SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination, Immune Responses, and Antibody Testing in Immunosuppressed Populations: Tip of the Iceberg

Performance of commercial SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and Omicron BA.1 antibody assays compared with pseudovirus neutralization tests

BACKGROUND

Commercially available ELISA-based antibody tests are used to approximate vaccination success against SARS-CoV-2 in at-risk patients, but it is unclear whether they correlate with neutralization of the Omicron variant.

METHODS

269 serum samples of a cohort of 44 non-immunosuppressed participants and 65 MTX-treated rheumatic patients taken before and after COVID-19 booster vaccinations were measured using COVID-19 antibody testing systems with wild-type and Omicron BA.1 antigens developed by three different manufacturers (surrogate virus neutralization test cPass, and binding antibody tests QuantiVac and SeraSpot), as well as with a pseudovirus neutralization test (pVNT). The pVNT was considered the gold standard for determining the presence and level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

RESULTS

All three wild-type ELISAs showed excellent test performance compared with wild-type neutralization in pVNT. However, out of 56 samples without Omicron BA.1 neutralization in pVNT, 71.4% showed positive results in at least one and 28.6% in all three wild-type ELISAs at the manufacturer-defined cut-offs. Omicron ELISAs showed either decreased specificity (57.1% and 55.4% for binding ELISAs) or sensitivity (51.2% in cPass) compared to Omicron neutralization in pVNT. The proportion of any false positive results among all samples decreased from 26.5% before to 3.2% after booster vaccination, however binding antibody test specificities remained below 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a poorer test performance of new Omicron antibody test systems compared to wild-type tests in detecting neutralizing antibodies against the corresponding SARS-CoV-2 variants. Decisions for booster vaccination or passive immunization of at-risk patients should not be based solely on antibody test results.

Long-term cellular immune response in immunocompromised unvaccinated COVID-19 patients undergoing monoclonal antibody treatment

Immunocompromised patients are at increased risk for a severe course of COVID-19. Treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) has become widely accepted. However, the effects of mAb treatment on the long-term primary cellular response to SARS-CoV-2 are unknown. In the following study, we investigated the long-term cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 Spike S1, Membrane (M) and Nucleocapsid (N) antigens using the ELISpot assay in unvaccinated, mAb-treated immunocompromised high-risk patients. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAb untreated though vaccinated COVID-19 immunocompromised patients, vaccinated SARS-CoV-2 immunocompromised patients without COVID-19 and vaccinated healthy control subjects served as control groups. The cellular immune response was determined at a median of 5 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our data suggest that immunocompromised patients develop an endogenous long-term cellular immune response after COVID-19, although at low levels. A better understanding of the cellular immune response will help guide clinical decision making for these vulnerable patient cohorts.

Differences in Humoral and Cellular Vaccine Responses to SARS-CoV-2 in Kidney and Liver Transplant Recipients

The antibody and T cell responses after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination have not been formally compared between kidney and liver transplant recipients. Using a multiplex assay, we measured IgG levels against 4 epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and nucleocapsid (NC) antigen, SARS-CoV-2 variants, and common coronaviruses in serial blood samples from 52 kidney and 50 liver transplant recipients undergoing mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. We quantified IFN-γ/IL-2 T cells reactive against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein by FluoroSpot. We used multivariable generalized linear models to adjust for the differences in immunosuppression between groups. In liver transplant recipients, IgG levels against every SARS-CoV-2 spike epitope increased significantly more than in kidney transplant recipients (MFI: 19,617 vs 6,056; P<0.001), a difference that remained significant after adjustments. Vaccine did not affect IgG levels against NC nor common coronaviruses. Elicited antibodies recognized all variants tested but at significantly lower strength than the original Wuhan strain. Anti-spike IFN-γ-producing T cells increased significantly more in liver than in kidney transplant recipients (IFN-γ-producing T cells 28 vs 11 spots/5x10⁵ cells), but this difference lost statistical significance after adjustments. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine elicits a stronger antibody response in liver than in kidney transplant recipients, a phenomenon that is not entirely explained by the different immunosuppression.

Non-Invasive Monitoring for Rejection in Kidney Transplant Recipients After SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination

Introduction

Studies have shown reduced antiviral responses in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination, but data on post-vaccination alloimmune responses and antiviral responses against the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant are limited.

Materials and methods

To address this issue, we conducted a prospective, multi-center study of 58 adult KTRs receiving mRNA-BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines. We used multiple complementary non-invasive biomarkers for rejection monitoring including serum creatinine, proteinuria, donor-derived cell-free DNA, peripheral blood gene expression profile (PBGEP), urinary CXCL9 mRNA and de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Secondary outcomes included development of anti-viral immune responses against the wild-type and Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2.

Results

At a median of 85 days, no KTRs developed de novo DSAs and only one patient developed acute rejection following recent conversion to belatacept, which was associated with increased creatinine and urinary CXCL9 levels. During follow-up, there were no significant changes in proteinuria, donor-derived cell-free DNA levels or PBGEP. 36% of KTRs in our cohort developed anti-wild-type spike antibodies, 75% and 55% of whom had neutralizing responses against wild-type and Delta variants respectively. A cellular response against wild-type S1, measured by interferon-γ-ELISpot assay, developed in 38% of KTRs. Cellular responses did not differ in KTRs with or without antibody responses.

Conclusions

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in KTRs did not elicit a significant alloimmune response. About half of KTRs who develop anti-wild-type spike antibodies after two mRNA vaccine doses have neutralizing responses against the Delta variant. There was no association between anti-viral humoral and cellular responses.