Immune correlates analysis of the PREVENT-19 COVID-19 vaccine efficacy clinical trial

Anti-Spike IgG antibodies as correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in the pre-Omicron and Omicron era

Anti-Spike IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, which are elicited by vaccination and infection, are correlates of protection against infection with pre-Omicron variants. Whether this association can be generalized to infections with Omicron variants is unclear. We conducted a retrospective cohort study with 8457 blood donors in Tyrol, Austria, analyzing 15,340 anti-Spike IgG antibody measurements from March 2021 to December 2022 assessed by Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. Using a Bayesian joint model, we estimated antibody trajectories and adjusted hazard ratios for incident SARS-CoV-2 infection ascertained by self-report or seroconversion of anti-Nucleocapsid antibodies. At the time of their earliest available anti-Spike IgG antibody measurement (median November 23, 2021), participants had a median age of 46.0 years (IQR 32.8-55.2), with 45.3% being female, 41.3% having a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 75.5% having received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Among 6159 participants with endpoint data, 3700 incident SARS-CoV-2 infections with predominantly Omicron sublineages were recorded over a median of 8.8 months (IQR 5.7-12.4). The age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratio for SARS-CoV-2 associated with having twice the anti-Spike IgG antibody titer was 0.875 (95% credible interval 0.868-0.881) overall, 0.842 (0.827-0.856) during 2021, and 0.884 (0.877-0.891) during 2022 (all p < 0.001). The associations were similar in females and males (Pinteraction = 0.673) and across age (Pinteraction = 0.590). Higher anti-Spike IgG antibody titers were associated with reduced risk of incident SARS-CoV-2 infection across the entire observation period. While the magnitude of association was slightly weakened in the Omicron era, anti-Spike IgG antibody continues to be a suitable correlate of protection against newer SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Anti-spike antibody level is associated with the risk of clinical progression among subjects hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia: results from a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike (anti-S) may confer protection against symptomatic COVID-19. Whether their level predicts progression among those with COVID-19 pneumonia remains unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to assess predictors of anti-S levels and whether anti-S titer is associated with death or mechanical ventilation (MV). Adults hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia between July 2021 and July 2022 were enrolled if anti-S had been measured within 72 h of admission. Predictors of anti-S level were explored using multivariable quantile regression. The association between anti-S levels and 30-day death/MV was investigated via multivariable logistic regression. Analyses were stratified by vaccine status.

RESULTS

The median anti-S level was 1370 BAU/ml in 328 vaccinated and 15.5 BAU/ml in 206 unvaccinated individuals. Among the vaccinated, shorter symptom duration (p = 0.001), hematological malignancies (p = 0.002), and immunosuppressive therapy (p = 0.004) were associated with lower anti-S levels. In the unvaccinated group, symptom duration was the only predictor of anti-S levels (p < 0.001). After 30 days, 134 patients experienced death or MV. Among vaccinated individuals, higher anti-S levels correlated significantly with lower death/MV risk (per log2 increase, OR 0.88, 95%CI 0.81-0.97), irrespective of age and solid malignancies. Among unvaccinated, a marginally protective effect was observed (OR 0.86, 95%CI 0.73-1.01), independent of age, immunosuppressive therapy, and diabetes. Adjustment for monoclonal antibody treatment strengthened the association (OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.68-0.96).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that levels of anti-S antibodies can predict critical or fatal outcomes in COVID-19 pneumonia patients, regardless of vaccination. Whether anti-S Ab could guide risk assessment and vaccination boosting merits further evaluation.

SARS-CoV-2 correlates of protection from infection against variants of concern

Serum neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) induced by vaccination have been linked to protection against symptomatic and severe coronavirus disease 2019. However, much less is known about the efficacy of nAbs in preventing the acquisition of infection, especially in the context of natural immunity and against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immune-escape variants. Here we conducted mediation analysis to assess serum nAbs induced by prior SARS-CoV-2 infections as potential correlates of protection against Delta and Omicron infections, in rural and urban household cohorts in South Africa. We find that, in the Delta wave, D614G nAbs mediate 37% (95% confidence interval: 34-40%) of the total protection against infection conferred by prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and that protection decreases with waning immunity. In contrast, Omicron BA.1 nAbs mediate 11% (95% confidence interval: 9-12%) of the total protection against Omicron BA.1 or BA.2 infections, due to Omicron's neutralization escape. These findings underscore that correlates of protection mediated through nAbs are variant specific, and that boosting of nAbs against circulating variants might restore or confer immune protection lost due to nAb waning and/or immune escape. However, the majority of immune protection against SARS-CoV-2 conferred by natural infection cannot be fully explained by serum nAbs alone. Measuring these and other immune markers including T cell responses, both in the serum and in other compartments such as the nasal mucosa, may be required to comprehensively understand and predict immune protection against SARS-CoV-2.

Immunogenicity and Safety of Heterologous Omicron BA.1 and Bivalent SARS-CoV-2 Recombinant Spike Protein Booster Vaccines: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Mutations present in emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants permit evasion of neutralization with prototype vaccines. A novel Omicron BA.1 subvariant-specific vaccine (NVX-CoV2515) was tested alone or as a bivalent preparation with the prototype vaccine (NVX-CoV2373) to assess antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

Participants aged 18 to 64 years immunized with 3 doses of prototype mRNA vaccines were randomized 1:1:1 to receive a single dose of NVX-CoV2515, NVX-CoV2373, or the bivalent mixture in a phase 3 study investigating heterologous boosting with SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein vaccines. Immunogenicity was measured 14 and 28 days after vaccination for the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 sublineage and ancestral strain. Safety profiles of vaccines were assessed.

RESULTS

Of participants who received trial vaccine (N = 829), those administered NVX-CoV2515 (n = 286) demonstrated a superior neutralizing antibody response to BA.1 vs NVX-CoV2373 (n = 274) at day 14 (geometric mean titer ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.33-2.03). Seroresponse rates were 73.4% (91/124; 95% CI, 64.7-80.9) for NVX-CoV2515 vs 50.9% (59/116; 95% CI, 41.4-60.3) for NVX-CoV2373. All formulations were similarly well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

NVX-CoV2515 elicited a superior neutralizing antibody response against the Omicron BA.1 subvariant as compared with NVX-CoV2373 when administered as a fourth dose. Safety data were consistent with the established safety profile of NVX-CoV2373.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05372588).

Safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of Ad26.COV2.S as homologous or heterologous COVID-19 booster vaccination: Results of a randomized, double-blind, phase 2 trial

COVID-19 vaccine boosters may optimize durability of protection against variants of concern (VOCs). In this randomized, double-blind, phase 2 trial, participants received 3 different dose levels of an Ad26.COV2.S booster (5 × 1010 vp [viral particles], 2.5 × 1010 vp, or 1 × 1010 vp) ≥6 months post-primary vaccination with either single-dose Ad26.COV2.S (homologous boost; n = 774) or 2-dose BNT162b2 (heterologous boost; n = 758). Primary endpoints were noninferiority of neutralizing antibody responses at Day 15 post-boost versus Day 29 post-primary vaccination. Secondary endpoints included reactogenicity/safety and neutralizing antibody responses to VOCs. All primary endpoints passed prespecified hierarchical noninferiority criteria by Day 15 post-boost. Geometric mean increases in neutralizing antibody titers against the D614G reference strain ranged from 5.5 to 6.8 at Day 15 for homologous boosting and 12.6 to 22.0 for heterologous boosting. For VOCs, heterologous boosting elicited higher neutralizing antibody responses than homologous boosting. Neutralizing antibody responses were dose-dependent and durable for ≥6 months post-boost. More solicited systemic adverse events occurred following heterologous versus homologous boosting. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04999111.

Antibody Response to Symptomatic Infection With SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Viruses, December 2021-June 2022

We describe humoral immune responses in 105 ambulatory patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection. In dried blood spot (DBS) collected within 5 days of illness onset and during convalescence, we measured binding antibody (bAb) against ancestral spike protein receptor binding domain (RBD) and nucleocapsid (N) protein using a commercial multiplex bead assay. Geometric mean bAb concentrations against RBD increased by a factor of 2.5 from 1258 to 3189 units/mL and by a factor of 47 against N protein from 5.5 to 259 units/mL between acute illness and convalescence; lower concentrations were associated with greater geometric mean ratios. Paired DBS specimens may be used to evaluate humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Validation of a Pseudovirus Neutralization Assay for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: A High-Throughput Method for the Evaluation of Vaccine Immunogenicity

The evaluation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine immunogenicity remains essential as the severe acute respiratory syncytial virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic continues to evolve and as additional variants emerge. Neutralizing antibodies are a known correlate of protection for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. A pseudovirus neutralization (PNT) assay was developed and validated at Novavax Clinical Immunology Laboratories to allow for the detection of neutralizing antibodies in vaccine clinical trial sera. The PNT assay was precise, accurate, linear, and specific in measuring SARS-CoV-2 neutralization titers in human serum for ancestral strain and the Omicron subvariants BA.5 and XBB.1.5, with an overall geometric coefficient of variation of ≤43.4%, a percent relative bias within the expected range of -60% to 150%, and a linearity value of R2 > 0.98 for all three strains. This pseudovirus assay will be useful for the analysis of vaccine clinical trial samples to assess vaccine immunogenicity. Future work will focus on modifying the assay for emerging variants, including XBB.1.16, EG.5.1, BA.2.86, and any other variants that emerge in the ongoing pandemic.

Early antiviral CD4 and CD8 T cell responses and antibodies are associated with upper respiratory tract clearance of SARS-CoV-2

T cells are involved in protective immunity against numerous viral infections1. Data regarding functional roles of human T cells in SARS-CoV-2 (SARS2) viral clearance in primary COVID-19 are limited. To address this knowledge gap, samples were assessed for associations between SARS2 upper respiratory tract viral RNA levels and early virus-specific adaptive immune responses, for 95 unvaccinated clinical trial participants with acute primary COVID-19. Functionality and quantity of acute SARS2-specific CD4 and CD8 T cell responses were evaluated, in addition to antibody responses. Most individuals with acute COVID-19 developed SARS2-specific T cell responses within 6 days of symptom onset. Early CD4 T cell and CD8 T cell responses were strongly associated with reduced upper respiratory tract SARS2 viral RNA, independent of neutralizing antibody titers. Overall, these findings indicate a protective role for SARS2-specific T cells during acute COVID-19.

Immunogenicity and safety of a bivalent (omicron BA.5 plus ancestral) SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein vaccine as a heterologous booster dose: interim analysis of a phase 3, non-inferiority, randomised, clinical trial

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 variants evade immunity despite vaccination with prototype COVID-19 vaccines or previous infection. The 2019nCoV-311 (part 2) study is evaluating immune responses after two booster doses of a vaccine containing the omicron BA.5 subvariant spike protein in adults previously vaccinated with a prototype mRNA vaccine. This interim analysis reports on day 28 immunogenicity and safety outcomes after one booster dose.

METHODS

In this phase 3, randomised, observer-blinded study conducted at 35 sites in Australia, medically stable, previously COVID-19-vaccinated (mRNA-based; ≥three doses) adults aged 18 years or older were enrolled and randomly allocated (1:1:1; via an interactive web response system) to receive two doses of bivalent (NVX-CoV2373 + NVX-CoV2540; bivalent group), authorised prototype (NVX-CoV2373; prototype group), or BA.5 (NVX-CoV2540; BA.5 group) vaccine. Only blinded personnel performed study assessments or had participant contact to collect data after study vaccination. Participants received vaccines containing 5 μg SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike protein and 50 μg Matrix-M adjuvant, administered via a 0·5 mL intramuscular injection (2·5 μg of NVX-CoV2373 plus 2·5 μg of NVX-CoV2540 for the bivalent vaccine, prepared on-site as a 1:1 mixture). The coprimary endpoints include day 28 neutralising antibody geometric mean titre (GMT) ratios (GMTRs) to omicron BA.5 and the ancestral strain, and seroresponse rates to BA.5, in the bivalent and prototype groups. These endpoints were calculated in the per-protocol analysis set, which was defined as participants who had received a vaccine dose, had baseline and day 28 immunogenicity data, and were PCR-negative for SARS-CoV-2, with no major protocol deviations. The primary objective was to determine the primary outcome (antibody responses), which consisted of three comparisons: superiority of the bivalent versus prototype vaccine for neutralising antibody GMT to BA.5 (ie, lower bound of the GMTR 95% CI >1·0); non-inferiority of neutralising antibody seroresponse rate to BA.5 (ie, lower bound of the seroresponse rate 95% CI >-5%); and non-inferiority of neutralising antibody GMT to the ancestral strain (ie, lower bound of GMTR 95% CI >0·67). This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT05372588.

FINDINGS

Between March 22, 2023 and May 2, 2023, 837 participants were screened for eligibility and 766 were randomly allocated to receive the BA.5 (n=255), prototype (n=252), or bivalent (n=259) vaccine. After accounting for exclusions due to participants being baseline SARS-CoV-2-positive, having previous infection, or protocol deviations, the per-protocol analysis set included 694 participants (236 in BA.5 group, 227 in prototype group, and 231 in bivalent group). In this interim analysis (maximum follow-up 35 days after the first dose), the bivalent group, compared with the prototype group, had superior neutralising antibody responses to BA.5 (GMT 1017·8 [95% CI 891·0-1162·6] vs 515·1 [450·4-589·0]; GMTR 2·0 [1·69-2·33]) and a non-inferior seroresponse rate to BA.5 at day 28 (39·8% [33·5-46·5] vs 12·3% [8·4-17·3]; difference 27·5% [19·8-35·0]). The bivalent group also had non-inferior neutralising antibody responses to the ancestral strain (GMTR 1·0 [0·84-1·20]), compared with the prototype group. All vaccines were similarly well tolerated.

INTERPRETATION

All three coprimary endpoints were met in part 2 of the ongoing 2019nCoV-311 study. These data support the development of monovalent and/or bivalent vaccines for the most currently circulating variants, to optimise protection. With no new safety findings, further investigation of omicron-based subvariant vaccines is supported by the evidence.

FUNDING

Novavax.

Validation of a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 microneutralization assay for evaluation of vaccine immunogenicity

As variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continue to emerge, assessment of vaccine immunogenicity remains a critical factor to support continued vaccination. To this end, an in vitro microneutralization (MN50) assay was validated to quantitate SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies against prototype and variant strains (Beta, Delta, Omicron BA.1, Omicron BA.5, and XBB.1.5) in human serum. For the prototype strain, the MN50 assay met acceptance criteria for inter-/intra-assay precision, specificity, linearity, and selectivity. The assay was robust against changes to virus/serum incubation time, cell seeding density, virus content per well, cell passage number, and serum interference. Analyte in serum samples was stable up to five freeze/thaw cycles and for up to 12 months of storage at -80 ± 10 °C. Similar results were observed for the variant-adapted MN50 assays. The conversion factor to convert assay result units to WHO international standard units (IU/mL) was determined to be 0.62 for the prototype strain. This MN50 assay will be useful for vaccine immunogenicity analyses in clinical trial samples, enabling assessment of vaccine immunogenicity for ancestral and variant strains as variant-adapted vaccines are developed.

Mosaic sarbecovirus nanoparticles elicit cross-reactive responses in pre-vaccinated animals

Immunization with mosaic-8b [60-mer nanoparticles presenting 8 SARS-like betacoronavirus (sarbecovirus) receptor-binding domains (RBDs)] elicits more broadly cross-reactive antibodies than homotypic SARS-CoV-2 RBD-only nanoparticles and protects against sarbecoviruses. To investigate original antigenic sin (OAS) effects on mosaic-8b efficacy, we evaluated effects of prior COVID-19 vaccinations in non-human primates and mice on anti-sarbecovirus responses elicited by mosaic-8b, admix-8b (8 homotypics), or homotypic SARS-CoV-2 immunizations, finding greatest cross-reactivity for mosaic-8b. As demonstrated by molecular fate-mapping in which antibodies from specific cohorts of B cells are differentially detected, B cells primed by WA1 spike mRNA-LNP dominated antibody responses after RBD-nanoparticle boosting. While mosaic-8b- and homotypic-nanoparticles boosted cross-reactive antibodies, de novo antibodies were predominantly induced by mosaic-8b, and these were specific for variant RBDs with increased identity to RBDs on mosaic-8b. These results inform OAS mechanisms and support using mosaic-8b to protect COVID-19 vaccinated/infected humans against as-yet-unknown SARS-CoV-2 variants and animal sarbecoviruses with human spillover potential.

Serological Correlates of Protection Induced by COVID-19 Vaccination in the Working Age Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

COVID-19 vaccines represent effective public health measures in contrasting the pandemic worldwide. However, protection at the individual-level, which is of crucial importance from an occupational health perspective, is commonly assessed by a serological correlate of protection (CoP) for SARS-CoV-2, which has not yet been determined. The emergence of variants of concern (VOCs) that have shown high rates of breakthrough infections has further complicated the understanding of immune protection against infection. To define a potential serological correlate of protection induced by the COVID-19 vaccination, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to summarize the evidence concerning the binding antibody concentration corresponding to a protective effect. Eighteen and four studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses, respectively. The protection against infection was shown for anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) titers ranging from 154 to 168.2 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL during the pre-Omicron period, while ranging from 1235 to 3035 BAU/mL in the Omicron period. Pooling the results from the studies concerning anti-RBD and anti-Spike antibody titer, we found a mean of 1341.5 BAU/mL and 1400.1 BAU/mL, respectively. These findings suggest that although a fixed serological threshold corresponding to protection against different SARS-CoV-2 variants is not yet definable, higher binding antibody concentrations are associated with increased protective effects.

Principles and therapeutic applications of adaptive immunity

Adaptive immunity provides protection against infectious and malignant diseases. These effects are mediated by lymphocytes that sense and respond with targeted precision to perturbations induced by pathogens and tissue damage. Here, we review key principles underlying adaptive immunity orchestrated by distinct T cell and B cell populations and their extensions to disease therapies. We discuss the intracellular and intercellular processes shaping antigen specificity and recognition in immune activation and lymphocyte functions in mediating effector and memory responses. We also describe how lymphocytes balance protective immunity against autoimmunity and immunopathology, including during immune tolerance, response to chronic antigen stimulation, and adaptation to non-lymphoid tissues in coordinating tissue immunity and homeostasis. Finally, we discuss extracellular signals and cell-intrinsic programs underpinning adaptive immunity and conclude by summarizing key advances in vaccination and engineering adaptive immune responses for therapeutic interventions. A deeper understanding of these principles holds promise for uncovering new means to improve human health.

Plant stanol consumption increases anti-COVID-19 antibody responses, independent of changes in serum cholesterol concentrations: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

People with overweight/obesity generally have impaired immune responses, resulting among others in increased risk of severe complaints and hospitalization after infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (COVID-19), as well as decreased antibody production after vaccinations. Plant stanol ester previously increased the combined IgM/IgG antibody titers toward a hepatitis A vaccination in patients with allergic asthma, but the underlying mechanism is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated whether plant stanol ester consumption improved the immune response in subjects with overweight/obesity after a COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was performed. Thirty-two subjects with overweight/obesity consumed products with added plant stanols (4 g/d; provided as plant stanol ester) or control ≥2 wk before receiving their COVID-19 vaccination until 4 wk after vaccination. Antibody titers were analyzed weekly and statistically analyzed using mixed models. Serum metabolic markers and cytokine profiles were also analyzed.

RESULTS

IgM concentrations against the COVID-19 Spike protein were increased in the plant stanol ester group compared with the control group, with the largest difference observed 2 wk after vaccination [31.2 (0.43, 62.1) BAU/mL, or +139%; Group × Time: P = 0.031]. Subjects that produced very low IgM antibodies produced, as expected, hardly any IgG antibodies. In those with IgG seroconversion, IgG Spike concentrations were also increased in the plant stanol ester group compared with the control group [71.3 (2.51, 140.1) BAU/mL; Group P = 0.043]. Stimulated cytokine concentrations decreased in the plant stanol ester group compared with the control group in all 3 cytokine domains (that is, proinflammatory, T helper [Th1]/Th17, and Th2/regulatory T cells). Between-group differences in serum LDL cholesterol or other metabolic markers were not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Consuming plant stanols (4 g/d) affects immune responses to COVID-19 vaccinations, translating into increased serum anti-COVID-19 IgM concentrations in subjects with overweight/obesity. Only in IgG seroconverted subjects, serum anti-COVID-19 IgG concentrations also increase. These effects are independent of reductions in LDL cholesterol. These results suggest that this high-risk group for COVID-19 complications could benefit from plant stanol consumption. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT04844346.

Beta-variant recombinant booster vaccine elicits broad cross-reactive neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 including Omicron variants

Background

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineage contains variants with multiple sequence mutations relative to the ancestral strain particularly in the viral spike gene. These mutations are associated inter alia with loss of neutralization sensitivity to sera generated by immunization with vaccines targeting ancestral strains or prior infection with circulating (non-Omicron) variants. Here we present a comparison of vaccine formulation elicited cross neutralization responses using two different assay readouts from a subpopulation of a Phase II/III clinical trial.

Methods

Human sera from a Phase II/III trial (NCT04762680) was collected and evaluated for neutralizing responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike antigen protein vaccines formulated with AS03 adjuvant, following a primary series of two-doses of ancestral strain vaccine in individuals who were previously unvaccinated or as an ancestral or variant strain booster vaccine among individuals previously vaccinated with the mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine.

Results

We report that a neutralizing response to Omicron BA.1 is induced by the two-dose primary series in 89% of SARS-CoV-2-seronegative individuals. A booster dose of each vaccine formulation raises neutralizing antibody titers that effectively neutralizes Omicron BA.1 and BA.4/5 variants. Responses are highest after the monovalent Beta variant booster and similar in magnitude to human convalescent plasma titers.

Conclusion

The findings of this study suggest the possibility to generate greater breadth of cross-neutralization to more recently emerging viral variants through use of a diverged spike vaccine in the form of a Beta variant booster vaccine.

Quantifying how single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine efficacy depends on Spike sequence features

In the ENSEMBLE randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (NCT04505722), estimated single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine efficacy (VE) was 56% against moderate to severe-critical COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 Spike sequences were determined from 484 vaccine and 1,067 placebo recipients who acquired COVID-19. In this set of prespecified analyses, we show that in Latin America, VE was significantly lower against Lambda vs. Reference and against Lambda vs. non-Lambda [family-wise error rate (FWER) p < 0.05]. VE differed by residue match vs. mismatch to the vaccine-insert at 16 amino acid positions (4 FWER p < 0.05; 12 q-value ≤ 0.20); significantly decreased with physicochemical-weighted Hamming distance to the vaccine-strain sequence for Spike, receptor-binding domain, N-terminal domain, and S1 (FWER p < 0.001); differed (FWER ≤ 0.05) by distance to the vaccine strain measured by 9 antibody-epitope escape scores and 4 NTD neutralization-impacting features; and decreased (p = 0.011) with neutralization resistance level to vaccinee sera. VE against severe-critical COVID-19 was stable across most sequence features but lower against the most distant viruses.

One-year follow-up of the immunogenicity and safety of a primary series of the NVX-CoV2373 (TAK-019) vaccine in healthy Japanese adults: Final report of a phase I/II randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In the interim report of this phase I/II randomized, placebo-controlled trial in Japanese adults, a two-dose primary series of NVX-CoV2373 (5 µg SARS-CoV-2 recombinant nanoparticle spike protein [rS]; 50 µg Matrix-M) administered 21 days apart induced robust anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses up to day 50 and had an acceptable safety profile.

METHODS

Following the double-blind phase of this study (day 1-50), participants were informed about their assignment to NVX-CoV2373 or placebo, and their reconsent was required for continuation in the open-label phase (day 51-387). This final report evaluated immunogenicity on days 202 and 387, and safety findings from the 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

In total, 131/150 participants in the NVX-CoV2373 arm and 4/50 in the placebo arm completed the study. The most common reason for discontinuation was because the participant requested a publicly available COVID-19 vaccine. At 6 months and 1 year after the second vaccine dose, both the geometric mean titres of anti-SARS-CoV-2 rS serum immunoglobulin G and serum neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strain were numerically higher than before the second dose. There were no deaths, adverse events (AEs) leading to participant withdrawal, or AEs of special interest throughout the trial. During follow-up, 2.0 % (1/50) of participants in the placebo arm reported COVID-19 approximately 1 month after the second vaccine dose (serious AE requiring hospitalisation, already presented in the interim report) and 2.7 % (4/150) in the NVX-CoV2373 arm after approximately 10 months (mild [2/4] or moderate [2/4] in severity).

DISCUSSION

A primary series of NVX-CoV2373 induced persistent immune responses up to 1 year after the second dose. The vaccine was well tolerated and had an acceptable safety profile. We believe our findings offer important insights for determining dosing intervals between primary and booster vaccinations.

Immunogenicity and safety of a second heterologous booster dose of NVX-CoV2373 (TAK-019) in healthy Japanese adults who had previously received a primary series of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine: Interim analysis report of a phase 3 open-label trial

BACKGROUND

The phase 3, single-arm, open-label TAK-019-3001 study assessed two heterologous booster doses of NVX-CoV2373 administered 5 months apart in healthy Japanese adults who had completed a primary series of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine 6-12 months previously. In the main part of this study, a first booster induced rapid and robust anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses, addressing waning immunity in participants.

METHODS

This interim analysis evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of a second booster in the extension part of this study including comparisons with the first booster. Immunogenicity was assessed on extension day (ED) 1 (before vaccination) and ED15. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events occurring in the 7 and 28 days, respectively, after vaccination were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 150 participants who received a first NVX-CoV2373 booster, 129 were administered a second booster on ED1. Participant characteristics were consistent between the main and extension parts of the study. Titres of anti-SARS-CoV-2 rS serum immunoglobulin G and serum neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strain at ED15 were 4.0- and 3.0-fold higher, respectively, than those observed 5 months after the first booster on ED1, and 3.0- and 1.4-fold higher, respectively, than those observed 14 days after the first booster on day 15. The proportions of participants who experienced solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs) in the 7 days after the second booster were 73.6 % and 51.2 %, respectively: most were of grade 2 severity or lower. Seven percent of participants experienced unsolicited AEs in the 28 days after the second booster: all were unrelated to the treatment. There were no deaths or AEs leading to study discontinuation.

DISCUSSION

A second heterologous NVX-CoV2373 booster in healthy Japanese adults induced more robust anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses than the first booster. The second booster was well tolerated. No new safety concerns were identified.

Antibody and B Cell Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination: The End of the Beginning

As the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved during the past years, interactions between human immune systems, rapidly mutating and selected SARS-CoV-2 viral variants, and effective vaccines have complicated the landscape of individual immunological histories. Here, we review some key findings for antibody and B cell-mediated immunity, including responses to the highly mutated omicron variants; immunological imprinting and other impacts of successive viral antigenic variant exposures on antibody and B cell memory; responses in secondary lymphoid and mucosal tissues and non-neutralizing antibody-mediated immunity; responses in populations vulnerable to severe disease such as those with cancer, immunodeficiencies, and other comorbidities, as well as populations showing apparent resistance to severe disease such as many African populations; and evidence of antibody involvement in postacute sequelae of infection or long COVID. Despite the initial phase of the pandemic ending, human populations will continue to face challenges presented by this unpredictable virus.

Broadly neutralizing antibody induction by non-stabilized SARS-CoV-2 Spike mRNA vaccination in nonhuman primates

Immunization with mRNA or viral vectors encoding spike with diproline substitutions (S-2P) has provided protective immunity against severe COVID-19 disease. How immunization with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike elicits neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) against difficult-to-neutralize variants of concern (VOCs) remains an area of great interest. Here, we compare immunization of macaques with mRNA vaccines expressing ancestral spike either including or lacking diproline substitutions, and show the diproline substitutions were not required for protection against SARS-CoV-2 challenge or induction of broadly neutralizing B cell lineages. One group of nAbs elicited by the ancestral spike lacking diproline substitutions targeted the outer face of the receptor binding domain (RBD), neutralized all tested SARS-CoV-2 VOCs including Omicron XBB.1.5, but lacked cross-Sarbecovirus neutralization. Structural analysis showed that the macaque broad SARS-CoV-2 VOC nAbs bound to the same epitope as a human broad SARS-CoV-2 VOC nAb, DH1193. Vaccine-induced antibodies that targeted the RBD inner face neutralized multiple Sarbecoviruses, protected mice from bat CoV RsSHC014 challenge, but lacked Omicron variant neutralization. Thus, ancestral SARS-CoV-2 spike lacking proline substitutions encoded by nucleoside-modified mRNA can induce B cell lineages binding to distinct RBD sites that either broadly neutralize animal and human Sarbecoviruses or recent Omicron VOCs.

Stochastic interventional approach to assessing immune correlates of protection: Application to the COVE messenger RNA-1273 vaccine trial

BACKGROUND

Stochastic interventional vaccine efficacy (SVE) analysis is a new approach to correlate of protection (CoP) analysis of a phase III trial that estimates how vaccine efficacy (VE) would change under hypothetical shifts of an immune marker.

METHODS

We applied nonparametric SVE methodology to the COVE trial of messenger RNA-1273 vs placebo to evaluate post-dose 2 pseudovirus neutralizing antibody (nAb) titer against the D614G strain as a CoP against COVID-19. Secondly, we evaluated the ability of these results to predict VE against variants based on shifts of geometric mean titers to variants vs D614G. Prediction accuracy was evaluated by 13 validation studies, including 12 test-negative designs.

RESULTS

SVE analysis of COVE supported post-dose 2 D614G titer as a CoP: estimated VE ranged from 66.9% (95% confidence interval: 36.2, 82.8%) to 99.3% (99.1, 99.4%) at 10-fold decreased or increased titer shifts, respectively. The SVE estimates only weakly predicted variant-specific VE estimates (concordance correlation coefficient 0.062 for post 2-dose VE).

CONCLUSION

SVE analysis of COVE supports nAb titer as a CoP for messenger RNA vaccines. Predicting variant-specific VE proved difficult due to many limitations. Greater anti-Omicron titers may be needed for high-level protection against Omicron vs anti-D614G titers needed for high-level protection against pre-Omicron COVID-19.

Antibody response to symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant viruses, December 2021-June 2022

To describe humoral immune responses to symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, we assessed immunoglobulin G binding antibody levels using a commercial multiplex bead assay against SARS-CoV-2 ancestral spike protein receptor binding domain (RBD) and nucleocapsid protein (N). We measured binding antibody units per mL (BAU/mL) during acute illness within 5 days of illness onset and during convalescence in 105 ambulatory patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection with Omicron variant viruses. Comparing acute- to convalescent phase antibody concentrations, geometric mean anti-N antibody concentrations increased 47-fold from 5.5 to 259 BAU/mL. Anti-RBD antibody concentrations increased 2.5-fold from 1258 to 3189 BAU/mL.

XBB.1.5 spike protein COVID-19 vaccine induces broadly neutralizing and cellular immune responses against EG.5.1 and emerging XBB variants

Monovalent SARS-CoV-2 Prototype (Wuhan-Hu-1) and bivalent (Prototype + BA.4/5) COVID-19 vaccines have demonstrated a waning of vaccine-mediated immunity highlighted by lower neutralizing antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB sub-variants. The reduction of humoral immunity due to the rapid evolution of SARS-CoV-2 has signaled the need for an update to vaccine composition. A strain change for all authorized/approved vaccines to a monovalent composition with Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 has been supported by the WHO, EMA, and FDA. Here, we demonstrate that immunization with a monovalent recombinant spike protein COVID-19 vaccine (Novavax, Inc.) based on the subvariant XBB.1.5 induces neutralizing antibodies against XBB.1.5, XBB.1.16, XBB.2.3, EG.5.1, and XBB.1.16.6 subvariants, promotes higher pseudovirus neutralizing antibody titers than bivalent (Prototype + XBB.1.5) vaccine, induces SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific Th1-biased CD4 + T-cell responses against XBB subvariants, and robustly boosts antibody responses in mice and nonhuman primates primed with a variety of monovalent and bivalent vaccines. Together, these data support updating the Novavax vaccine to a monovalent XBB.1.5 formulation for the 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

Distinct receptor binding domain IgG thresholds predict protective host immunity across SARS-CoV-2 variants and time

SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibodies provide protection against COVID-19. Evidence from early vaccine trials suggested binding antibody thresholds could serve as surrogate markers of neutralising capacity, but whether these thresholds predict sufficient neutralising capacity against variants of concern (VOCs), and whether this is impacted by vaccine or infection history remains unclear. Here we analyse individuals recovered from, vaccinated or with hybrid immunity against SARS-CoV-2. An NT50 ≥ 100 IU confers protection in vaccine trials, however, as VOC induce a reduction in NT50, we use NT50 ≥ 1000 IU as a cut off for WT NT50 that would retain neutralisation against VOC. In unvaccinated convalescent participants, a receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG of 456 BAU/mL predicts an NT50 against WT of 1000 IU with an accuracy of 80% (95%CI 73-86%). This threshold maintains accuracy in determining loss of protective immunity against VOC in two vaccinated cohorts. It predicts an NT50 < 100 IU against Beta with an accuracy of 80% (95%CI 67-89%) in 2 vaccine dose recipients. In booster vaccine recipients with a history of COVID-19 (hybrid immunity), accuracy is 87% (95%CI 77-94%) in determining an NT50 of <100 IU against BA.5. This analysis provides a discrete threshold that could be used in future clinical studies.

The breadth of the neutralizing antibody response to original SARS-CoV-2 infection is linked to the presence of Long COVID symptoms

The associations between longitudinal dynamics and the breadth of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody (nAb) response with various Long COVID phenotypes before vaccination are not known. The capacity of antibodies to cross-neutralize a variety of viral variants may be associated with ongoing pathology and persistent symptoms. We measured longitudinal neutralizing and cross-neutralizing antibody responses to pre- and post-SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants in participants infected early in the COVID-19 pandemic, before widespread rollout of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Cross-sectional regression models adjusted for clinical covariates and longitudinal mixed-effects models were used to determine the impact of the breadth and rate of decay of neutralizing responses on the development of Long COVID symptoms, as well as Long COVID phenotypes. We identified several novel relationships between SARS-CoV-2 antibody neutralization and the presence of Long COVID symptoms. Specifically, we show that, although nAb responses to the original, infecting strain of SARS-CoV-2 were not associated with Long COVID in cross-sectional analyses, cross-neutralization ID50 levels to the Omicron BA.5 variant approximately 4 months following acute infection was independently and significantly associated with greater odds of Long COVID and with persistent gastrointestinal and neurological symptoms. Longitudinal modeling demonstrated significant associations in the overall levels and rates of decay of neutralization capacity with Long COVID phenotypes. A higher proportion of participants had antibodies capable of neutralizing Omicron BA.5 compared with BA.1 or XBB.1.5 variants. Our findings suggest that relationships between various immune responses and Long COVID are likely complex but may involve the breadth of antibody neutralization responses.

Immunogenicity and safety of AZD2816, a beta (B.1.351) variant COVID-19 vaccine, and AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) as third-dose boosters for previously vaccinated adults: a multicentre, randomised, partly double-blinded, phase 2/3 non-inferiority immunobridging study in the UK and Poland

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate AZD2816, a variant-updated COVID-19 vaccine expressing the full-length SARS-CoV-2 beta (B.1.351) variant spike protein that is otherwise similar to AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19), and AZD1222 as third-dose boosters.

METHODS

This phase 2/3, partly double-blinded, randomised, active-controlled study was done at 19 sites in the UK and four in Poland. Adult participants who had received a two-dose AZD1222 or mRNA vaccine primary series were randomly assigned by means of an Interactive Response Technology-Randomisation and Trial Supply Management system (1:1 within each primary-series cohort, stratified by age, sex, and comorbidities) to receive AZD1222 or AZD2816 (intramuscular injection; 5 × 1010 viral particles). Participants, investigators, and all sponsor staff members involved in study conduct were masked to randomisation. AZD1222 and AZD2816 doses were prepared by unmasked study staff members. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and humoral immunogenicity (non-inferiority of day-29 pseudovirus neutralising antibody geometric mean titre [GMT] against ancestral SARS-CoV-2: AZD1222 booster vs AZD1222 primary series [historical controls]; margin 0·67; SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04973449, and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between June 27 and Sept 30, 2021, 1394 participants of the 1741 screened were randomly assigned to AZD1222 or AZD2816 following an AZD1222 (n=373, n=377) or mRNA vaccine (n=322, n=322) primary series. In SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants receiving AZD1222 or AZD2816, 78% and 80% (AZD1222 primary series) and 90% and 93%, respectively (mRNA vaccine primary series) reported solicited adverse events to the end of day 8; 2%, 2%, 1%, and 1% had serious adverse events and 12%, 12%, 10%, and 11% had adverse events of special interest, respectively, to the end of day 180. The primary immunogenicity non-inferiority endpoint was met: day-29 neutralising antibody GMT ratios (ancestral SARS-CoV-2) were 1·02 (95% CI 0·90-1·14) and 3·47 (3·09-3·89) with AZD1222 booster versus historical controls (AZD1222 and mRNA vaccine primary series, respectively). Responses against beta were greater with AZD2816 versus AZD1222 (GMT ratios, AZD1222, mRNA vaccine primary series 1·84 [1·63-2·08], 2·22 [1·99-2·47]).

INTERPRETATION

Both boosters were well tolerated, with immunogenicity against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 similar to AZD1222 primary-series vaccination. AZD2816 gave greater immune responses against beta versus AZD1222.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Clinical Utility of SARS-CoV-2 Serological Testing and Defining a Correlate of Protection

Herein, we review established clinical use cases for SARS-CoV-2 antibody measures, which include diagnosis of recent prior infection, isolating high titer convalescent plasma, diagnosing multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), and booster dosing in the immunosuppressed and other populations. We then address whether an antibody correlate of protection (CoP) for SARS-CoV-2 has been successfully defined with the following considerations: Antibody responses in the immunocompetent, vaccine type, variants, use of binding antibody tests vs. neutralization tests, and endpoint measures. In the transition from the COVID-19 pandemic to endemic, there has been much interest in defining an antibody CoP. Due to the high mutability of respiratory viruses and our current knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 variants defining a CoP for prevention of infection is unrealistic. However, a CoP may be defined for prevention of severe disease requiring hospitalization and/or death. Most SARS-CoV-2 CoP research has focused on neutralization measurements. However, there can be significant differences in neutralization test methods, and disparate responses to new variants depending on format. Furthermore, neutralization assays are often impractical for high throughput applications (e.g., assessing humoral immune response in populations or large cohorts). Nevertheless, CoP studies using neutralization measures are reviewed to determine where there is consensus. Alternatively, binding antibody tests could be used to define a CoP. Binding antibody assays tend to be highly automatable, high throughput, and therefore practical for large population applications. Again, we review studies for consensus on binding antibody responses to vaccines, focusing on standardized results. Binding antibodies directed against the S1 receptor binding domain (S1-RBD) of the viral spike protein can provide a practical, indirect measure of neutralization. Initially, a response for S1-RBD antibodies may be selected that reflects the peak response in immunocompetent populations and may serve as a target for booster dosing in the immunocompromised. From existing studies reporting peak S1-RBD responses in standardized units, an approximate range of 1372-2744 BAU/mL for mRNA and recombinant protein vaccines was extracted that could serve as an initial CoP target. This target would need to be confirmed and potentially adjusted for updated vaccines, and almost certainly for other vaccine formats (i.e., viral vector). Alternatively, a threshold or response could be defined based on outcomes over time (i.e., prevention of severe disease). We also discuss the precedent for clinical measurement of antibodies for vaccine-preventable diseases (e.g., hepatitis B). Lastly, cellular immunity is briefly addressed for its importance in the nature and durability of protection.

Stochastic Interventional Vaccine Efficacy and Principal Surrogate Analyses of Antibody Markers as Correlates of Protection against Symptomatic COVID-19 in the COVE mRNA-1273 Trial

The COVE trial randomized participants to receive two doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine or placebo on Days 1 and 29 (D1, D29). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike IgG binding antibodies (bAbs), anti-receptor binding domain IgG bAbs, 50% inhibitory dilution neutralizing antibody (nAb) titers, and 80% inhibitory dilution nAb titers were measured at D29 and D57. We assessed these markers as correlates of protection (CoPs) against COVID-19 using stochastic interventional vaccine efficacy (SVE) analysis and principal surrogate (PS) analysis, frameworks not used in our previous COVE immune correlates analyses. By SVE analysis, hypothetical shifts of the D57 Spike IgG distribution from a geometric mean concentration (GMC) of 2737 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL (estimated vaccine efficacy (VE): 92.9% (95% CI: 91.7%, 93.9%)) to 274 BAU/mL or to 27,368 BAU/mL resulted in an overall estimated VE of 84.2% (79.0%, 88.1%) and 97.6% (97.4%, 97.7%), respectively. By binary marker PS analysis of Low and High subgroups (cut-point: 2094 BAU/mL), the ignorance interval (IGI) and estimated uncertainty interval (EUI) for VE were [85%, 90%] and (78%, 93%) for Low compared to [95%, 96%] and (92%, 97%) for High. By continuous marker PS analysis, the IGI and 95% EUI for VE at the 2.5th percentile (519.4 BAU/mL) vs. at the 97.5th percentile (9262.9 BAU/mL) of D57 Spike IgG concentration were [92.6%, 93.4%] and (89.2%, 95.7%) vs. [94.3%, 94.6%] and (89.7%, 97.0%). Results were similar for other D29 and D57 markers. Thus, the SVE and PS analyses additionally support all four markers at both time points as CoPs.

The role of vaccination route with an adenovirus-vectored vaccine in protection, viral control, and transmission in the SARS-CoV-2/K18-hACE2 mouse infection model

Introduction

Vaccination is the most effective mechanism to prevent severe COVID-19. However, breakthrough infections and subsequent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 remain a significant problem. Intranasal vaccination has the potential to be more effective in preventing disease and limiting transmission between individuals as it induces potent responses at mucosal sites.

Methods

Utilizing a replication-deficient adenovirus serotype 5-vectored vaccine expressing the SARS-CoV-2 RBD (AdCOVID) in homozygous and heterozygous transgenic K18-hACE2, we investigated the impact of the route of administration on vaccine immunogenicity, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and survival.

Results

Mice vaccinated with AdCOVID via the intramuscular or intranasal route and subsequently challenged with SARS-CoV-2 showed that animals vaccinated intranasally had improved cellular and mucosal antibody responses. Additionally, intranasally vaccinated animals had significantly better viremic control, and protection from lethal infection compared to intramuscularly vaccinated animals. Notably, in a novel transmission model, intranasal vaccination reduced viral transmission to naïve co-housed mice compared to intramuscular vaccination.

Discussion

Our data provide convincing evidence for the use of intranasal vaccination in protecting against SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission.

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine-Induced Immune Responses Among Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients

Background

Although severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination reduces the risk and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), several variables may impact the humoral response among patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted among SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated HSCT recipients between 2020 and 2022 at a single center in Boston, Massachusetts. Patients age ≥18 years who received doses of Pfizer, Moderna, or J&J vaccines were included. Anti-spike (S) immunoglobulin G (IgG) titer levels were measured using the Roche assay. Responders (≥0.8 U/mL) and nonresponders (<0.8 U/mL) were categorized and analyzed. Multivariable linear and logistic regression were used to estimate the correlation coefficient and odds ratio of response magnitude and status.

Results

Of 152 HSCT recipients, 141 (92.8%) were responders, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) anti-S IgG titer of 2500 (107.9-2500) U/mL at a median (IQR) of 80.5 (36-153.5) days from last dose, regardless of the number of doses received. Higher quantitative titers were associated with receipt of more vaccine doses (coeff, 205.79; 95% CI, 30.10 to 381.47; P = .022), being female (coeff, 343.5; 95% CI, -682.6 to -4.4; P = .047), being younger (<65 years; coeff, 365.2; 95% CI, -711.3 to 19.1; P = .039), and not being on anti-CD20 therapy (coeff, -1163.7; 95% CI, -1717.7 to -609.7; P = .001). Being male (odds ratio [OR], 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.93; P = .04) and being on anti-CD20 therapy (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.70; P = .016) were associated with nonresponse.

Conclusions

Overall, most HSCT recipients had high SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses. More vaccine doses improved the magnitude of immune responses. Anti-S IgG monitoring may be useful for identifying attenuated vaccine-induced responses.

Immunogenicity and safety of a fourth homologous dose of NVX-CoV2373

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants has significantly reduced the efficacy of some approved vaccines. A fourth dose of NVX-CoV2373 (5 µg SARS-CoV-2 recombinant spike [rS] protein + 50 µg Matrix-M™ adjuvant; Novavax, Gaithersburg, MD) was evaluated to determine induction of cross-reactive antibodies to variants of concern. A phase II randomized study (NCT04368988) recruited participants in Australia and the United States to assess a primary series of NVX-CoV2373 followed by two booster doses (third and fourth doses at 6-month intervals) in adults 18-84 years of age. The primary series was administered when the SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strain was prevalent and the third and fourth doses while the Alpha and Delta variants were prevalent in AUS and US. Local/systemic reactogenicity was assessed the day of vaccination and for 6 days thereafter. Unsolicited adverse events (AEs) were reported. Immunogenicity was measured before, and 14 days after, fourth dose administration, using anti-spike serum immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralization assays against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain and Omicron sublineages. Among 1283 enrolled participants, 258 were randomized to receive the two-dose primary series, of whom 104 received a third dose, and 45 received a fourth dose of NVX-CoV2373. The incidence of local/systemic reactogenicity events increased after the first three doses of NVX-CoV2373 and leveled off after dose 4. Unsolicited AEs were reported in 9 % of participants after dose 4 (none of which were severe or serious). Anti-rS IgG levels and neutralization antibody titers increased following booster doses to a level approximately four-fold higher than that observed after the primary series, with a progressively narrowed gap in response between the ancestral strain and Omicron BA.5. A fourth dose of NVX-CoV2373 enhanced immunogenicity for ancestral and variant SARS-CoV-2 strains without increasing reactogenicity, indicating that updates to the vaccine composition may not be currently warranted.

Comparing antibody assays as correlates of protection against COVID-19 in the COVE mRNA-1273 vaccine efficacy trial

The best assay or marker to define mRNA-1273 vaccine-induced antibodies as a correlate of protection (CoP) is unclear. In the COVE trial, participants received two doses of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine or placebo. We previously assessed IgG binding antibodies to the spike protein (spike IgG) or receptor binding domain (RBD IgG) and pseudovirus neutralizing antibody 50 or 80% inhibitory dilution titer measured on day 29 or day 57, as correlates of risk (CoRs) and CoPs against symptomatic COVID-19 over 4 months after dose. Here, we assessed a new marker, live virus 50% microneutralization titer (LV-MN50), and compared and combined markers in multivariable analyses. LV-MN50 was an inverse CoR, with a hazard ratio of 0.39 (95% confidence interval, 0.19 to 0.83) at day 29 and 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 1.04) at day 57 per 10-fold increase. In multivariable analyses, pseudovirus neutralization titers and anti-spike binding antibodies performed best as CoRs; combining antibody markers did not improve correlates. Pseudovirus neutralization titer was the strongest independent correlate in a multivariable model. Overall, these results supported pseudovirus neutralizing and binding antibody assays as CoRs and CoPs, with the live virus assay as a weaker correlate in this sample set. Day 29 markers performed as well as day 57 markers as CoPs, which could accelerate immunogenicity and immunobridging studies.

An update on lateral flow immunoassay for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies

Over the last three years, after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented number of novel diagnostic tests have been developed. Assays to evaluate the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 have been widely considered as part of the control strategy. The lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), to detect both IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2, has been widely studied as a point-of-care (POC) test. Compared to laboratory tests, LFIAs are faster, cheaper and user-friendly, thus available also in areas with low economic resources. Soon after the onset of the pandemic, numerous kits for rapid antibody detection were put on the market with an emergency use authorization. However, since then, scientists have tried to better define the accuracy of these tests and their usefulness in different contexts. In fact, while during the first phase of the pandemic LFIAs for antibody detection were auxiliary to molecular tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19, successively these tests became a tool of seroprevalence surveillance to address infection control policies. When in 2021 a massive vaccination campaign was implemented worldwide, the interest in LFIA reemerged due to the need to establish the extent and the longevity of immunization in the vaccinated population and to establish priorities to guide health policies in low-income countries with limited access to vaccines. Here, we summarize the accuracy, the advantages and limits of LFIAs as POC tests for antibody detection, highlighting the efforts that have been made to improve this technology over the last few years.

Safety, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of the NVX-CoV2373 COVID-19 Vaccine in Adolescents: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Greater than 20% of cases and 0.4% of deaths from COVID-19 occur in children. Following demonstration of the safety and efficacy of the adjuvanted, recombinant spike protein vaccine NVX-CoV2373 in adults, the PREVENT-19 trial immediately expanded to adolescents.

Objective

To evaluate the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of NVX-CoV2373 in adolescents.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The NVX-CoV2373 vaccine was evaluated in adolescents aged 12 to 17 years in an expansion of PREVENT-19, a phase 3, randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled multicenter clinical trial in the US. Participants were enrolled from April 26 to June 5, 2021, and the study is ongoing. A blinded crossover was implemented after 2 months of safety follow-up to offer active vaccine to all participants. Key exclusion criteria included known previous laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection or known immunosuppression. Of 2304 participants assessed for eligibility, 57 were excluded and 2247 were randomized.

Interventions

Participants were randomized 2:1 to 2 intramuscular injections of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo, 21 days apart.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Serologic noninferiority of neutralizing antibody responses compared with those in young adults (aged 18-25 years) in PREVENT-19, protective efficacy against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, and assessment of reactogenicity and safety.

Results

Among 2232 participants (1487 NVX-CoV2373 and 745 placebo recipients), the mean (SD) age was 13.8 (1.4) years, 1172 (52.5%) were male, 1660 (74.4%) were White individuals, and 359 (16.1%) had had a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline. After vaccination, the ratio of neutralizing antibody geometric mean titers in adolescents compared with those in young adults was 1.5 (95% CI, 1.3-1.7). Twenty mild COVID-19 cases occurred after a median of 64 (IQR, 57-69) days of follow-up, including 6 among NVX-CoV2373 recipients (incidence, 2.90 [95% CI, 1.31-6.46] cases per 100 person-years) and 14 among placebo recipients (incidence, 14.20 [95% CI, 8.42-23.93] cases per 100 person-years), yielding a vaccine efficacy of 79.5% (95% CI, 46.8%-92.1%). Vaccine efficacy for the Delta variant (the only viral variant identified by sequencing [n = 11]) was 82.0% (95% CI, 32.4%-95.2%). Reactogenicity was largely mild to moderate and transient, with a trend toward greater frequency after the second dose of NVX-CoV2373. Serious adverse events were rare and balanced between treatments. No adverse events led to study discontinuation.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this randomized clinical trial indicate that NVX-CoV2373 is safe, immunogenic, and efficacious in preventing COVID-19, including the predominant Delta variant, in adolescents.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04611802.

The Breadth of the Neutralizing Antibody Response to Original SARS-CoV-2 Infection is Linked to the Presence of Long COVID Symptoms

Background

The associations between longitudinal dynamics and the breadth of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody response with various Long COVID (LC) phenotypes prior to vaccination are not known. The capacity of antibodies to cross neutralize a variety of viral variants may be associated with ongoing pathology and persistent symptoms.

Methods

We measured longitudinal neutralizing and cross-neutralizing antibody responses to pre- and post-SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants in participants infected during the early waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, prior to wide-spread rollout of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Cross sectional regression models adjusted for various clinical covariates and longitudinal mixed effects models were used to determine the impact of the breadth and rate of decay of neutralizing responses on the development of Long COVID symptoms in general, as well as LC phenotypes.

Results

We identified several novel relationships between SARS-CoV-2 antibody neutralization and the presence of LC symptoms. Specifically, we show that, although neutralizing antibody responses to the original, infecting strain of SARS-CoV-2 were not associated with LC in cross-sectional analyses, cross-neutralization ID50 levels to the Omicron BA.5 variant approximately 4 months following acute infection was independently and significantly associated with greater odds of LC and with persistent gastrointestinal and neurological symptoms. Longitudinal modeling demonstrated significant associations in the overall levels and rates of decay of neutralization capacity with LC phenotypes. A higher proportion of participants had antibodies capable of neutralizing Omicron BA.5 compared with BA.1 or XBB.1.5 variants.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that relationships between various immune responses and LC are likely complex but may involve the breadth of antibody neutralization responses.