Two novel SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization assays are suitable for assessing successful immunization with mRNA-1273

Association between Gut Microbiota Composition and Long-Term Vaccine Immunogenicity following Three Doses of CoronaVac

BACKGROUND

Neutralizing antibody level wanes with time after COVID-19 vaccination. We aimed to study the relationship between baseline gut microbiota and immunogenicity after three doses of CoronaVac.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study recruiting three-dose CoronaVac recipients from two centers in Hong Kong. Blood samples were collected at baseline and one year post-first dose for virus microneutralization (vMN) assays to determine neutralization titers. The primary outcome was high immune response (defined as with vMN titer ≥ 40). Shotgun DNA metagenomic sequencing of baseline fecal samples identified potential bacterial species and metabolic pathways using Linear Discriminant Analysis Effect Size (LEfSe) analysis. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify high response predictors.

RESULTS

In total, 36 subjects were recruited (median age: 52.7 years [IQR: 47.9-56.4]; male: 14 [38.9%]), and 18 had low immune response at one year post-first dose vaccination. Eubacterium rectale (log10LDA score = 4.15, p = 0.001; relative abundance of 1.4% vs. 0, p = 0.002), Collinsella aerofaciens (log10LDA score = 3.31, p = 0.037; 0.39% vs. 0.18%, p = 0.038), and Streptococcus salivarius (log10LDA score = 2.79, p = 0.021; 0.05% vs. 0.02%, p = 0.022) were enriched in low responders. The aOR of high immune response with E. rectale, C. aerofaciens, and S. salivarius was 0.03 (95% CI: 9.56 × 10-4-0.32), 0.03 (95% CI: 4.47 × 10-4-0.59), and 10.19 (95% CI: 0.81-323.88), respectively. S. salivarius had a positive correlation with pathways enriched in high responders like incomplete reductive TCA cycle (log10LDA score = 2.23). C. aerofaciens similarly correlated with amino acid biosynthesis-related pathways. These pathways all showed anti-inflammation functions.

CONCLUSION

E. rectale,C. aerofaciens, and S. salivarius correlated with poorer long-term immunogenicity following three doses of CoronaVac.

Performance Analysis of Serodiagnostic Tests to Characterize the Incline and Decline of the Individual Humoral Immune Response in COVID-19 Patients: Impact on Diagnostic Management

Serodiagnostic tests for antibody detection to estimate the immunoprotective status regarding SARS-CoV-2 support diagnostic management. This study aimed to investigate the performance of serological assays for COVID-19 and elaborate on test-specific characteristics. Sequential samples (n = 636) of four panels (acute COVID-19, convalescent COVID-19 (partly vaccinated post-infection), pre-pandemic, and cross-reactive) were tested for IgG by indirect immunofluorescence test (IIFT) and EUROIMMUN EUROLINE Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Profile (IgG). Neutralizing antibodies were determined by a virus neutralization test (VNT) and two surrogate neutralization tests (sVNT, GenScript cPass, and EUROIMMUN SARS-CoV-2 NeutraLISA). Analysis of the acute and convalescent panels revealed high positive (78.3% and 91.6%) and negative (91.6%) agreement between IIFT and Profile IgG. The sVNTs revealed differences in their positive (cPass: 89.4% and 97.0%, NeutraLISA: 71.5% and 72.1%) and negative agreement with VNT (cPass: 92.3% and 50.0%, NeutraLISA: 95.1% and 92.5%) at a diagnostic specificity of 100% for all tests. The cPass showed higher inhibition rates than NeutraLISA at VNT titers below 1:640. Cross-reactivities were only found by cPass (57.1%). Serodiagnostic tests, which showed substantial agreement and fast runtime, could provide alternatives for cell-based assays. The findings of this study suggest that careful interpretation of serodiagnostic results obtained at different times after SARS-CoV-2 antigen exposure is crucial to support decision-making in diagnostic management.

Development of automated microfluidic immunoassays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and antigen

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic. Rapid and sensitive detection of the virus soon after infection is important for the treatment and prevention of transmission of COVID-19, and detection of antibodies is important for epidemiology, assessment of vaccine immunogenicity, and identification of the natural reservoir and intermediate host(s). Patient nasal or oropharyngeal swabs or saliva used in conjunction with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA, whereas lateral flow immunoassays (LFI) detect SARS-CoV-2 proteins. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in blood. Although effective, these assays have poor sensitivity (e.g., LFI) or are labor intensive and time consuming (PCR and ELISA). Here we describe the development of rapid, automated ELISA-based immunoassays to detect SARS-CoV-2 antigens and antibodies against the virus. The Simple Plex™ platform uses rapid microfluidic reaction kinetics for sensitive analyte detection with small sample volumes. We developed three sensitive <90-min Simple Plex immunoassays that measure either the SARS-CoV-2 antigens or the immune response to SARS-CoV-2, including neutralizing antibodies, in serum from COVID-19 patients.

Enhancing Immunogenicity of a Thermostable, Efficacious SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Formulation through Oligomerization and Adjuvant Choice

Currently deployed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines all require storage at refrigerated or sub-zero temperatures. We demonstrate that after month-long incubation at 37 °C, solubilization, and formulation with squalene-in-water emulsion adjuvant, a stabilized receptor binding domain retains immunogenicity and protective efficacy. We also examine the effects of trimerization of the stabilized RBD, as well as of additional adjuvants, on both B and T-cell responses. The additional emulsion or liposome-based adjuvants contained a synthetic TLR-4 ligand and/or the saponin QS-21. Trimerization enhanced immunogenicity, with significant antibody titers detectable after a single immunization. Saponin-containing adjuvants elicited enhanced immunogenicity relative to both emulsion and aluminum hydroxide adjuvanted formulations lacking these immunostimulants. Trimeric RBD formulated with liposomal based adjuvant containing both TLR-4 ligand and saponin elicited a strongly Th1 biased response, with ~10-fold higher neutralization titers than the corresponding aluminum hydroxide adjuvanted formulation. The SARS-CoV-2 virus is now endemic in humans, and it is likely that periodic updating of vaccine formulations in response to viral evolution will continue to be required to protect vulnerable individuals. In this context, it is desirable to have efficacious, thermostable vaccine formulations to facilitate widespread vaccine coverage, including in low- and middle-income countries, where global access rights to clinically de-risked adjuvants will be important moving forward.

Validation of a SARS-CoV-2 Surrogate Neutralization Test Detecting Neutralizing Antibodies against the Major Variants of Concern

SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination elicit a broad range of neutralizing antibody responses against the different variants of concern (VOC). We established a new variant-adapted surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) and assessed the neutralization activity against the ancestral B.1 (WT) and VOC Delta, Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5. Analytical performances were compared against the respective VOC to the reference virus neutralization test (VNT) and two CE-IVD labeled kits using three different cohorts collected during the COVID-19 waves. Correlation analyses showed moderate to strong correlation for Omicron sub-variants (Spearman's r = 0.7081 for BA.1, r = 0.7205 for BA.2, and r = 0.6042 for BA.5), and for WT (r = 0.8458) and Delta-sVNT (r = 0.8158), respectively. Comparison of the WT-sVNT performance with two CE-IVD kits, the "Icosagen SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody ELISA kit" and the "Genscript cPass, kit" revealed an overall good correlation ranging from 0.8673 to -0.8773 and a midway profile between both commercial kits with 87.76% sensitivity and 90.48% clinical specificity. The BA.2-sVNT performance was similar to the BA.2 Genscript test. Finally, a correlation analysis revealed a strong association (r = 0.8583) between BA.5-sVNT and VNT sVNT using a double-vaccinated cohort (n = 100) and an Omicron-breakthrough infection cohort (n = 91). In conclusion, the sVNT allows for the efficient prediction of immune protection against the various VOCs.

Monitoring of Sotrovimab-Levels as Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis in Kidney Transplant Recipients Not Responding to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines

Background Sotrovimab, a monoclonal antibody against SARS-CoV-2, is used as a pre-exposition prophylaxis (PrEP) against COVID-19, but monitoring strategies using routine test systems have not been defined. Methods Twenty kidney transplant recipients without antibodies after vaccination received 500 mg Sotrovimab. Antibody levels were quantified over eight weeks using live-virus neutralization (BA1 and BA2), antibody binding assays (TrimericS, Elecsys, QuantiVAC) and surrogate virus neutralization tests (sVNTs; TECOmedical, cPass and NeutraLISA). Results Sotrovimab neutralized both Omicron subvariants (BA1 NT titer 90 (+-50) > BA2 NT titer 33 (+-15) one hour post infusion). Sotrovimab was measurable on all used immunoassays, although a prior 1:100 dilution was necessary for Elecsys due to a presumed prozone effect. The best correlation with live-virus neutralization titers was found for QuantiVAC and TrimericS, with a respective R2 of 0.65/0.59 and 0.76/0.57 against BA1/BA2. Elecsys showed an R2 of 0.56/0.54 for BA1/BA2, respectively. sVNT values increased after infusion but had only a poor correlation with live-virus neutralization titers (TECOmedical and cPass) or did not reach positivity thresholds (NeutraLISA). Conclusion Antibody measurements by the used immunoassays showed differences in antibody levels and only a limited correlation with neutralization capacity. We do not recommend sVNTs for monitoring SARS-CoV-2 neutralization by Sotrovimab.

Diagnostics and analysis of SARS-CoV-2: current status, recent advances, challenges and perspectives

The disastrous spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has induced severe public healthcare issues and weakened the global economy significantly. Although SARS-CoV-2 infection is not as fatal as the initial outbreak, many infected victims suffer from long COVID. Therefore, rapid and large-scale testing is critical in managing patients and alleviating its transmission. Herein, we review the recent advances in techniques to detect SARS-CoV-2. The sensing principles are detailed together with their application domains and analytical performances. In addition, the advantages and limits of each method are discussed and analyzed. Besides molecular diagnostics and antigen and antibody tests, we also review neutralizing antibodies and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. Further, the characteristics of the mutational locations in the different variants with epidemiological features are summarized. Finally, the challenges and possible strategies are prospected to develop new assays to meet different diagnostic needs. Thus, this comprehensive and systematic review of SARS-CoV-2 detection technologies may provide insightful guidance and direction for developing tools for the diagnosis and analysis of SARS-CoV-2 to support public healthcare and effective long-term pandemic management and control.

Comparison of a rapid fluorescence immunochromatographic test with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for measurement of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody neutralizing activity

Background

SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein Receptor Binding Domain neutralizing antibodies (NAbs-RBD) inhibit the viral binding to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors. We compared an ELISA and a fluorescence immunochromatography(FIC) method in NAbs-RBD detection after COVID-19 immunization.

Method

Serum samples from healthcare workers(HCWs) vaccinated with BNT162b2 were collected one and four months after the second dose. NAbs-RBD(%) detection was performed using ELISA cPass™(FDA approved) and FIC n-AbCOVID-19® assays.

Results

Samples from 200 HCWs [median age(IQR): 45(35-53] were tested with both assays. There was a good qualitative agreement between the two methods [AUC: 0.92(95%C.I.: 0.89-0.94, P-value:0.007)]. NAbs-RBD(%), one and four months after immunization, were significantly lower with FIC compared to ELISA for all age groups (P-value<0.0001). The quantitative comparison between FIC and ELISA detected slight agreement one month after the second dose [(Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficient(CCC): 0.21(95%CI: 0.15-0.27)] which improved four months after the second dose [CCC: 0.6(95%CI: 0.54-0.66)].

Conclusion

FIC had good qualitative agreement with ELISA in the detection of positive NAbs-RBD(%) and could be an alternative for rapid NAbs-RBD(%) testing.

Effect of Moderate to Severe Hepatic Steatosis on Vaccine Immunogenicity against Wild-Type and Mutant Virus and COVID-19 Infection among BNT162b2 Recipients

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the effect of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) on BNT162b2 immunogenicity against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and variants and infection outcome, as data are lacking.

METHODS

Recipients of two doses of BNT162b2 were prospectively recruited. Outcomes of interest were seroconversion of neutralizing antibody by live virus microneutralization (vMN) to SARS-CoV-2 strains (wild-type, delta and omicron variants) at day 21, 56 and 180 after first dose. Exposure of interest was moderate-to-severe NAFLD (controlled attenuation parameter ≥ 268 dB/M on transient elastography). We calculated adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of infection with NAFLD by adjusting for age, sex, overweight/obesity, diabetes and antibiotic use.

RESULTS

Of 259 BNT162b2 recipients (90 (34.7%) male; median age: 50.8 years (IQR: 43.6-57.8)), 68 (26.3%) had NAFLD. For wild type, there was no difference in seroconversion rate between NAFLD and control groups at day 21 (72.1% vs. 77.0%; p = 0.42), day 56 (100% vs. 100%) and day 180 (100% and 97.2%; p = 0.22), respectively. For the delta variant, there was no difference also at day 21 (25.0% vs. 29.5%; p = 0.70), day 56 (100% vs. 98.4%; p = 0.57) and day 180 (89.5% vs. 93.3%; p = 0.58), respectively. For the omicron variant, none achieved seroconversion at day 21 and 180. At day 56, there was no difference in seroconversion rate (15.0% vs. 18.0%; p = 0.76). NAFLD was not an independent risk factor of infection (aOR: 1.50; 95% CI: 0.68-3.24).

CONCLUSIONS

NAFLD patients receiving two doses of BNT162b2 had good immunogenicity to wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and the delta variant but not the omicron variant, and they were not at higher risk of infection compared with controls.

Comprehensive Comparison of Seven SARS-CoV-2-Specific Surrogate Virus Neutralization and Anti-Spike IgG Antibody Assays Using a Live-Virus Neutralization Assay as a Reference

Neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) are considered a valuable marker for measuring humoral immunity against SARS-CoV-2. However, live-virus neutralization tests (NTs) require high-biosafety-level laboratories and are time-consuming. Therefore, surrogate virus neutralization tests (sVNTs) have been widely applied, but unlike most anti-spike (S) antibody assays, NTs and sVNTs are not harmonized, requiring further evaluation and comparative analyses. This study compared seven commercial sVNTs and anti-S-antibody assays with a live-virus NT as a reference, using a panel of 720 single and longitudinal serum samples from 666 convalescent patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection. The sensitivity of these assays for detecting antibodies ranged from 48 to 94% after PCR-confirmed infection and from 56% to 100% relative to positivity in the in-house live-virus NT. Furthermore, we performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses to determine which immunoassays were most suitable for assessing nAb titers exceeding a specific cutoff (NT titer, ≥80) and found that the NeutraLISA and the cPass assays reached the highest area under the curve (AUC), exceeding 0.91. In addition, when the assays were compared for their correlation with nAb kinetics over time in a set of longitudinal samples, the extent of the measured decrease of nAbs after infection varied widely among the evaluated immunoassays. Finally, in vaccinated convalescent patients, high titers of nAbs exceeded the upper limit of the evaluated assays' quantification ranges. Based on data from this study, we conclude that commercial immunoassays are acceptable substitutes for live-virus NTs, particularly when additional adapted cutoffs are employed to detect nAbs beyond a specific threshold titer. IMPORTANCE While the measurement of neutralizing antibodies is considered a valuable tool in assessing protection against SARS-CoV-2, neutralization tests employ live-virus isolates and cell culture, requiring advanced laboratory biosafety levels. Including a large sample panel (over 700 samples), this study provides adapted cutoff values calculated for seven commercial immunoassays (including four surrogate neutralization assays and a protein-based microarray) that robustly correlate with specific titers of neutralizing antibodies.

Comparison of five Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays across three doses of BNT162b2 reveals insufficient standardization of SARS-CoV-2 serology

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the comparability of WHO standard referenced commercial SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests over three doses of BNT162b2 vaccine and up to 14 months.

METHODS

114 subjects (without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or immunosuppressive medication) vaccinated with three doses of BNT162b2 were included in this study. Antibody levels were quantified 3 weeks after the first dose, 5-6 weeks and 7 months after the second dose, and 4-5 weeks and 4 months after the third dose using the Roche Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 S, the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant, the DiaSorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG, the GenScript cPASS sVNT and the TECO sVNT assays.

RESULTS

For each time point analyzed, systematic differences are evident between the results in BAU/mL of the three antibody binding assays. The assay ratios change in a time-dependent manner even beyond administering the third dose (Roche measuring 9 and 3 times higher than Abbott and DiaSorin, respectively). However, changes decrease in magnitude with increasing time intervals from the first dose. IgG-based assays show better agreement across them than with Roche (overall correlations: Abbott x DiaSorin: ρ = 0.94 vs. Abbott x Roche: ρ=0.89, p < 0.0001; DiaSorin x Roche: ρ = 0.87, p < 0.0001), but results are not interchangeable. The sVNTs suggest an underestimation of antibody levels by Roche and slight overestimation by both IgG assays after the first vaccine dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardization of SARS-CoV-2 antibody binding assays still needs to be improved to allow reliable use of variable assay systems for longitudinal analyses.

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.

Comparison of three different COVID-19 vaccine platforms (CoronaVac, BTN162b2, and Ad5-nCoV) in individuals with and without prior COVID-19: Reactogenicity and neutralizing antibodies

Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) can be indicators of collective immunity, vaccine efficacy, and the longevity of the humoral response. This study aimed to compare reactogenicity and NAbs generated by three different COVID-19 vaccine platforms in individuals with and without prior COVID-19. 336 individuals vaccinated (112 with CoronaVac [inactivated virus], 112 with BNT162b2 [messenger RNA], and 112 with Ad5-nCoV [non-replicating viral vector]) were included. NAbs were quantified with the cPass SARS-CoV-2 kit. Individuals immunized with the Ad5-nCoV showed higher reactogenicity than those immunized with the other vaccines (p < 0.001). The BTN162b2 vaccine-induced NAbs with higher inhibition capacity than the other platforms in the first dose. In individuals without prior COVID-19, the Ad5-nCoV vaccine generated lower NAbs against SARS-CoV-2 than those induced by two doses of the BTN162b2 (Ad5-nCoV 72.10 [55.6-93.4] vs. BTN162b2 98.41 [98.16-98.56], p < 0.0001). One individual did not generate NAbs (0.89%) after a complete immunization with CoronaVac; in BTN162b2, all generated these antibodies, and in the Ad5-nCoV group, four individuals (3.57%) did not generate NAbs. Comorbidities, gender, age, and reactogenicity did not significantly influence the generation of NAbs (p > 0.05); however, a history of COVID-19 before vaccination was associated with antibodies with greater neutralizing capacity after the first dose (p < 0.01). In conclusion, the mRNA vaccine (BTN162b2) had a remarkable better ability to produce NAbs and lower reactogenicity than the other platforms, whereas the Ad5-nCov vaccine induced the lowest NAbs response in individuals without a history of COVID-19; therefore, we suggest that a booster could benefit these individuals.

Correlation between anti-S IgG and neutralizing antibody titers against three live SARS-CoV-2 variants in BNT162b2 vaccine recipients

We analyzed serially collected serum samples from healthy adults who underwent BNT162b2 vaccination to elucidate the association between spike (S)-IgG antibody titers determined by ELISA using the WHO international standard (NIBSC code 20/136) and neutralizing antibody titers against three live SARS-CoV-2 variants. This study included 53 health care workers who received two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. S-IgG and nucleocapsid (N)-IgG antibody titers were measured by ELISA. Neutralizing (NT) antibody responses against three variants (Wuhan D614 G: KUH003, Alpha, and Delta) were evaluated before and after the first and second vaccination. N-IgG were not detected in any serum samples. S-IgG antibody titers remarkably increased after two BNT162b2 vaccine doses in all participants. S-IgG antibody titers were strongly correlated with NT titers against three variants of live viruses: KUH003 (r = 0.86), Alpha (r = 0.72), and Delta (r = 0.84). Serum samples from participants after one dose of BNT162b2 neutralized Alpha efficiently (median titer, 113.0), but median NT titers against KUH003 and Delta variants were lower, 57.0 and 28.0, respectively (p < .01). Two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine elicited a strong immune response in this study. The second dose was required for induction of a strong booster effect. Serum collected from BNT162b2 vaccine recipients contained significantly lower neutralizing activity against Delta than that of against KUH003 (p < .0001) and Alpha (p < .0001). If a new variant emerges, live virus-based NT titers should be examined in serum obtained from vaccine recipients to evaluate vaccine efficacy for protection against infection.

Evaluation of commercially available fully automated and ELISA-based assays for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies

Rapid and accurate measurement of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2)-specific neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) is paramount for monitoring immunity in infected and vaccinated subjects. The current gold standard relies on pseudovirus neutralization tests which require sophisticated skills and facilities. Alternatively, recent competitive immunoassays measuring anti-SARS-CoV-2 nAbs are proposed as a quick and commercially available surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT). Here, we report the performance evaluation of three sVNTs, including two ELISA-based assays and an automated bead-based immunoassay for detecting nAbs against SARS-CoV-2. The performance of three sVNTs, including GenScript cPass, Dynamiker, and Mindray NTAb was assessed in samples collected from SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (n = 160), COVID-19 vaccinated individuals (n = 163), and pre-pandemic controls (n = 70). Samples were collected from infected patients and vaccinated individuals 2-24 weeks after symptoms onset or second dose administration. Correlation analysis with pseudovirus neutralization test (pVNT) and immunoassays detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 binding antibodies was performed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was generated to assess the optimal threshold for detecting nAbs by each assay. All three sVNTs showed an excellent performance in terms of specificity (100%) and sensitivity (100%, 97.0%, and 97.1% for GenScript, Dynamiker, and Mindray, respectively) in samples collected from vaccinated subjects. GenScript demonstrated the strongest correlation with pVNT (r = 0.743, R² = 0.552), followed by Mindray (r = 0.718, R² = 0.515) and Dynamiker (r = 0.608, R² = 0.369). Correlation with anti-SARS-CoV-2 binding antibodies was variable, but the strongest correlations were observed between anti-RBD IgG antibodies and Mindray (r = 0.952, R² = 0.907). ROC curve analyses demonstrated excellent performance for all three sVNT assays in both groups, with an AUC ranging between 0.99 and 1.0 (p < 0.0001). Also, it was shown that the manufacturer's recommended cutoff values could be modified based on the tested cohort without significantly affecting the sVNT performance. The sVNT provides a rapid, low-cost, and scalable alternative to conventional neutralization assays for measuring and expanding nAbs testing across various research and clinical settings. Also, it could aid in evaluating actual protective immunity at the population level and assessing vaccine effectiveness to lay a foundation for boosters' requirements.

Comparison of commercial SARS-CoV-2 surrogate neutralization assays with a full virus endpoint dilution neutralization test in two different cohorts

Determination of neutralizing antibody titers is still considered the gold standard for infection protection. A full virus neutralization test (VNT) with replication-competent, infectious SARS-CoV-2, is labor-intensive and requires Biosafety Level 3 certified laboratories. Therefore, several commercial SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization tests (sVNTs) have been developed that aim to detect neutralizing antibodies targeting the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the viral spike glycoprotein (S). Neutralizing antibodies to the RBD block its interaction with the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor protein. Here, we compared a full virus neutralization test (VNT) with two SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization tests (sVNT) and validated them in two cohorts of i) convalescent SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals and ii) COVID vaccinated individuals. The sVNTs showed highly different results both, compared to the VNT-titers and also between the two cohorts. This indicates that currently, sVNT provide a qualitative instead of a quantitative measurement of neutralizing antibodies. The findings in this work show that the cutoff levels for sVNTs might need to be readjusted for convalescent and vaccinated individuals.

Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Variants in Pregnant Women and Their Neonates under Antenatal Vaccination with Moderna (mRNA-1273) Vaccine

The aim of the study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor binding domain IgG antibody (SRBD IgG) binding ratio (SBR) from Alpha, Beta, and Gamma variants of SARS-CoV-2 in pregnant women and neonates. The impact of antenatal influenza (flu) and pertussis (Tdap) vaccines was also studied. We enrolled pregnant women vaccinated with the Moderna (mRNA-1273) vaccine during pregnancy and collected maternal plasma (MP) and neonatal cord blood (CB) during delivery to determine the SBR via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA). A total of 78 samples were collected from 39 pregnant women. The SBR was higher for Alpha variants compared to Beta/Gamma variants (MP: 63.95% vs. 47.91% vs. 43.48%, p = 0.0001; CB: 72.14% vs. 56.78% vs. 53.66%, p = 0.006). Pregnant women receiving two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine demonstrated a better SBR against SARS-CoV-2 Alpha, Beta, and Gamma variants than women receiving just a single dose. Women who received the Tdap/flu vaccines demonstrated a better SBR when two COVID-19 vaccine doses were < 6 weeks apart. A better SBR was detected among women who had more recently received their second COVID-19 vaccine dose. Two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine provided recipients with a better SBR for Alpha/Beta/Gamma variants. Although Tdap/flu vaccines may affect the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine, different vaccination timings can improve the SBR.

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.

Comparison of the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Surrogate Neutralization Assays by TECOmedical and DiaPROPH-Med with Samples from Vaccinated and Infected Individuals

Anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific serological responses are a topic of ongoing evaluation studies. In the study presented here, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 surrogate neutralization assays by TECOmedical and DiaPROPH -Med were assessed in a head-to-head comparison with serum samples of individuals after vaccination as well as after previous infection with SARS-CoV-2. In case of discordant results, a cell culture-based neutralization assay was applied as a reference standard. The TECOmedical assay showed sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 61.3%, respectively, the DiaPROPH-Med assay 95.0% and 48.4%, respectively. As a side finding of the study, differences in the likelihood of expressing neutralizing antibodies could be shown for different exposition types. So, 60 of 81 (74.07%) of the samples with only one vaccination showed an expression of neutralizing antibodies in contrast to 85.71% (60 of 70 samples) of the samples with two vaccinations and 100% (40 of 40) of the samples from previously infected individuals. In conclusion, the both assays showed results similar to previous assessments. While the measured diagnostic accuracy of both assays requires further technical improvement of this diagnostic approach, as the calculated specificity values of 61.3% and 48.4%, respectively, appear acceptable for diagnostic use only in populations with a high percentage of positive subjects, but not at expectedly low positivity rates.

Development and utilization of a surrogate SARS-CoV-2 viral neutralization assay to assess mRNA vaccine responses

BACKGROUND

Tests for SARS-CoV-2 immunity are needed to help assess responses to vaccination, which can be heterogeneous and may wane over time. The plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) is considered the gold standard for measuring serum neutralizing antibodies but requires high level biosafety, live viral cultures and days to complete. We hypothesized that competitive enzyme linked immunoassays (ELISAs) based on SARS-CoV-2 spike protein's receptor binding domain (RBD) attachment to its host receptor, the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptor (ACE2r), would correlate with PRNT, given the central role of RBD-ACE2r interactions in infection and published studies to date, and enable evaluation of vaccine responses.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Configuration and development of a competitive ELISA with plate-bound RBD and soluble biotinylated ACE2r was accomplished using pairs of pre/post vaccine serum. When the competitive ELISA was used to evaluate N = 32 samples from COVID-19 patients previously tested by PRNT, excellent correlation in IC50 results were observed (rs = .83, p < 0.0001). When the competitive ELISA was used to evaluate N = 42 vaccinated individuals and an additional N = 13 unvaccinated recovered COVID-19 patients, significant differences in RBD-ACE2r inhibitory activity were associated with prior history of COVID-19 and type of vaccine received. In longitudinal analyses pre and up to 200 days post vaccine, surrogate neutralizing activity increased markedly after primary and booster vaccine doses, but fell substantially, up to <12% maximal levels within 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A competitive ELISA based on inhibition of RBD-ACE2r attachment correlates well with PRNT, quantifies significantly higher activity among vaccine recipients with prior COVID (vs. those without), and highlights marked declines in surrogate neutralizing activity over a 6 month period post vaccination. The findings raise concern about the duration of vaccine responses and potential need for booster shots.

High Heterogeneity of Virus-Neutralizing and RBD-Binding Activities of COVID-19 Convalescent Sera

The parameters of the humoral response are an important immunological characteristic of donors who recovered from COVID-19 and vaccinated individuals. Analysis of the level of virus-binding antibodies has become widespread. The most accurate predictor of effective immune protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection is the activity of virus-neutralizing antibodies. We determined virus-neutralizing activities in plasma samples of individuals (n = 111) who had COVID-19 from April to September 2020. Three independent methods were used: conventional with live virus, with virus-like particles pseudotyped with spike protein, and a surrogate virus-neutralization test (cVNT, pVNT and sVNT, respectively). For comparison, the levels of IgG, IgA and IgM antibodies against the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were also evaluated. The levels of virus-binding as well as virus-neutralizing antibodies in cVNT and pVNT showed high heterogeneity. A comparison of cVNT and pVNT results showed a high correlation, sVNT results also correlated well with both cVNT and pVNT. To the greatest extent, the level of IgG antibodies correlated with the results of cVNT, pVNT and sVNT. These results can be used in the selection of plasmas that are best suited for transfusion and treatment of acute COVID-19. In addition, data on the virus-neutralizing activity of plasma are important for the selection of potential donors, for the isolation of SARS-CoV-2-specific B-lymphocytes, in order to further generate monoclonal virus-neutralizing antibodies.

Antibody Response of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac Platforms in Recovered Individuals Previously Infected by COVID-19 against SARS-CoV-2 Wild Type and Delta Variant

Vaccinating recovered patients previously infected by COVID-19 with mRNA vaccines to boost their immune response against wild-type viruses (WT), we aimed to investigate whether vaccine platform and time of vaccination affect immunogenicity against the SARS-CoV-2 WT and Delta variant (DV). Convalescent patients infected by COVID-19 were recruited and received one booster dose of the BNT162b2 (PC-B) or CoronaVac (PC-C) vaccines, while SARS-CoV-2 naïve subjects received two doses of the BNT162b2 (CN-B) or CoronaVac (CN-C) vaccines. The neutralizing antibody in sera against the WT and DV was determined with live virus neutralization assay (vMN). The vMN geometric mean titre (GMT) against WT in recovered individuals previously infected by COVID-19 reduced significantly from 60.0 (95% confidence interval (CI), 46.5-77.4) to 33.9 (95% CI, 26.3-43.7) at 6 months post recovery. In the PC-B group, the BNT162b2 vaccine enhanced antibody response against WT and DV, with 22.3-fold and 20.4-fold increases, respectively. The PC-C group also showed 1.8-fold and 2.2-fold increases for WT and DV, respectively, after receiving the CoronaVac vaccine. There was a 10.6-fold increase in GMT in the CN-B group and a 1.3-fold increase in the CN-C group against DV after full vaccination. In both the PC-B and PC-C groups, there was no difference between GMT against WT and DV after vaccination. Subjects in the CN-B and CN-C groups showed inferior GMT against DV compared with GMT against WT after vaccination. In this study, one booster shot effectively enhanced the pre-existing neutralizing activity against WT and DV in recovered subjects.