Evaluation and deployment of isotype-specific salivary antibody assays for detecting previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adults

Correlates of Nucleocapsid Antibodies and a Combination of Spike and Nucleocapsid Antibodies Against Protection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection During the Omicron XBB.1.16/EG.5-Predominant Wave

Background

We aimed to examine the association among nucleocapsid (N) antibodies, a combination of N and spike (S) antibodies, and protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection.

Methods

We conducted a prospective cohort study among staff at a national medical research center in Tokyo and followed them for the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection between June and September 2023 (Omicron XBB.1.16/EG.5 wave). At baseline, participants donated blood samples to measure N- and S-specific antibodies. Cox regression was used to estimate the hazard ratio and protection ([1 - hazard ratio] × 100) against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection across these antibody levels.

Results

Among participants with previous infection, higher pre-reinfection N antibodies were associated with a lower risk of reinfection, even after adjusting S antibody levels (P < .01 for trend). Estimation of the protection matrix for N and S antibodies revealed that high levels in N and S antibodies conferred robust protection (>90%) against subsequent infection. In addition, a pattern of low pre-reinfection N antibodies but high vaccine-enhanced S antibodies showed high protection (>80%).

Conclusions

Pre-reinfection N antibody levels correlated with protection against reinfection, independent of S antibodies. If the N antibodies were low, vaccine-boosted S antibodies might enhance the reinfection protection.

The impact of vaccine type and booster dose on the magnitude and breadth of SARS-CoV-2-specific systemic and mucosal antibodies among COVID-19 vaccine recipients

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on global health and economy, which was significantly mitigated by the availability of COVID-19 vaccines. The levels of systemic and mucosal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 correlated with protection. However, there is limited data on how vaccine type and booster doses affect mucosal antibody response, and how the breadth of mucosal and systemic antibodies compares. In this cross-sectional study, we compared the magnitude and breadth of mucosal and systemic antibodies in 108 individuals who received either the BNT162b2 (Pfizer) or CoronaVac (SinoVac) vaccine. We found that BNT162b2 (vs CoronaVac) or booster doses (vs two doses) were significantly associated with higher serum IgG levels, but were not significantly associated with salivary IgA levels, regardless of prior infection status. Among non-infected individuals, serum IgG, serum IgA and salivary IgG levels were significantly higher against the ancestral strain than the Omicron BA.2 sublineage, but salivary IgA levels did not differ between the strains. Salivary IgA had the weakest correlation with serum IgG (r = 0.34) compared with salivary IgG (r = 0.63) and serum IgA (r = 0.60). Our findings suggest that intramuscular COVID-19 vaccines elicit a distinct mucosal IgA response that differs from the systemic IgG response. As mucosal IgA independently correlates with protection, vaccine trials should include mucosal IgA as an outcome measure.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific mucosal antibodies in saliva following concomitant COVID-19 and influenza vaccination in the ComFluCOV trial

The ComFluCOV trial randomized 679 participants to receive an age-appropriate influenza vaccine, or placebo, alongside their second COVID-19 vaccine. Concomitant administration was shown to be safe, and to preserve systemic immune responses to both vaccines. Here we report on a secondary outcome of the trial investigating SARS-CoV-2-specific mucosal antibody responses. Anti-spike IgG and IgA levels in saliva were measured with in-house ELISAs. Concomitant administration of an influenza vaccine did not affect salivary anti-spike IgG positivity rates to Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 (99.1 cf. 95.6%), or AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 (67.8% cf. 64.9%), at 3-weeks post-vaccination relative to placebo. Furthermore, saliva IgG positively correlated with serum titres highlighting the potential utility of saliva for assessing differences in immunogenicity in future vaccine studies. Mucosal IgA was not detected in response to either COVID-19 vaccine, reinforcing the need for novel vaccines capable of inducing sterilising immunity or otherwise reducing transmission. The trial is registered as ISRCTN 14391248.

SARS-CoV-2-Specific Immune Responses in Vaccination and Infection during the Pandemic in 2020-2022

To gain insight into how immunity develops against SARS-CoV-2 from 2020 to 2022, we analyzed the immune response of a small group of university staff and students who were either infected or vaccinated. We investigated the levels of receptor-binding domain (RBD)-specific and nucleocapsid (N)-specific IgG and IgA antibodies in serum and saliva samples taken early (around 10 days after infection or vaccination) and later (around 1 month later), as well as N-specific T-cell responses. One patient who had been infected in 2020 developed serum RBD and N-specific IgG antibodies, but declined eight months later, then mRNA vaccination in 2021 produced a higher level of anti-RBD IgG than natural infection. In the vaccination of naïve individuals, vaccines induced anti-RBD IgG, but it declined after six months. A third vaccination boosted the IgG level again, albeit to a lower level than after the second. In 2022, when the Omicron variant became dominant, familial transmission occurred among vaccinated people. In infected individuals, the levels of serum anti-RBD IgG antibodies increased later, while anti-N IgG peaked earlier. The N-specific activated T cells expressing IFN γ or CD107a were detected only early. Although SARS-CoV-2-specific salivary IgA was undetectable, two individuals showed a temporary peak in RBD- and N-specific IgA antibodies in their saliva on the second day after infection. Our study, despite having a small sample size, revealed that SARS-CoV-2 infection triggers the expected immune responses against acute viral infections. Moreover, our findings suggest that the temporary mucosal immune responses induced early during infection may provide better protection than the currently available intramuscular vaccines.

Silent battles: immune responses in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection

SARS-CoV-2 infections manifest with a broad spectrum of presentations, ranging from asymptomatic infections to severe pneumonia and fatal outcomes. This review centers on asymptomatic infections, a widely reported phenomenon that has substantially contributed to the rapid spread of the pandemic. In such asymptomatic infections, we focus on the role of innate, humoral, and cellular immunity. Notably, asymptomatic infections are characterized by an early and robust innate immune response, particularly a swift type 1 IFN reaction, alongside a rapid and broad induction of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells. Often, antibody levels tend to be lower or undetectable after asymptomatic infections, suggesting that the rapid control of viral replication by innate and cellular responses might impede the full triggering of humoral immunity. Even if antibody levels are present in the early convalescent phase, they wane rapidly below serological detection limits, particularly following asymptomatic infection. Consequently, prevalence studies reliant solely on serological assays likely underestimate the extent of community exposure to the virus.

Applications of SARS-CoV-2 serological testing: impact of test performance, sample matrices, and patient characteristics

Laboratory testing has been a key tool in managing the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic. While rapid antigen and PCR testing has proven useful for diagnosing acute SARS-CoV-2 infections, additional testing methods are required to understand the long-term impact of SARS-CoV-2 infections on immune response. Serological testing, a well-documented laboratory practice, measures the presence of antibodies in a sample to uncover information about host immunity. Although proposed applications of serological testing for clinical use have previously been limited, current research into SARS-CoV-2 has shown growing utility for serological methods in these settings. To name a few, serological testing has been used to identify patients with past infections and long-term active disease and to monitor vaccine efficacy. Test utility and result interpretation, however, are often complicated by factors that include poor test sensitivity early in infection, lack of immune response in some individuals, overlying infection and vaccination responses, lack of standardization of antibody titers/levels between instruments, unknown titers that confer immune protection, and large between-individual biological variation following infection or vaccination. Thus, the three major components of this review will examine (1) factors that affect serological test utility: test performance, testing matrices, seroprevalence concerns and viral variants, (2) patient factors that affect serological response: timing of sampling, age, sex, body mass index, immunosuppression and vaccination, and (3) informative applications of serological testing: identifying past infection, immune surveillance to guide health practices, and examination of protective immunity. SARS-CoV-2 serological testing should be beneficial for clinical care if it is implemented appropriately. However, as with other laboratory developed tests, use of SARS-CoV-2 serology as a testing modality warrants careful consideration of testing limitations and evaluation of its clinical utility.

Serum HCoV-spike specific antibodies do not protect against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adolescents

SARS-CoV-2 infections in children are generally asymptomatic or mild and rarely progress to severe disease and hospitalization. Why this is so remains unclear. Here we explore the potential for protection due to pre-existing cross-reactive seasonal coronavirus antibodies and compare the rate of antibody decline for nucleocapsid and spike protein in serum and oral fluid against SARS-CoV-2 within the pediatric population. No differences in seasonal coronaviruses antibody concentrations were found at baseline between cases and controls, suggesting no protective effect from pre-existing immunity against seasonal coronaviruses. Antibodies against seasonal betacoronaviruses were boosted in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. In serum, anti-nucleocapsid antibodies fell below the threshold of positivity more quickly than anti-spike protein antibodies. These findings add to our understanding of protection against infection with SARS-CoV-2 within the pediatric population, which is important when considering pediatric SARS-CoV-2 immunization policies.