS-CoV-2, and potential clinical applications of NAbs in COVID-19. This article also highlights the possible challenges and solutions associated with COVID-19 antibody-based prophylaxis, therapy, and vaccination.

Estimation of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Activity and Protective Immunity in Different Vaccine Types Using Three Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test Assays and Two Semiquantitative Binding Assays Targeting the Receptor-Binding Domain

Estimating neutralizing activity in vaccinees is crucial for predicting the protective effect against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). As the plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) requires a biosafety level 3 facility, it would be advantageous if surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) assays and binding assays could predict neutralizing activity. Here, five different assays were evaluated with respect to the PRNT in vaccinees: three sVNT assays from GenScript, Boditech Med, and SD Biosensor and two semiquantitative binding assays from Roche and Abbott. The vaccinees were subjected to three vaccination protocols: homologous ChAdOx1, homologous BNT162b2, and heterologous administration. The ability to predict a 50% neutralizing dose (ND50) of ≥20 largely varied among the assays, with the binding assays showing substantial agreement (kappa, ~0.90) and the sVNT assays showing relatively poor performance, especially in the ChAdOx1 group (kappa, 0.33 to 0.97). The ability to predict an ND50 value of ≥118.25, indicating a protective effect, was comparable among different assays. Applying optimal cutoffs based on Youden's index, the kappa agreements were greater than 0.60 for all assays in the total group. Overall, relatively poor performance was demonstrated in the ChAdOx1 group, owing to low antibody titers. Although there were intra-assay differences related to the vaccination protocols, as well as interassay differences, all assays demonstrated fair performance in predicting the protective effect using the new cutoffs. This study demonstrates the need for a different cutoff for each assay to appropriately determine a higher neutralizing titer and suggests the clinical feasibility of using various assays for estimation of the protective effect. IMPORTANCE The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to last, despite high COVID-19 vaccination rates. As many people experience breakthrough infection after prior infection and/or vaccination, estimating the neutralization activity and predicting the protective effect are major issues of concern. However, since standard neutralization tests are not available in most clinical laboratories, it would be beneficial if commercial assays could predict these aspects. In this study, we evaluated the performance of three sVNT assays and two semiquantitative binding assays targeting the receptor-binding domain with respect to the PRNT. Our results suggest that these assays could be used for predicting the protective effect by adjusting the cutoffs.

Clinical Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Renal Transplant Recipients. Antibody Levels Impact in Pneumonia and Death

BACKGROUND

Few studies have described the clinical impact of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines in renal transplant recipients (RTRs) in the context of omicron variant and the third vaccine dose. Antibody titer has been tried to relate to the prediction of outcomes related to SARS-CoV-2, but it results controversially in these populations.

METHODS

All patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction followed at a RTRs reference center from March 15, 2020, to March 15, 2022, were considered for analysis. Cases were analyzed by vaccination status. Breakthrough cases were then analyzed by nonantibodies (<20 arbitrary unit [AU]/mL), low (20-100 AU/mL), and high antibody titers (>100 AU/mL) against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Outcomes included pneumonia and mortality. We used logistic regression multivariable to assess for confounders.

RESULTS

Among 186 RTRs with coronavirus disease 2019, 50.5% (n = 94) were vaccinated versus 49.5% (n = 92) unvaccinated. Of the vaccinated patients, 67.02% developed a high antibody titer (>100 AU/mL) but 14.89% achieved a low antibody titer and 18.08% nonantibodies. Pneumonia-free survival (day 20) was 95% in high antibody titer but 40% in unvaccinated RTRs. Survival in RTRs at day 60 was similar in the unvaccinated group compared with nonantibodies breakthrough cases (82%) but 92% in the low antibody titer group (relative risk, 0.027; 95% confidence interval, 0.002-0.479; P = 0.014). Only patients with >100 AU/mL showed a 100% survival on day 60 postinfection.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccinated RTRs who achieve at least a low antibody titer (>20 AU/mL) had better results in terms of pneumonia and mortality than unvaccinated RTRs. Antibody titer >100 AU/mL associate with even better results than patients with lower antibody titers.

SARS-CoV-2 Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis with Sotrovimab and Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab in Immunocompromised Patients-A Single-Center Experience

Immunocompromised patients experience reduced vaccine effectiveness and are at higher risk for coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) death. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) aims to protect these patients. So far, only tixagevimab/cilgavimab is authorized for use as PrEP. This paper aims to provide real-world data on the use of tixagevimab/cilgavimab and sotrovimab as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) PrEP in immunocompromised patients, comparing the evolution of antibody levels and reporting the incidence of breakthrough infections. A retrospective, single-center analysis was conducted including 132 immunocompromised patients with inadequate vaccine response, who received COVID-PrEP at our clinic between January and June 2022. Initially, 95 patients received sotrovimab while 37 patients received tixagevimab/cilgavimab. Antibody levels after first PrEP with sotrovimab remain high for several months after infusion (median 10,058 and 7235 BAU/mL after 1 and 3 months, respectively), with higher titers than after tixagevimab/cilgavimab injection even 3 months later (7235 vs. 1647 BAU/mL, p = 0.0007). Overall, breakthrough infections were rare (13/132, 10%) when compared to overall infection rates during this period (over 30% of the Austrian population), with mild disease course and rapid viral clearance (median 10 days). Sotrovimab may be an additional option for SARS-CoV-2 PrEP.

T-Cell Assay after COVID-19 Vaccination Could Be a Useful Tool? A Pilot Study on Interferon-Gamma Release Assay in Healthcare Workers

Background: SARS-CoV-2 T-cells are crucial for long-term protection against reinfection. The aim was to demonstrate the Interferon-gamma Release Assay (IGRA) test could be useful for vaccination monitoring. Methods: In a prospective cohort of 98 vaccinated healthcare workers for SARS-CoV-2, we selected 23 people in low-antibodies (Group 1, N = 8), high-antibodies (Group 2, N = 9), and negative control groups (Group 3, N = 6). SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and cellular responses were analyzed at 8 months after two doses of Pfizer BioNTech, evaluating anti-RBD (Receptor Binding Domain) and RBD-ACE2 (Angiotensin Converting Enzyme-2) blocking antibodies in sera through a Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CLIA) and T-cells through the IGRA test in heparinized plasma. Moreover, lymphocyte subtyping was executed by a flow cytometer. Statistical analysis was performed. Results: The data confirmed that RBD and RBD-ACE2 blocking ACE2 antibody levels of Group 1 were significantly lower than Group 2; p < 0.001. However, T-cells showed no significant difference between Group 1 and Group 2. Conclusions: This work suggests the need for new strategies for booster doses administration.

Evaluation of commercial Anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody assays in seropositive subjects

The virus neutralization test (VNT) is the reference for the assessment of the functional ability of neutralizing antibodies (NAb) to block SARS-CoV-2 entry into cells. New competitive immunoassays measuring antibodies preventing interaction between the spike protein and its cellular receptor are proposed as surrogate VNT (sVNT). We tested three commercial sVNT (a qualitative immunochromatographic test and two quantitative immunoassays named YHLO and TECO) together with a conventional anti-spike IgG assay (bioMérieux) in comparison with an in-house plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT₅₀) using the original 19A strain and different variants of concern (VOC), on a panel of 306 sera from naturally-infected or vaccinated patients. The qualitative test was rapidly discarded because of poor sensitivity and specificity. Areas under the curve of YHLO and TECO assays were, respectively, 85.83 and 84.07 (p-value >0.05) using a positivity threshold of 20 for PRNT₅₀, and 95.63 and 90.35 (p-value =0.02) using a threshold of 80. However, the performances of YHLO and bioMérieux were very close for both thresholds, demonstrating the absence of added value of sVNT compared to a conventional assay for the evaluation of the presence of NAb in seropositive subjects. In addition, the PRNT₅₀ assay showed a reduction of NAb titers towards different VOC in comparison to the 19A strain that could not be appreciated by the commercial tests. Despite the good correlation between the anti-spike antibody titer and the titer of NAb by PRNT₅₀, our results highlight the difficulty to distinguish true NAb among the anti-RBD antibodies with commercial user-friendly immunoassays.

COVID-19 booster vaccination during pregnancy enhances maternal binding and neutralizing antibody responses and transplacental antibody transfer to the newborn (DMID 21-0004)

IMPORTANCE

COVID-19 vaccination is recommended during pregnancy for the protection of the mother. Little is known about the immune response to booster vaccinations during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE

To measure immune responses to COVID-19 primary and booster mRNA vaccination during pregnancy and transplacental antibody transfer to the newborn.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study of pregnant participants enrolled from July 2021 to January 2022, with follow up through and up to 12 months after delivery.

SETTING

Multicenter study conducted at 9 academic sites.

PARTICIPANTS

Pregnant participants who received COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and their newborns.

EXPOSURES

Primary or booster COVID-19 mRNA vaccination during pregnancy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

SARS-CoV-2 binding and neutralizing antibody (nAb) titers after primary or booster COVID-19 mRNA vaccination during pregnancy and antibody transfer to the newborn. Immune responses were compared between primary and booster vaccine recipients in maternal sera at delivery and in cord blood, after adjusting for days since last vaccination.

RESULTS

In this interim analysis, 167 participants received a primary 2-dose series and 73 received a booster dose of mRNA vaccine during pregnancy. Booster vaccination resulted in significantly higher binding and nAb titers, including to the Omicron BA.1 variant, in maternal serum at delivery and cord blood compared to a primary 2-dose series (range 0.55 to 0.88 log ₁₀ higher, p<0.0001 for all comparisons). Although levels were significantly lower than to the prototypical D614G variant, nAb to Omicron were present at delivery in 9% (GMT ID50 12.7) of Pfizer and 22% (GMT ID50 14.7) of Moderna recipients, and in 73% (GMT ID50 60.2) of boosted participants (p<0.0001). Transplacental antibody transfer was efficient regardless of vaccination regimen (median transfer ratio range: 1.55-1.77 for binding IgG and 1.00-1.78 for nAb).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

COVID-19 mRNA vaccination during pregnancy elicited robust immune responses in mothers and efficient transplacental antibody transfer to the newborn. A booster dose during pregnancy significantly increased maternal and cord blood antibody levels, including against Omicron.Findings support continued use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy, including booster doses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinical trials.gov; Registration Number: NCT05031468 ; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05031468.

KEY POINTS

Question: What is the immune response after COVID-19 booster vaccination during pregnancy and how does receipt of a booster dose impact transplacental antibody transfer to the newborn?Findings: Receipt of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines during pregnancy elicited robust binding and neutralizing antibody responses in the mother and in the newborn. Booster vaccination during pregnancy elicited significantly higher antibody levels in mothers at delivery and cord blood than 2-dose vaccination, including against the Omicron BA.1 variant.Meaning: COVID-19 vaccines, especially booster doses, should continue to be strongly recommended during pregnancy.

Evaluation of Natural and Vaccine-Induced Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunity: A Comparative Study between Different Groups of Volunteers

(1) Background: The production of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies should help minimize the severity of COVID-19 disease. Our focus was to investigate and compare different vaccination schedules, monitoring circulating S-RBD Ab (antibodies anti—Spike protein—Receptor Binding Domain) levels after administering two doses in naïve patients. Likewise, vaccine-stimulated immunity in naïve and previously infected patients was compared. (2) Methods: We included 392 patients. Sera were evaluated by Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S. Statistical analyses were conducted by MedCalc and JASP. (3) Results: In COVID-19 patients, the median value of Ab levels was 154 BAU/mL, stable up to 9 months after the infection. From the data observed in vaccinated patients, higher median values were recorded in COVID-19/Pfizer BioNTech (18913 BAU/mL) than in other groups (Pfizer BioNTech: 1841; ChadOx1 961; heterologous vaccination: 2687) BAU/mL. (4) Conclusions: In conclusion, a single booster dose given to previously infected patients raised an antibody response much higher than two doses given to naïve individuals and heterologous vaccination generated a robust persistent antibody response at high levels, steady up to three months after administration.

A COVID-19 Vaccine for Dogs Prevents Reverse Zoonosis

COVID-19 is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome virus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which can infect both humans and animals. SARS-CoV-2 originated from bats and can affect various species capable of crossing the species barrier due to active mutation. Although reports on reverse zoonosis (human-to-animal transmission) of SARS-CoV-2 remain limited, reverse zoonosis has been reported in many species such as cats, tigers, minks, etc. Therefore, transmission to more animals cannot be ruled out. Moreover, the wide distribution of SARS-CoV-2 in the human population could result in an increased risk of reverse zoonosis. To counteract reverse zoonosis, we developed the first COVID-19 subunit vaccines for dogs, which are representative companion animals, and the vaccine includes the SARS-CoV-2 recombinant protein of whole S1 protein and the receptor-binding domain (RBD). A subunit vaccine is a vaccine developed by purifying only the protein region that induces an immune response instead of the whole pathogen. This type of vaccine is safer than the whole virus vaccine because there is no risk of infection and proliferation through back-mutation of the virus. Vaccines were administered to beagles twice at an interval of 3 weeks subcutaneously and antibody formation rates were assessed in serum. We identified a titer, comparable to that of vaccinated people, shown to be sufficient to protect against SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the vaccination of companion animals, such as dogs, may prevent reverse zoonosis by protecting animals from SARS-CoV-2; thus, reverse zoonosis of COVID-19 is preventable.

A cell-based ELISA as surrogate of virus neutralization assay for RBD SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies

SARS-CoV-2, the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic, has provoked a global crisis and death of millions of people. Several serological assays to determine the quality of the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 and the efficacy of vaccines have been developed, among them the gold standard conventional virus neutralization assays. However, these tests are time consuming, require biosafety level 3 (BSL3), and are low throughput and expensive. This has motivated the development of alternative methods, including molecular inhibition assays. Herein, we present a safe cell-based ELISA-virus neutralization test (cbE-VNT) as a surrogate for the conventional viral neutralization assays that detects the inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 RBD binding to ACE2-bearing cells independently of species. Our test shows a very good correlation with the conventional and molecular neutralization assays and achieves 100% specificity and 95% sensitivity. cbE-VNT is cost-effective, fast and enables a large-scale serological evaluation that can be performed in a BSL2 laboratory, allowing its use in pre-clinical and clinical investigations.

Evaluation of serological anti-SARS-CoV-2 chemiluminescent immunoassays correlated to live virus neutralization test, for the detection of anti-RBD antibodies as a relevant alternative in COVID-19 large-scale neutralizing activity monitoring

The Spike-Receptor Binding Domain (S-RBD) is considered the most antigenic protein in SARS-CoV-2 and probably the key player in SARS-CoV-2 immune response. Quantitative immunoassays may help establish an anti-RBD Abs threshold as an indication of protective immunity. Since different immunoassays are commercial, the standard reference method for the neutralizing activity is the live Virus Neutralization Test (VNT).

In this study, anti-RBD IgG levels were detected with two chemiluminescent immunoassays in paucisymptomatic, symptomatic and vaccinated subjects, and their neutralizing activity was correlated to VNT titer, using SARS-CoV-2 original and British variant strains.

Both immunoassays confirmed higher anti-RBD Abs levels in vaccinated subjects. Furthermore, despite different anti-RBD Abs median concentrations between the immunoassays, a strong positive correlation with VNT was observed.

In conclusion, although the SARS-CoV-2 immune response heterogeneity, the use of immunoassays can help in large-scale monitoring of COVID-19 samples, becoming a valid alternative to VNT test for diagnostic routine laboratories.

Nasal and Salivary Mucosal Humoral Immune Response Elicited by mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccine Compared to SARS-CoV-2 Natural Infection

SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays are crucial in managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Approved mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are well known to induce a serum antibody responses against the spike protein and its RBD. Mucosal immunity plays a major role in the fight against COVID-19 directly at the site of virus entry; however, vaccine abilities to elicit mucosal immune responses have not been reported. We detected anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA-S1 and IgG-RBD in three study populations (healthy controls, vaccinated subjects, and subjects recovered from COVID-19 infection) on serum, saliva, and nasal secretions using two commercial immunoassays (ELISA for IgA-S1 and chemiluminescent assay for IgG-RBD). Our results show that the mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine Comirnaty (Pfizer/BioNTech, New York, NY, USA) determines the production of nasal and salivary IgA-S1 and IgG-RBD against SARS-CoV-2. This mucosal humoral immune response is stronger after the injection of the second vaccine dose compared to subjects recovered from COVID-19. Since there is a lack of validated assays on saliva and nasal secretions, this study shows that our pre-analytical and analytical procedures are consistent with the data. Our findings indicate that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine elicits antigen-specific nasal and salivary immune responses, and that mucosal antibody assays could be used as candidates for non-invasive monitoring of vaccine-induced protection against viral infection.