Clinical correlates of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody profiles in Spanish COVID-19 patients from a high incidence region

Prognostic Value of SARS-CoV-2 Anti-RBD IgG Antibody Quantitation on Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

Background

Antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2 can be used as an indicator of recent or past vaccination or infection. However, the prognostic value of antibodies targeting the receptor binding protein (anti-RBD) in hospitalized patients is not widely reported.

Purpose

Determine prognostic impact of SARS-CoV-2 antibody quantification at the time of admission on clinical outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Methods

We conducted a pilot observational study on patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection to determine the prognostic impact of antibody quantitation within the first two days of admission. Anti-nucleocapsid IgG (anti-N) and Anti-RBD levels were measured. Anti-RBD level of 500 AU/mL was used as a cutoff to stratify patients. Spearman's rank Coefficient (rs) was used to demonstrate association.

Results

Of the 26 patients included, those who were vaccinated more frequently tested positive for Anti-RBD (100% vs 46.2%, P = 0.005) with higher median titer level (623 vs 0, P = 0.011) compared to unvaccinated patients. Anti-N positivity was more frequently seen in unvaccinated patients (53.9% vs 7.7%, P = 0.03). Anti-RBD levels >500 were associated with lower overall hospital length of stay (LOS)(5 vs 10 days, P = 0.046). The analysis employing a Spearman Rank coefficient demonstrated a strong negative correlation between anti-S titer and LOS (rs=-.515, p = 0.007) and a moderate negative correlation with oxygen needs (rs =-.401, p = 0.042).

Conclusion

Anti-RBD IgG levels were associated with lower LOS and oxygen needs during hospitalization. Further studies are needed to determine if levels on admission can be used as a prognostic indicator.

The temporal course of T- and B-cell responses to vaccination with BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the response of the immune system (and its influencing factors) to vaccination with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273.

METHODS

531 vaccinees, recruited from healthcare professionals, donated samples before, in between, and after the administration of the two doses of the vaccine. T- and B-cell responses were examined via interferon-γ (IFN-γ) release assay, and antibodies against different epitopes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (S1 and NCP) were detected via ELISA and surrogate neutralization assay. Results were correlated with influencing factors such as age, sex, prior infection, vaccine received (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273), and immunosuppression. Furthermore, antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) were measured to screen for autoimmune responses following vaccination with an mRNA vaccine.

RESULTS

No markers of immunity against SARS-CoV-2 were found before the first vaccination. Two weeks after it, specific responses against SARS-CoV-2 were already measurable (median ± median absolute deviation (MAD): anti-S1 IgG 195.5 ± 172.7 BAU/mL; IgA 6.7 ± 4.9 OD; surrogate neutralization 39 ± 23.7%), and were significantly increased two weeks after the second dose (anti-S1 IgG 3744 ± 2571.4 BAU/mL; IgA 12 ± 0 OD; surrogate neutralization 100 ± 0%, IFN-γ 1897.2 ± 886.7 mIU/mL). Responses were stronger for younger participants (this difference decreasing after the second dose). Further influences were previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (causing significantly stronger responses after the first dose compared to unexposed individuals (p ≤ 0.0001)) and the vaccine received (significantly stronger reactions for recipients of mRNA-1273 after both doses, p < 0.05-0.0001). Some forms of immunosuppression significantly impeded the immune response to the vaccination (with no observable immune response in three immunosuppressed participants). There was no significant induction of ANAs by the vaccination (no change in qualitative ANA results (p 0.2592) nor ANA titres (p 0.08) from pre-to post-vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Both vaccines elicit strong and specific immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 which become detectable one week (T-cell response) or two weeks (B-cell response) after the first dose.

The Impact of Anti-rheumatic Drugs on the Seroprevalence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in a Cohort of Patients With Inflammatory Arthritis: The MAINSTREAM Study

Objectives

Given the high occurrence of asymptomatic subsets, the true prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in rheumatic patients is still underestimated. This study aims to evaluate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) patients receiving immunomodulatory drugs.

Methods

All consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis or spondyloarthritis receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) evaluated between 4th May and 16th June 2020 were included. All participants were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgG, IgM, IgA) by ELISA and were questioned about previous COVID-19 symptoms and clinical course. Results were compared with healthy population from the same region and with a control group of healthy subjects diagnosed with confirmed COVID-19.

Results

The study population includes 358 patients. The overall prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (18.4%) was higher than prevalence rate based on swab-positivity (1.12%) or clinically suspected cases (10.6%), but consistent with seroprevalence observed in the healthy population. Among seropositive patients 58% were asymptomatic. Mean anti-SARS-CoV-2 titer was comparable with the control group. No differences in seroprevalence were observed according to age, sex, rheumatic disease and treatment with conventional, biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs, whereas glucocorticoids and comorbidities resulted in higher seroprevalence rate.

Conclusions

The results of this study are reassuring about the low impact of RMDs and immunomodulatory therapies on the risk and clinical course of COVID-19 and on humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antigens as Targets of Antibody Responses

Humoral immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during acute infection and convalescence has been widely studied since March 2020. In this review, the authors summarize literature on humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 antigens with a focus on spike, nucleocapsid, and the receptor-binding domain as targets of antibody responses. They highlight serologic studies during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and discuss the clinical relevance of antibody levels in COVID-19 progression. Antibody responses in pediatric COVID-19 patients are also reviewed. Finally, the authors discuss antibody responses during convalescence and their role in protection from SARS-CoV-2 reinfection.

Antibody Response to SARS-CoV-2 in Relation to the Contributing Factors in COVID-19 Patients

Human health has always been challenged by variety of viral infections, but severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has surpassed all previous viral diseases and emerged as a major health challenge around the globe. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 and serological assay provides a compliment to diagnosis after second week of infection. The aim of the study is the characterization of antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in the blood sample of diagnosed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, and its potential association with factors such as age, gender, time, and symptoms. Serum from 248 confirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients was investigated for antibodies. Elecsys anti-SARS chemiluminescent immune assay was performed for the detection of nucleocapsid-specific antibodies. Association of antibody response with gender, age, and time after onset of symptoms was analyzed. Among 248 PCR positive SARS-CoV-2 patients, 214 (86.3%) have virus-specific antibody signals. Antibodies positivity rate was higher in male patient patients as compared with female patients (90.8% vs. 79.2%, p = 0.009). Patients aged 30-40 years had the highest antibody positivity rate as compared with other groups (89.10%, p = 0.04). Patients age group >60 years had a lower positivity rate (75%, p = 0.04). The increasing trend in the antibodies detection with time was observed, maximum positive antibodies response rate observed at 8 weeks. Patients were categorized on the basis of clinical symptoms into asymptomatic, mild, and moderate; 17.7% were asymptomatic, 60.5% showed mild symptoms, and 21.8% showed moderate symptoms of the disease. Males were seen to be more asymptomatic as compared with females (i.e., 59.1% to 40.9%). The serological test for SARS-CoV-2 has a high sensitivity at >2 weeks after the positive PCR result or onset of illness. In addition, the serological response differs among patients based on gender, age, as well as time between the onset of symptoms or PCR confirmation and sample collection for the study of antibody response.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in general practice in Ireland: a seroprevalence study

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody testing in community settings may help us better understand the immune response to this virus and, therefore, help guide public health efforts.

Aim

To conduct a seroprevalence study of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies in Irish GP clinics.

Design & setting

Participants were 172 staff and 799 patients from 15 general practices in the Midwest region of Ireland.

Method

This seroprevalence study utilised two manufacturers’ point-of-care (POC) SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin M (IgM)—IgG combined antibody tests, which were offered to patients and staff in general practice from 15 June to 10 July 2020.

Results

IgG seroprevalence was 12.6% in patients attending general practice and 11.1% in staff working in general practice, with administrative staff having the lowest seroprevalence at 2.5% and nursing staff having the highest at 17.6%. Previous symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 and history of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test were associated with higher seroprevalence. IgG antibodies were detected in approximately 80% of participants who had a previous PCR-confirmed infection. Average length of time between participants’ positive PCR test and positive IgG antibody test was 83 days.

Conclusion

Patients and healthcare staff in general practice in Ireland had relatively high rates of IgG to SARS-CoV-2 compared with the national average between 15 June and 10 July 2020 (1.7%). Four-fifths of participants with a history of confirmed COVID-19 disease still had detectable antibodies an average of 12 weeks post-infection. While not proof of immunity, SARS-CoV-2 POC testing can be used to estimate IgG seroprevalence in general practice settings.

Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction cycle threshold values vis-à-vis anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies from a high incidence region

Objectives

To examine the relationship between antibody status and cycle threshold (Ct) values, the prognostic value of the latter for COVID-19 patients, and the inter-assay comparability of SARS-CoV-2 Ct values.

Methods

In 347 COVID-19 inpatients, SARS-CoV-2 Ct values (via reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction) on admission were compared between 2 assays and correlated with the antibody response (in the course of the disease), the clinical course and the time since onset of symptoms.

Results

Ct values for 2 of 3 target genes showed significant differences between the 2 assays used (P=0.012 and P<0.0001). Ct values were significantly higher for antibody positive patients (P<0.0001) and positively correlated with the amount of time since onset of symptoms (R: 0.332–0.363; P<0.001). Patients with fatal outcomes showed higher viral loads than survivors (P<0.0001).

Conclusions

Ct values depend strongly on assay used and target gene examined and should not be used as quantitative values to guide therapeutic or diagnostic decisions. The inverse association between antibody status and viral load suggests that antibodies contribute to the elimination of the virus, independent of the outcome, which is influenced by the viral load on admission and might depend more strongly on other parts of the immune response.