Characterization of neutralizing versus binding antibodies and memory B cells in COVID-19 recovered individuals from India

A comprehensive review on immunogen and immune-response proteins of SARS-CoV-2 and their applications in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of COVID-19

Exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) prompts humoral immune responses in the human body. As the auxiliary diagnosis of a current infection, the existence of viral proteins can be checked from specific antibodies (Abs) induced by immunogenic viral proteins. For people with a weakened immune system, Ab treatment can help neutralize viral antigens to resist and treat the disease. On the other hand, highly immunogenic viral proteins can serve as effective markers for detecting prior infections. Additionally, the identification of viral particles or the presence of antibodies may help establish an immune defense against the virus. These immunogenic proteins rather than SARS-CoV-2 can be given to uninfected people as a vaccination to improve their coping ability against COVID-19 through the generation of memory plasma cells. In this work, we review immunogenic and immune-response proteins derived from SARS-CoV-2 with regard to their classification, origin, and diverse applications (e.g., prevention (vaccine development), diagnostic testing, and treatment (via neutralizing Abs)). Finally, advanced immunization strategies against COVID-19 are discussed along with the contemporary circumstances and future challenges.

Light chain of a public SARS-CoV-2 class-3 antibody modulates neutralization against Omicron

The pairing of antibody genes IGHV2-5/IGLV2-14 is established as a public immune response that potently cross-neutralizes SARS-CoV-2 variants, including Omicron, by targeting class-3/RBD-5 epitopes in the receptor binding domain (RBD). LY-CoV1404 (bebtelovimab) exemplifies this, displaying exceptional potency against Omicron sub-variants up to BA.5. Here, we report a human antibody, 002-S21B10, encoded by the public clonotype IGHV2-5/IGLV2-14. While 002-S21B10 neutralized key SARS-CoV-2 variants, it did not neutralize Omicron, despite sharing >92% sequence similarity with LY-CoV1404. The structure of 002-S21B10 in complex with spike trimer plus structural and sequence comparisons with LY-CoV1404 and other IGHV2-5/IGLV2-14 antibodies revealed significant variations in light-chain orientation, paratope residues, and epitope-paratope interactions that enable some antibodies to neutralize Omicron but not others. Confirming this, replacing the light chain of 002-S21B10 with the light chain of LY-CoV1404 restored 002-S21B10's binding to Omicron. Understanding such Omicron evasion from public response is vital for guiding therapeutics and vaccine design.

SARS-CoV-2 Serological Investigation of White-Tailed Deer in Northeastern Ohio

Coronaviruses are known to cross species barriers, and spill over among animals, from animals to humans, and vice versa. SARS-CoV-2 emerged in humans in late 2019. It is now known to infect numerous animal species, including companion animals and captive wildlife species. Experimental infections in other animals have established that many species are susceptible to infection, with new ones still being identified. We have developed an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for detecting antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) proteins, that is both sensitive and specific. It can detect S antibodies in sera at dilutions greater than 1:10,000, and does not cross-react with antibodies to the other coronaviruses tested. We used the S antibody ELISA to test serum samples collected from 472 deer from ten sites in northeastern Ohio between November 2020 and March 2021, when the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was first peaking in humans in Ohio, USA. Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were found in serum samples from every site, with an overall positivity rate of 17.2%; we further compared the viral neutralizing antibody titers to our ELISA results. These findings demonstrate the need to establish surveillance programs to monitor deer and other susceptible wildlife species globally.

Molecular basis of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant evasion from shared neutralizing antibody response

Understanding the molecular features of neutralizing epitopes is important for developing vaccines/therapeutics against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. We describe three monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) generated from COVID-19 recovered individuals during the first wave of the pandemic in India. These mAbs had publicly shared near germline gene usage and potently neutralized Alpha and Delta, poorly neutralized Beta, and failed to neutralize Omicron BA.1 SARS-CoV-2 variants. Structural analysis of these mAbs in complex with trimeric spike protein showed that all three mAbs bivalently bind spike with two mAbs targeting class 1 and one targeting a class 4 receptor binding domain epitope. The immunogenetic makeup, structure, and function of these mAbs revealed specific molecular interactions associated with the potent multi-variant binding/neutralization efficacy. This knowledge shows how mutational combinations can affect the binding or neutralization of an antibody, which in turn relates to the efficacy of immune responses to emerging SARS-CoV-2 escape variants.

Kinetics of Humoral Immunity against SARS-CoV-2 in Healthcare Workers after the Third Dose of BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine

Protection provided by COVID-19 vaccines is compromised due to waning immunity over time. This study aimed to assess the level of antibodies anti-S-RBD of SARS-CoV-2 in a cohort of healthcare workers before and, on average, one and four months after the third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. The determination of antibodies was carried out in serum samples using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA). All 34 participants (10 males, 24 females, 19 participants <50 years old, 15 participants ≥50 years old) showed a significant antibody level increase after the booster dose. Subsequently, a significant decrease in the antibody concentration was observed, with a reduction of about 60% after 150 days from the booster. Six subjects were infected by SARS-CoV-2 after the booster and showed a significantly higher antibody concentration on average four months after the third dose compared to naïve ones. Male and female participants had a similar trend in the antibody decline, while older subjects, compared to the younger ones, had a slightly slower decrease, even if they developed a lower level of antibodies after the third dose. These findings support the importance of the booster dose and underline the need for surveillance programs to better understand the antibody kinetics and optimize vaccination strategies.

Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in rapid development of diagnostic test methods for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection. Serology tests to detect the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 enable detection of past infection and may detect cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection that were missed by earlier diagnostic tests. Understanding the diagnostic accuracy of serology tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection may enable development of effective diagnostic and management pathways, inform public health management decisions and understanding of SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the accuracy of antibody tests, firstly, to determine if a person presenting in the community, or in primary or secondary care has current SARS-CoV-2 infection according to time after onset of infection and, secondly, to determine if a person has previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Sources of heterogeneity investigated included: timing of test, test method, SARS-CoV-2 antigen used, test brand, and reference standard for non-SARS-CoV-2 cases.

SEARCH METHODS

The COVID-19 Open Access Project living evidence database from the University of Bern (which includes daily updates from PubMed and Embase and preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv) was searched on 30 September 2020. We included additional publications from the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre) 'COVID-19: Living map of the evidence' and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health 'NIPH systematic and living map on COVID-19 evidence'. We did not apply language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated commercially produced serology tests, targeting IgG, IgM, IgA alone, or in combination. Studies must have provided data for sensitivity, that could be allocated to a predefined time period after onset of symptoms, or after a positive RT-PCR test. Small studies with fewer than 25 SARS-CoV-2 infection cases were excluded. We included any reference standard to define the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tests (RT-PCR), clinical diagnostic criteria, and pre-pandemic samples).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We use standard screening procedures with three reviewers. Quality assessment (using the QUADAS-2 tool) and numeric study results were extracted independently by two people. Other study characteristics were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. We present sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each test and, for meta-analysis, we fitted univariate random-effects logistic regression models for sensitivity by eligible time period and for specificity by reference standard group. Heterogeneity was investigated by including indicator variables in the random-effects logistic regression models. We tabulated results by test manufacturer and summarised results for tests that were evaluated in 200 or more samples and that met a modification of UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) target performance criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 178 separate studies (described in 177 study reports, with 45 as pre-prints) providing 527 test evaluations. The studies included 64,688 samples including 25,724 from people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2; most compared the accuracy of two or more assays (102/178, 57%). Participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were most commonly hospital inpatients (78/178, 44%), and pre-pandemic samples were used by 45% (81/178) to estimate specificity. Over two-thirds of studies recruited participants based on known SARS-CoV-2 infection status (123/178, 69%). All studies were conducted prior to the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and present data for naturally acquired antibody responses. Seventy-nine percent (141/178) of studies reported sensitivity by week after symptom onset and 66% (117/178) for convalescent phase infection. Studies evaluated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) (165/527; 31%), chemiluminescent assays (CLIA) (167/527; 32%) or lateral flow assays (LFA) (188/527; 36%). Risk of bias was high because of participant selection (172, 97%); application and interpretation of the index test (35, 20%); weaknesses in the reference standard (38, 21%); and issues related to participant flow and timing (148, 82%). We judged that there were high concerns about the applicability of the evidence related to participants in 170 (96%) studies, and about the applicability of the reference standard in 162 (91%) studies. Average sensitivities for current SARS-CoV-2 infection increased by week after onset for all target antibodies. Average sensitivity for the combination of either IgG or IgM was 41.1% in week one (95% CI 38.1 to 44.2; 103 evaluations; 3881 samples, 1593 cases), 74.9% in week two (95% CI 72.4 to 77.3; 96 evaluations, 3948 samples, 2904 cases) and 88.0% by week three after onset of symptoms (95% CI 86.3 to 89.5; 103 evaluations, 2929 samples, 2571 cases). Average sensitivity during the convalescent phase of infection (up to a maximum of 100 days since onset of symptoms, where reported) was 89.8% for IgG (95% CI 88.5 to 90.9; 253 evaluations, 16,846 samples, 14,183 cases), 92.9% for IgG or IgM combined (95% CI 91.0 to 94.4; 108 evaluations, 3571 samples, 3206 cases) and 94.3% for total antibodies (95% CI 92.8 to 95.5; 58 evaluations, 7063 samples, 6652 cases). Average sensitivities for IgM alone followed a similar pattern but were of a lower test accuracy in every time slot. Average specificities were consistently high and precise, particularly for pre-pandemic samples which provide the least biased estimates of specificity (ranging from 98.6% for IgM to 99.8% for total antibodies). Subgroup analyses suggested small differences in sensitivity and specificity by test technology however heterogeneity in study results, timing of sample collection, and smaller sample numbers in some groups made comparisons difficult. For IgG, CLIAs were the most sensitive (convalescent-phase infection) and specific (pre-pandemic samples) compared to both ELISAs and LFAs (P < 0.001 for differences across test methods). The antigen(s) used (whether from the Spike-protein or nucleocapsid) appeared to have some effect on average sensitivity in the first weeks after onset but there was no clear evidence of an effect during convalescent-phase infection. Investigations of test performance by brand showed considerable variation in sensitivity between tests, and in results between studies evaluating the same test. For tests that were evaluated in 200 or more samples, the lower bound of the 95% CI for sensitivity was 90% or more for only a small number of tests (IgG, n = 5; IgG or IgM, n = 1; total antibodies, n = 4). More test brands met the MHRA minimum criteria for specificity of 98% or above (IgG, n = 16; IgG or IgM, n = 5; total antibodies, n = 7). Seven assays met the specified criteria for both sensitivity and specificity. In a low-prevalence (2%) setting, where antibody testing is used to diagnose COVID-19 in people with symptoms but who have had a negative PCR test, we would anticipate that 1 (1 to 2) case would be missed and 8 (5 to 15) would be falsely positive in 1000 people undergoing IgG or IgM testing in week three after onset of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a seroprevalence survey, where prevalence of prior infection is 50%, we would anticipate that 51 (46 to 58) cases would be missed and 6 (5 to 7) would be falsely positive in 1000 people having IgG tests during the convalescent phase (21 to 100 days post-symptom onset or post-positive PCR) of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some antibody tests could be a useful diagnostic tool for those in whom molecular- or antigen-based tests have failed to detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus, including in those with ongoing symptoms of acute infection (from week three onwards) or those presenting with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19. However, antibody tests have an increasing likelihood of detecting an immune response to infection as time since onset of infection progresses and have demonstrated adequate performance for detection of prior infection for sero-epidemiological purposes. The applicability of results for detection of vaccination-induced antibodies is uncertain.

Molecular basis of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant evasion from shared neutralizing antibody response

A detailed understanding of the molecular features of the neutralizing epitopes developed by viral escape mutants is important for predicting and developing vaccines or therapeutic antibodies against continuously emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. Here, we report three human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) generated from COVID-19 recovered individuals during first wave of pandemic in India. These mAbs had publicly shared near germline gene usage and potently neutralized Alpha and Delta, but poorly neutralized Beta and completely failed to neutralize Omicron BA.1 SARS-CoV-2 variants. Structural analysis of these three mAbs in complex with trimeric spike protein showed that all three mAbs are involved in bivalent spike binding with two mAbs targeting class-1 and one targeting class-4 Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) epitope. Comparison of immunogenetic makeup, structure, and function of these three mAbs with our recently reported class-3 RBD binding mAb that potently neutralized all SARS-CoV-2 variants revealed precise antibody footprint, specific molecular interactions associated with the most potent multi-variant binding / neutralization efficacy. This knowledge has timely significance for understanding how a combination of certain mutations affect the binding or neutralization of an antibody and thus have implications for predicting structural features of emerging SARS-CoV-2 escape variants and to develop vaccines or therapeutic antibodies against these.

Molecular basis of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant evasion from shared neutralizing antibody response

A detailed understanding of the molecular features of the neutralizing epitopes developed by viral escape mutants is important for predicting and developing vaccines or therapeutic antibodies against continuously emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. Here, we report three human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) generated from COVID-19 recovered individuals during first wave of pandemic in India. These mAbs had publicly shared near germline gene usage and potently neutralized Alpha and Delta, but poorly neutralized Beta and completely failed to neutralize Omicron BA.1 SARS-CoV-2 variants. Structural analysis of these three mAbs in complex with trimeric spike protein showed that all three mAbs are involved in bivalent spike binding with two mAbs targeting class-1 and one targeting class-4 Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) epitope. Comparison of immunogenetic makeup, structure, and function of these three mAbs with our recently reported class-3 RBD binding mAb that potently neutralized all SARS-CoV-2 variants revealed precise antibody footprint, specific molecular interactions associated with the most potent multi-variant binding / neutralization efficacy. This knowledge has timely significance for understanding how a combination of certain mutations affect the binding or neutralization of an antibody and thus have implications for predicting structural features of emerging SARS-CoV-2 escape variants and to develop vaccines or therapeutic antibodies against these.

Structural insights for neutralization of Omicron variants BA.1, BA.2, BA.4, and BA.5 by a broadly neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 antibody

In this study, by characterizing several human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) isolated from single B cells of the COVID-19–recovered individuals in India who experienced ancestral Wuhan strain (WA.1) of SARS-CoV-2 during early stages of the pandemic, we found a receptor binding domain (RBD)–specific mAb 002-S21F2 that has rare gene usage and potently neutralized live viral isolates of SARS-CoV-2 variants including Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Omicron sublineages (BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5) with IC 50 ranging from 0.02 to 0.13 μg/ml. Structural studies of 002-S21F2 in complex with spike trimers of Omicron and WA.1 showed that it targets a conformationally conserved epitope on the outer face of RBD (class 3 surface) outside the ACE2-binding motif, thereby providing a mechanistic insights for its broad neutralization activity. The discovery of 002-S21F2 and the broadly neutralizing epitope it targets have timely implications for developing a broad range of therapeutic and vaccine interventions against SARS-CoV-2 variants including Omicron sublineages.

Homogeneous surrogate virus neutralization assay to rapidly assess neutralization activity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered the development of numerous diagnostic tools to monitor infection and to determine immune response. Although assays to measure binding antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are widely available, more specific tests measuring neutralization activities of antibodies are immediately needed to quantify the extent and duration of protection that results from infection or vaccination. We previously developed a 'Serological Assay based on a Tri-part split-NanoLuc® (SATiN)' to detect antibodies that bind to the spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2. Here, we expand on our previous work and describe a reconfigured version of the SATiN assay, called Neutralization SATiN (Neu-SATiN), which measures neutralization activity of antibodies directly from convalescent or vaccinated sera. The results obtained with our assay and other neutralization assays are comparable but with significantly shorter preparation and run time for Neu-SATiN. As the assay is modular, we further demonstrate that Neu-SATiN enables rapid assessment of the effectiveness of vaccines and level of protection against existing SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and can therefore be readily adapted for emerging variants.

A Qualitative Comparison of the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant Assay against Commonly Used Canadian SARS-CoV-2 Enzyme Immunoassays in Blood Donor Retention Specimens, April 2020 to March 2021

Our group has previously used laboratory and commercially developed assays to understand the IgG responses to SARS-CoV-2 antigens, including nucleocapsid (N), spike (S), and receptor binding domain (RBD), in Canadian blood donors. In this current study, we analyzed 17,428 available and previously characterized retention samples collected from April 2020 to March 2021. The analysis compared the characteristics of the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay (Abbott anti-spike [S], Abbott, Chicago, IL) against four other IgG assays. The Abbott anti-S assay has a qualitative threshold of 50 AU/mL. The four comparator assays were the Abbott anti-nucleocapsid (N) assay and three commonly used Canadian in-house IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) recognizing distinct recombinant viral antigens, full-length spike glycoprotein, glycoprotein RBD, and nucleocapsid. The strongest qualitative relationship was between Sinai RBD and the Abbott anti-S assay (kappa, 0.707; standard error [SE] of kappa, 0.018; 95% confidence interval, 0.671 to 0.743). We then scored each previously characterized specimen as positive when two anti-SARS-COV-2 assays identified anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG in the specimen. Using this composite reference standard approach, the sensitivity of the Abbott anti-S assay was 95.96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.27 to 97.63%). The specificity of the Abbott anti-S assay was 99.35% (95% CI, 99.21 to 99.46%). Our study provides context on the use of commonly used SARS-CoV-2 serologies in Canada and identifies how these assays qualitatively compare to newer commercial assays. Our next steps are to assess how well the Abbott anti-S assays quantitatively detect wild-type and SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. IMPORTANCE We describe the qualitative test characteristics of the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay against four other anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays commonly used in Canada. Although there is no gold standard for identifying anti-SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity, aggregate standards can be used to assess seropositivity. In this study, we used a specimen bank of previously well-characterized specimens collected between April 2020 and March 2021. The Abbott anti-S assay showed the strongest qualitative relationship with a widely used laboratory-developed IgG assay for the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain. Using the composite reference standard approach, we also showed that the Abbott anti-S assay was highly sensitive and specific. As new anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays are developed, it is important to compare their test characteristics against other assays that have been extensively used in prior research.

Antibody response after two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine among healthcare workers of a Greek Covid 19 referral hospital: A prospective cohort study

The global vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has highlighted the need of assessing vaccines' immunogenicity against COVID-19. To evaluate humoral immunity induced by the BNT162b2 vaccine, we enrolled health care workers at AHEPA University Hospital of Thessaloniki, Greece to measure Anti-S SARS-CoV-2, anti-RBD SARS-CoV-2 and neutralizing antibodies. A total of 955 individuals with a median age of 50 years, were included in the study. Median values of antibodies were 1947.27 BAU/mL (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant), 2064.98 BAU/mL (MAGLUMI SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG) and 2464.63 IU/mL (MAGLUMI SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibodies). Individuals previously infected had greater antibody responses than infection naive ones and a 7-fold higher neutralizing antibodies titre. Antibodies degreased by age but not sex. Spearman's correlation coefficient among the three assays ranged from 0.903 to 0.969. The BNT162b2 vaccine was highly immunogenic in our cohort. Further research is needed to evaluate the vaccine's immunogenicity through time as well as in different populations.

Early and strong antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 predict disease severity in COVID-19 patients

Background

Antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 is a valuable biomarker for the assessment of the spread of the virus in a population and evaluation of the vaccine candidates. Recent data suggest that antibody levels also may have a prognostic significance in COVID-19. Most of the serological studies so far rely on testing antibodies against spike (S) or nucleocapsid (N) protein, however antibodies can be directed against other structural and nonstructural proteins of the virus, whereas their frequency, biological and clinical significance is unknown.

Methods

A novel antigen array comprising 30 SARS-CoV-2 antigens or their fragments was developed and used to examine IgG, IgA, IgE and IgM responses to SARS-CoV-2 in sera from 103 patients with COVID-19 including 34 patients for whom sequential samples were available, and 20 pre-pandemic healthy controls.

Results

Antibody responses to various antigens are highly correlated and the frequencies and peak levels of antibodies are higher in patients with severe/moderate disease than in those with mild disease. This finding supports the idea that antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 may exacerbate the severity of the disease via antibody-dependent enhancement. Moreover, early IgG and IgA responses to full length S protein may be used as an additional biomarker for the identification of patients who are at risk of developing severe disease. Importantly, this is the first study reporting that SARS-CoV-2 elicits IgE responses and their serum levels positively correlate with the severity of the disease thus suggesting a link between high levels of antibodies and mast cell activation.

Conclusions

This is the first study assessing the prevalence and dynamics IgG, IgA, IgE and IgM responses to multiple SARS-CoV-2 antigens simultaneously. Results provide important insights into the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and have implications in planning and interpreting antibody-based epidemiological studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12967-022-03382-y.

Fast and Accurate Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test Based on Antibody-Mediated Blocking of the Interaction of ACE2 and SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein RBD

The humoral response to the SARS-CoV-2 S protein determines the development of protective immunity against this infection. The standard neutralizing antibodies detection method is a live virus neutralization test. It can be replaced with an ELISA-based surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT), measuring the ability of serum antibodies to inhibit complex formation between the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the S protein and the cellular ACE2 receptor. There are conflicting research data on the sVNT methodology and the reliability of its results. We show that the performance of sVNT dramatically improves when the intact RBD from the Wuhan-Hu-1 virus variant is used as the plate coating reagent, and the HRP-conjugated soluble ACE2 is used as the detection reagent. This design omits the pre-incubation step in separate tubes or separate microplate and allows the simple quantification of the results using the linear regression, utilizing only 3–4 test sample dilutions. When this sVNT was performed for 73 convalescent plasma samples, its results showed a very strong correlation with VNT (Spearman’s Rho 0.83). For the RBD, bearing three amino acid substitutions and corresponding to the SARS-CoV-2 beta variant, the inhibitory strength was diminished for 18 out of 20 randomly chosen serum samples, and the magnitude of this decrease was not similar to the change in overall anti-RBD IgG level. The sVNT assay design with the ACE2-HRP is preferable over the assay with the RBD-HRP reagent and is suitable for mass screening of neutralizing antibodies titers.

Seroprevalence of anti SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies among adults in Jammu district, India: A community-based study

Background & objectives

Serology testing is essential for immunological surveillance in the population. This serosurvey was conducted to ascertain the cumulative population immunity against SARS-CoV-2 among adults in Jammu district and to understand the association of seropositivity with sociodemographic and clinical correlates.

Methods

On September 30 and October 1, 2020, a household survey was done in 20 villages/wards chosen from 10 health blocks in district Jammu, India. Demographic, clinical and exposure information was collected from 2000 adults. Serum samples were screened for IgG antibodies using COVID Kavach MERILISA kit. Tests of association were used to identify risk factors associated with IgG positivity. Crude odds ratio with 95 per cent confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated during univariate analysis followed by logistic regression.

Results

Overall adjusted seroprevalence for SARS-CoV-2 was 8.8 per cent (95% CI: 8.78-8.82); it varied from 4.1 per cent in Chauki choura to 16.7 per cent Pallanwalla across 10 blocks in the district. Seropositivity was observed to be comparatively higher in 41-50 and 61-70 yr age groups, among males and in rural areas. Fever, sore throat, cough, dyspnoea, myalgias, anosmia, ageusia, fatigue, seizures, history of exposure, medical consultation, hospitalization and missing work showed significant association with seropositivity on univariate analysis. On logistic regression, only sore throat, myalgia and missing work showed significant adjusted odds of IgG positivity. Extrapolation to adult population suggested that exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was 14.4 times higher than reported cases, translating into Infection fatality rate of 0.08 per cent.

Interpretation & conclusions

Since a major part of population was immunologically naive, all efforts to contain COVID-19 need to be vigorously followed while these baseline results provide an important yardstick to monitor the trends of COVID-19 and guide locally appropriate control strategies in the region.

Function Is More Reliable than Quantity to Follow Up the Humoral Response to the Receptor-Binding Domain of SARS-CoV-2-Spike Protein after Natural Infection or COVID-19 Vaccination

Both the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and emergence of variants of concern have highlighted the need for functional antibody assays to monitor the humoral response over time. Antibodies directed against the spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 are an important component of the neutralizing antibody response. In this work, we report that in a subset of patients-despite a decline in total S-specific antibodies-neutralizing antibody titers remain at a similar level for an average of 98 days in longitudinal sampling of a cohort of 59 Hispanic/Latino patients exposed to SARS-CoV-2. Our data suggest that 100% of seroconverting patients make detectable neutralizing antibody responses which can be quantified by a surrogate viral neutralization test. Examination of sera from ten out of the 59 subjects which received mRNA-based vaccination revealed that both IgG titers and neutralizing activity of sera were higher after vaccination compared to a cohort of 21 SARS-CoV-2 naïve subjects. One dose was sufficient for the induction of a neutralizing antibody, but two doses were necessary to reach 100% surrogate virus neutralization in subjects irrespective of previous SARS-CoV-2 natural infection status. Like the pattern observed after natural infection, the total anti-S antibodies titers declined after the second vaccine dose; however, neutralizing activity remained relatively constant for more than 80 days after the first vaccine dose. Furthermore, our data indicates that-compared with mRNA vaccination-natural infection induces a more robust humoral immune response in unexposed subjects. This work is an important contribution to understanding the natural immune response to the novel coronavirus in a population severely impacted by SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, by comparing the dynamics of the immune response after the natural infection vs. the vaccination, these findings suggest that functional neutralizing antibody tests are more relevant indicators than the presence or absence of binding antibodies.

Function is more reliable than quantity to follow up the humoral response to the Receptor Binding Domain of SARS- CoV-2 Spike protein after natural infection or COVID-19 vaccination

Both the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and emergence of variants of concern have highlighted the need for functional antibody assays to monitor the humoral response over time. Antibodies directed against the spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 are an important component of the neutralizing antibody response. In this work, we report that in a subset of patients-despite a decline in total S-specific antibodies-neutralizing antibody titers remain at a similar level for an average of 98 days in longitudinal sampling of a cohort of 59 Hispanic/Latino patients exposed to SARS-CoV-2. We also report that serum neutralization capacity correlates with IgG titers, wherein IgG1 was the predominant isotype (62.71%), followed by IgG4 (15.25%), IgG3 (13.56%), and IgG2 (8.47%) at the earliest tested timepoint. IgA titers were detectable in just 28.81% of subjects, and only 62.71% of subjects had detectable IgM in the first sample despite confirmation of infection by a molecular diagnostic assay. Our data suggests that 100% of seroconverting patients make detectable neutralizing antibody responses which can be quantified by a surrogate viral neutralization test. Examination of sera from 10 out of the 59 subjects which had received an initial first dose of mRNA-based vaccination revealed that both IgG titers and neutralizing activity of sera were higher after vaccination compared to a cohort of 21 SARS-CoV-2 naïve subjects. One dose was sufficient for induction of neutralizing antibody, but two doses were necessary to reach 100% surrogate virus neutralization in subjects irrespective of previous SARS-CoV-2 natural infection status. Like the pattern seen after natural infection, after the second vaccine dose, the total anti-S antibodies titers declined, however, neutralizing activity remained relatively constant for more than 80 days after the first vaccine dose. The decline in anti-S antibody titer, however, was significantly less in pre-exposed individuals, highlighting the potential for natural infection to prime a more robust immune response to the vaccine. Furthermore, our data indicates that-compared with mRNA vaccination-natural infection induces a more robust humoral immune response in unexposed subjects. However, this difference was significant only when neutralizing antibody titers were compared among the two groups. No differences were observed between naturally infected and vaccinated individuals when total anti-S antibodies and IgG titers were measured. This work is an important contribution to understanding the natural immune response to the novel coronavirus in a population severely impacted by SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, by comparing the dynamics of the immune response after the natural infection vs. the vaccination, these findings suggest that a functional neutralizing antibody tests are more relevant indicators than the presence or absence of binding antibodies. In this context, our results also support standardizing methods of assessing the humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 when determining vaccine efficacy and describing the immune correlates of protection for SARS-CoV-2.

IMMUNO-COV v2.0: Development and Validation of a High-Throughput Clinical Assay for Measuring SARS-CoV-2-Neutralizing Antibody Titers

Neutralizing antibodies are key determinants of protection from future infection, yet well-validated high-throughput assays for measuring titers of SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies are not generally available. Here, we describe the development and validation of IMMUNO-COV v2.0, a scalable surrogate virus assay, which titrates antibodies that block infection of Vero-ACE2 cells by a luciferase-encoding vesicular stomatitis virus displaying SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoproteins (VSV-SARS2-Fluc). Antibody titers, calculated using a standard curve consisting of stepped concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 spike monoclonal antibody, correlated closely (P < 0.0001) with titers obtained from a gold standard 50% plaque-reduction neutralization test (PRNT50%) performed using a clinical isolate of SARS-CoV-2. IMMUNO-COV v2.0 was comprehensively validated using data acquired from 242 assay runs performed over 7 days by five analysts, utilizing two separate virus lots, and 176 blood samples. Assay performance was acceptable for clinical use in human serum and plasma based on parameters including linearity, dynamic range, limit of blank and limit of detection, dilutional linearity and parallelism, precision, clinical agreement, matrix equivalence, clinical specificity and sensitivity, and robustness. Sufficient VSV-SARS2-Fluc virus reagent has been banked to test 5 million clinical samples. Notably, a significant drop in IMMUNO-COV v2.0 neutralizing antibody titers was observed over a 6-month period in people recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Together, our results demonstrate the feasibility and utility of IMMUNO-COV v2.0 for measuring SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies in vaccinated individuals and those recovering from natural infections. Such monitoring can be used to better understand what levels of neutralizing antibodies are required for protection from SARS-CoV-2 and what booster dosing schedules are needed to sustain vaccine-induced immunity. IMPORTANCE Since its emergence at the end of 2019, SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, has caused over 100 million infections and 2.4 million deaths worldwide. Recently, countries have begun administering approved COVID-19 vaccines, which elicit strong immune responses and prevent disease in most vaccinated individuals. A key component of the protective immune response is the production of neutralizing antibodies capable of preventing future SARS-CoV-2 infection. Yet, fundamental questions remain regarding the longevity of neutralizing antibody responses following infection or vaccination and the level of neutralizing antibodies required to confer protection. Our work is significant as it describes the development and validation of a scalable clinical assay that measures SARS-CoV-2-neutraling antibody titers. We have critical virus reagent to test over 5 million samples, making our assay well suited for widespread monitoring of SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies, which can in turn be used to inform vaccine dosing schedules and answer fundamental questions regarding SARS-CoV-2 immunity.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody dynamics and B-cell memory response over time in COVID-19 convalescent subjects

Objectives

The worldwide spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) highlights the need for assessment of long-term humoral immunity in convalescent subjects. Our objectives were to evaluate long-term IgG antibody response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and B-cell memory response in COVID-19 convalescent subjects.

Methods

Blood samples were collected from a cohort of subjects recovering from COVID-19 and from healthy subjects who donated blood. SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies were quantitatively detected by ELISA using anti-S1 spike IgG. SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific IgG memory B cells were evaluated by reversed B-cell FluroSpot based on human IgG SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain in a randomly selected group of subjects recovering from COVID-19. Statistical analysis was performed with clinical variables and time post COVID-19 infection.

Results

Antibody response was not detected in 26 of 392 COVID-19 convalescent subjects (6.6%). Over a period of 9 months, the level of antibodies decreased by 50% but stabilized at 6 months, and a protective level prevailed for up to 9 months. No differences were found regarding IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels for age, gender, and major blood types over time. Over time, asymptomatic COVID-19 subjects did not differ in antibody level from subjects with mild to severe disease. Repeated paired IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibody level analyses disclosed that, over 6 and 9 months, 15.3% (nine of 59) and 15.8% (three of 19) of subjects became SARS-CoV-2 IgG-seronegative, respectively, all with a low antibody level at 3 months. Rate of antibody decline was not affected by age, gender, or clinical symptomatology. In a subgroup of recovering subjects, memory B-cell response up to 9 months post-COVID-19 infection was undetectable in 31.8% of subjects (14/44), and there was no correlation with age, SARS-CoV-2 antibody level, or time post infection.

Conclusions

The majority of convalescent COVID-19 subjects develop an IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibody response and a protective level prevails over a period of up to 9 months, regardless of age, gender, major blood types or clinical symptomatology.

Humoral immune response to COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in patients with multiple sclerosis treated with high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies

Background and Aims

The National Multiple Sclerosis Society and other expert organizations recommended that all patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) should be vaccinated against COVID-19. However, the effect of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) on the efficacy to mount an appropriate immune response is unknown. We aimed to characterize humoral immunity in mRNA-COVID-19 MS vaccinees treated with high-efficacy DMTs.

Methods

We measured SARS-CoV-2 IgG response using anti-spike protein-based serology (EUROIMMUN) in 125 MS patients vaccinated with BNT162b2-COVID-19 vaccine 1 month after the second dose. Patients were either untreated or under treatment with fingolimod, cladribine, or ocrelizumab. A group of healthy subjects similarly vaccinated served as control. The percent of subjects that developed protective antibodies, the titer, and the time from the last dosing were evaluated.

Results

Protective humoral immunity of 97.9%, 100%, 100%, 22.7%, and 3.8%, was observed in COVID-19 vaccinated healthy subjects (N = 47), untreated MS patients (N = 32), and MS patients treated with cladribine (N = 23), ocrelizumab (N = 44), and fingolimod (N = 26), respectively. SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titer was high in healthy subjects, untreated MS patients, and MS patients under cladribine treatment, within 29.5-55 days after the second vaccine dose. Only 22.7% of patients treated with ocrelizumab developed humoral IgG response irrespective to normal absolute lymphocyte count. Most fingolimod-treated MS patients had very low lymphocyte count and failed to develop SARS-COV-2 antibodies. Age, disease duration, and time from the last dosing did not affect humoral response to COVID-19 vaccination.

Conclusions

Cladribine treatment does not impair humoral response to COVID-19 vaccination. We recommend postponing ocrelizumab treatment in MS patients willing to be vaccinated as a protective humoral response can be expected only in some. We do not recommend vaccinating MS patients treated with fingolimod as a protective humoral response is not expected.

Passive Immunity Trial for Our Nation (PassITON): study protocol for a randomized placebo-control clinical trial evaluating COVID-19 convalescent plasma in hospitalized adults

BACKGROUND

Convalescent plasma is being used widely as a treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma is unclear.

METHODS

The Passive Immunity Trial for Our Nation (PassITON) is a multicenter, placebo-controlled, blinded, randomized clinical trial being conducted in the USA to provide high-quality evidence on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma as a treatment for adults hospitalized with symptomatic disease. Adults hospitalized with COVID-19 with respiratory symptoms for less than 14 days are eligible. Enrolled patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to 1 unit (200-399 mL) of COVID-19 convalescent plasma that has demonstrated neutralizing function using a SARS-CoV-2 chimeric virus neutralization assay. Study treatments are administered in a blinded fashion and patients are followed for 28 days. The primary outcome is clinical status 14 days after study treatment as measured on a 7-category ordinal scale assessing mortality, respiratory support, and return to normal activities of daily living. Key secondary outcomes include mortality and oxygen-free days. The trial is projected to enroll 1000 patients and is designed to detect an odds ratio ≤ 0.73 for the primary outcome.

DISCUSSION

This trial will provide the most robust data available to date on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma for the treatment of adults hospitalized with acute moderate to severe COVID-19. These data will be useful to guide the treatment of COVID-19 patients in the current pandemic and for informing decisions about whether developing a standardized infrastructure for collecting and disseminating convalescent plasma to prepare for future viral pandemics is indicated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04362176 . Registered on 24 April 2020.