Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among potential convalescent plasma donors and analysis of their deferral pattern: Experience from tertiary care hospital in western India

Influenza vaccination as a prognostic factor of humoral IgA responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection

There is evidence that influenza vaccination may provide additional benefits by inducing training of innate immunity and increasing humoral responses to heterologous challenges. Immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies dominate the early phase of the adaptive response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, but whether their production may be associated with previous influenza vaccination has not been a subject of any study. This study compared serum SARS-CoV-2-specific IgA responses, measured with Microblot-Array assay, in individuals who experienced COVID-19 (N = 1318) and differed in the status of the seasonal influenza vaccine, age, sex, and disease severity. Influenza-vaccinated individuals had a higher seroprevalence of IgA antibodies against nucleocapsid (anti-NP; by 10.1%), receptor-binding domain of spike protein (anti-RBD; by 11.8%) and the S2 subunit of spike protein (anti-S2; by 6.8%). Multivariate analysis, including age, sex, and COVID-19 severity, confirmed that receiving the influenza vaccine was associated with higher odds of being seropositive for anti-NP (OR, 95% CI = 1.57, 1.2-2.0), anti-RBD (OR, 95% CI = 1.6, 1.3-2.0), and anti-S2 (OR, 95% CI = 1.9, 1.4-2.7), as well as being seropositive for at least one anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA antibody (OR, 95% CI = 1.7, 1.3-2.1) and all three of them (OR, 95% CI = 2.6, 1.7-4.0). Age ≥ 50 years was an additional factor predicting better IgA responses. However, the concentration of particular antibodies in seropositive subjects did not differ in relation to the influenza vaccination status. The study evidenced that influenza vaccination was associated with improved serum IgA levels produced in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Further studies are necessary to assess whether trained immunity is involved in the observed phenomenon.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma (CCP) During the Pandemic Era: A Literature Review

Worldwide pandemic with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) was caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). As November 2, 2022, World Health Organization (WHO) received 628,035,553 reported incidents on COVID-19, with 6,572,800 mortalities and, with a total 12,850,970,971 vaccine doses have been delivered as of October 31, 2022. The infection can cause mild or self-limiting symptoms of pulmonary and severe infections or death may be caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Simultaneously, antivirals, corticosteroids, immunological treatments, antibiotics, and anticoagulants have been proposed as potential medicines to cure COVID-19 affected patients. Among these initial treatments, COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP), which was retrieved from COVID-19 recovered patients to be used as passive immune therapy, in which antibodies from cured patients were given to infected patients to prevent illness. Such treatment has yielded the best results in earlier with preventative or early stages of illness. Convalescent plasma (CP) is the first treatment available when infectious disease initially appears, although few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted to evaluate its effectiveness. The historical record suggests with potential benefit for other respiratory infections, as coronaviruses like Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-CoV-I (SARS-CoV-I) and Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), though the analysis of such research is constrained by some non-randomized experiments (NREs). Rigorous studies on CP are made more demanding by the following with the immediacy of the epidemics, CP use may restrict the ability to utilize it for clinical testing, non-homogenous nature of product, highly decentralized manufacturing process; constraints with capacity to measure biologic function, ultimate availability of substitute therapies, as antivirals, purified immune globulins, or monoclonal antibodies. Though, it is still not clear how effectively CCP works among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The current review tries to focus on its efficiency and usage in clinical scenarios and identifying existing benefits of implementation during pandemic or how it may assist with future pandemic preventions.

Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic and How Blood Operators Can Prepare for the Next Pandemic

Humans interact with virus-infected animal hosts, travel globally, and maintain social networks that allow for novel viruses to emerge and develop pandemic potential. There are key lessons-learned from the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that blood operators can apply to the next pandemic. Warning signals to the COVID-19 pandemic included outbreaks of Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-1 (SARS-CoV-1) and Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in the prior two decades. It will be critical to quickly determine whether there is a risk of blood-borne transmission of a new pandemic virus. Prior to the next pandemic blood operators should be prepared for changes in activities, policies, and procedures at all levels of the organization. Blood operators can utilize “Plan-Do-Study-Act” cycles spanning from: vigilance for emerging viruses, surveillance activities and studies, operational continuity, donor engagement and trust, and laboratory testing if required. Occupational health and donor safety issues will be key areas of focus even if the next pandemic virus is not transfusion transmitted. Blood operators may also be requested to engage in new activities such as the development of therapeutics or supporting public health surveillance activities. Activities such as scenario development, tabletop exercises, and drills will allow blood operators to prepare for the unknowns of the next pandemic.

Immunogenic epitope panel for accurate detection of non-cross-reactive T cell response to SARS-CoV-2

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic calls for more effective diagnostic tools. T cell response assessment serves as an independent indicator of prior COVID-19 exposure while also contributing to a more comprehensive characterization of SARS-CoV-2 immunity. In this study, we systematically assessed the immunogenicity of 118 epitopes with immune cells collected from multiple cohorts of vaccinated, convalescent, healthy unexposed, and SARS-CoV-2–exposed donors. We identified 75 immunogenic epitopes, 24 of which were immunodominant. We further confirmed HLA restriction for 49 epitopes and described association with more than 1 HLA allele for 14 of these. Exclusion of 2 cross-reactive epitopes that generated a response in prepandemic samples left us with a 73-epitope set that offered excellent diagnostic specificity without losing sensitivity compared with full-length antigens, and this evoked a robust cross-reactive response. We subsequently incorporated this set of epitopes into an in vitro diagnostic Corona-T-test, which achieved a diagnostic accuracy of 95% in a clinical trial. In a cohort of asymptomatic seronegative individuals with a history of prolonged SARS-CoV-2 exposure, we observed a complete absence of T cell response to our epitope panel. In combination with strong reactivity to full-length antigens, this suggests that a cross-reactive response might protect these individuals.

Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies among COVID19 biobank donors in Argentina

Biobanks are instrumental for accelerating research. Early in SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the Argentinean Biobank of Infectious Diseases (BBEI) initiated the COVID19 collection and started its characterization. Blood samples from subjects with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection either admitted to health institutions or outpatients, were enrolled. Highly exposed seronegative individuals, were also enrolled. Longitudinal samples were obtained in a subset of donors, including persons who donated plasma for therapeutic purposes (plasma donors). SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM and IgG levels, IgG titers and IgG viral neutralization capacity were determined. Out of 825 donors, 57.1% were females and median age was 41 years (IQR 32-53 years). Donors were segregated as acute or convalescent donors, and mild versus moderate/severe disease donors. Seventy-eight percent showed seroconversion to SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies. Specific IgM and IgG showed comparable positivity rates in acute donors. IgM detectability rate declined in convalescent donors while IgG detectability remained elevated in early (74,8%) and late (83%) convalescent donors. Among donors with follow-up samples, IgG levels seemed to decline more rapidly in plasma donors. IgG levels were higher with age, disease severity, number of symptoms, and more durable in moderate/severe disease donors. Levels and titers of anti-spike/RBD IgG strongly correlated with neutralization activity against WT virus. The BBEI-COVID19 collection serves a dual role in this SARS-CoV-2 global crisis. First, it feeds researchers and developers transferring samples and data to fuel research projects. Second, it generates highly needed local data to understand and frame the regional dynamics of the infection.