Analysis of anti-Omicron neutralizing antibody titers in different vaccinated and unvaccinated convalescent plasma sources

Next-generation treatments: Immunotherapy and advanced therapies for COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in 2019 following prior outbreaks of coronaviruses like SARS and MERS in recent decades, underscoring their high potential of infectivity in humans. Insights from previous outbreaks of SARS and MERS have played a significant role in developing effective strategies to mitigate the global impact of SARS-CoV-2. As of January 7, 2024, there have been 774,075,242 confirmed cases of COVID-19 worldwide. To date, 13.59 billion vaccine doses have been administered, and there have been 7,012,986 documented fatalities (https://www.who.int/) Despite significant progress in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, the rapid evolution of SARS-CoV-2 challenges human defenses, presenting ongoing global challenges. The emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 lineages, shaped by mutation and recombination processes, has led to successive waves of infections. This scenario reveals the need for next-generation vaccines as a crucial requirement for ensuring ongoing protection against SARS-CoV-2. This demand calls for formulations that trigger a robust adaptive immune response without leading the acute inflammation linked with the infection. Key mutations detected in the Spike protein, a critical target for neutralizing antibodies and vaccine design -specifically within the Receptor Binding Domain region of Omicron variant lineages (B.1.1.529), currently dominant worldwide, have intensified concerns due to their association with immunity evasion from prior vaccinations and infections. As the world deals with this evolving threat, the narrative extends to the realm of emerging variants, each displaying new mutations with implications that remain largely misunderstood. Notably, the JN.1 Omicron lineage is gaining global prevalence, and early findings suggest it stands among the immune-evading variants, a characteristic attributed to its mutation L455S. Moreover, the detrimental consequences of the novel emergence of SARS-CoV-2 lineages bear a particularly critical impact on immunocompromised individuals and older adults. Immunocompromised individuals face challenges such as suboptimal responses to COVID-19 vaccines, rendering them more susceptible to severe disease. Similarly, older adults have an increased risk of severe disease and the presence of comorbid conditions, find themselves at a heightened vulnerability to develop COVID-19 disease. Thus, recognizing these intricate factors is crucial for effectively tailoring public health strategies to protect these vulnerable populations. In this context, this review aims to describe, analyze, and discuss the current progress of the next-generation treatments encompassing immunotherapeutic approaches and advanced therapies emerging as complements that will offer solutions to counter the disadvantages of the existing options. Preliminary outcomes show that these strategies target the virus and address the immunomodulatory responses associated with COVID-19. Furthermore, the capacity to promote tissue repair has been demonstrated, which can be particularly noteworthy for immunocompromised individuals who stand as vulnerable actors in the global landscape of coronavirus infections. The emerging next-generation treatments possess broader potential, offering protection against a wide range of variants and enhancing the ability to counter the impact of the constant evolution of the virus. Furthermore, advanced therapies are projected as potential treatment alternatives for managing Chronic Post-COVID-19 syndromeand addressing its associated long-term complications.

Antiviral combination therapies for persistent COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients

OBJECTIVES

After the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the severe COVID-19 burden falls upon immunocompromised patients who cannot mount an endogenous immune response after both vaccination and/or natural infection. They also experience persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection with high viral loads often unsuccessfully managed by the standard antiviral monotherapy regimen initially validated for treatment of COVID-19 immunocompetent patients, only. The off-label prescription of such monotherapy regimens in immunocompromised patients is likely to drive the emergence of treatment-related immune escape, relapses, excess morbidity, and mortality from both COVID-19 and delayed treatment of the underlying disorders. A possible treatment approach to mitigate such consequence is based on combined antiviral therapies.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for case reports, case series and clinical trials reporting the usage of combined antiviral therapies for COVID-19.

RESULTS

In this narrative review, we show that combinations of either small molecule antivirals or small molecule antiviral plus passive immunotherapies are safe and effective in small cohorts reported so far.

CONCLUSION

Considering the progressive loss of efficacy of all authorized anti-spike monoclonal antibodies, promising regimen options are reserved to combinations of small molecule antivirals and COVID-19 convalescent plasma from vaccinated donors.

Diminished Neutralization Capacity of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 in Donor Plasma Collected from January to March 2021

The 50% plaque reduction neutralization assay (PRNT50) has been previously used to assess the neutralization capacity of donor plasma against wild-type and variant of concern (VOC) severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Emerging data suggest that plasma with an anti-SARS-CoV-2 level of ≥2 × 104 binding antibody units/mL (BAU/mL) protects against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 infection. Specimens were collected using a cross-sectional random sampling approach. For PRNT50 studies, 63 previously analyzed specimens by PRNT50 versus SARS-CoV-2 wild-type, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta were analyzed by PRNT50 versus Omicron BA.1. The 63 specimens plus 4,390 specimens (randomly sampled regardless of serological evidence of infection) were also tested using the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay (anti-spike [S]; Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA; Abbott Quant assay). In the vaccinated group, the percentages of specimens with any measurable PRNT50 versus wild-type or VOC were wild type (21/25 [84%]), Alpha (19/25 [76%]), Beta (18/25 [72%]), Gamma (13/25 [52%]), Delta (19/25 [76%]), and Omicron BA.1 (9/25 [36%]). In the unvaccinated group, the percentages of specimens with any measurable PRNT50 versus wild type or VOC were wild-type SARS-CoV-2 (16/39 [41%]), Alpha (16/39 [41%]), Beta (10/39 [26%]), Gamma (9/39 [23%]), Delta (16/39 [41%]), and Omicron BA.1 (0/39) (Fisher's exact tests, vaccinated versus unvaccinated for each variant, P < 0.05). None of the 4,453 specimens tested by the Abbott Quant assay had a binding capacity of ≥2 × 104 BAU/mL. Vaccinated donors were more likely than unvaccinated donors to neutralize Omicron when assessed by a PRNT50 assay. IMPORTANCE SARS-CoV-2 Omicron emergence occurred in Canada during the period from November 2021 to January 2022. This study assessed the ability of donor plasma collected earlier (January to March 2021) to generate any neutralizing capacity against Omicron BA.1 SARS-CoV-2. Vaccinated individuals, regardless of infection status, were more likely to neutralize Omicron BA.1 than unvaccinated individuals. This study then used a semiquantitative binding antibody assay to screen a larger number of specimens (4,453) for individual specimens that might have high-titer neutralizing capacity against Omicron BA.1. None of the 4,453 specimens tested by the semiquantitative SARS-CoV-2 assay had a binding capacity suggestive of a high-titer neutralizing capacity against Omicron BA.1. These data do not imply that Canadians lacked immunity to Omicron BA.1 during the study period. Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is complex, and there is still no wide consensus on correlation of protection to SARS-CoV-2.

SARS-CoV-2 variants resistant to monoclonal antibodies in immunocompromised patients constitute a public health concern

COVID-19 in immunocompromised hosts has emerged as a difficult therapeutic management problem. Immunocompromised hosts mount weak responses to SARS-CoV-2 and manifest infection outcomes ranging from severe disease to persistent infection. Weakened immune systems mean greater viral loads and increased opportunities for viral evolution. Gupta, Konnova, et al. report the emergence of resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in immunocompromised patients after monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy. mAbs target only a single determinant in the viral Spike protein, which is a weakness of such therapy when treating a mutagenic and variable virus. Hence, the emergence of mAb resistance could have been anticipated, but its documentation is important because it has major public health implications, since such resistant variants have the potential to spread and escape vaccine immunity. For immunocompromised patients, these findings suggest the need for combination therapy with antiviral drugs and the use of polyclonal antibody preparations such as convalescent plasma.

Reduced Mortality among COVID-19 ICU Patients after Treatment with HemoClear Convalescent Plasma in Suriname

Convalescent plasma is a promising therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but its efficacy in intensive care unit (ICU) patients in low- and middle-income country settings such as Suriname is unknown. Bedside plasma separation using the HemoClear device made convalescent plasma therapy accessible as a treatment option in Suriname. Two hundred patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring intensive care were recruited. Fifty eight patients (29%) received COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) treatment in addition to standard of care (SOC). The CCP treatment and SOC groups were matched by age, sex, and disease severity scores. Mortality in the CCP treatment group was significantly lower than that in the SOC group (21% versus 39%; Fisher's exact test P = 0.0133). Multivariate analysis using ICU days showed that CCP treatment reduced mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.66; P = 0.001), while complication of acute renal failure (creatinine levels, >110 mol/L; HR, 4.45; 95% CI, 2.54 to 7.80; P < 0.0001) was independently associated with death. Decrease in chest X-ray score in the CCP treatment group (median -3 points, interquartile range [IQR] -4 to -1) was significantly greater than that in the SOC group (median -1 point, IQR -3 to 1, Mann-Whitney test P = 0.0004). Improvement in the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio was also significantly greater in the CCP treatment group (median 83, IQR 8 to 140) than in the SOC group (median 35, IQR -3 to 92, Mann-Whitney P = 0.0234). Further research is needed for HemoClear-produced CCP as a therapy for SARS-CoV-2 infection together with adequately powered, randomized controlled trials. IMPORTANCE This study compares mortality and other endpoints between intensive care unit COVID-19 patients treated with convalescent plasma plus standard of care (CCP), and a control group of patients hospitalized in the same medical ICU facility treated with standard of care alone (SOC) in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC) setting using bedside donor whole blood separation by gravity (HemoClear) to produce the CCP. It demonstrates a significant 65% survival improvement in HemoClear-produced CCP recipients (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.66; P = 0.001). Although this is an exploratory study, it clearly shows the benefit of using the HemoClear-produced CCP in ICU patients in the Suriname LMIC setting. Additional studies could further substantiate our findings and their applicability for both LMICs and high-income countries and the use of CCP as a prepared readiness method to combat new viral pandemics.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma (CCP) During the Pandemic Era: A Literature Review

Worldwide pandemic with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) was caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). As November 2, 2022, World Health Organization (WHO) received 628,035,553 reported incidents on COVID-19, with 6,572,800 mortalities and, with a total 12,850,970,971 vaccine doses have been delivered as of October 31, 2022. The infection can cause mild or self-limiting symptoms of pulmonary and severe infections or death may be caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Simultaneously, antivirals, corticosteroids, immunological treatments, antibiotics, and anticoagulants have been proposed as potential medicines to cure COVID-19 affected patients. Among these initial treatments, COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP), which was retrieved from COVID-19 recovered patients to be used as passive immune therapy, in which antibodies from cured patients were given to infected patients to prevent illness. Such treatment has yielded the best results in earlier with preventative or early stages of illness. Convalescent plasma (CP) is the first treatment available when infectious disease initially appears, although few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted to evaluate its effectiveness. The historical record suggests with potential benefit for other respiratory infections, as coronaviruses like Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-CoV-I (SARS-CoV-I) and Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), though the analysis of such research is constrained by some non-randomized experiments (NREs). Rigorous studies on CP are made more demanding by the following with the immediacy of the epidemics, CP use may restrict the ability to utilize it for clinical testing, non-homogenous nature of product, highly decentralized manufacturing process; constraints with capacity to measure biologic function, ultimate availability of substitute therapies, as antivirals, purified immune globulins, or monoclonal antibodies. Though, it is still not clear how effectively CCP works among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The current review tries to focus on its efficiency and usage in clinical scenarios and identifying existing benefits of implementation during pandemic or how it may assist with future pandemic preventions.

Commentary on "Outcomes of Convalescent Plasma with Defined High versus Lower Neutralizing Antibody Titers against SARS-CoV-2 among Hospitalized Patients: CoronaVirus Inactivating Plasma (CoVIP) Study"

The totality of evidence favors the efficacy of convalescent plasma to treat COVID-19 when high-titer plasma is administered early in the course of disease or to immunocompromised patients. In this commentary, we frame the findings of L. A. Bartelt, A. J. Markmann, B. Nelson, J. Keys, et al. (mBio 13:e01751-22, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.01751-22) in the context of the normal approval process for a therapeutic product. We point out that convalescent plasma has taken all of the typical steps associated with approval for a therapeutic product. Additionally, in less than 3 years, the optimal use cases and continued utility of this product to treat COVID-19 have been defined.

One-year follow-up of the CAPSID randomized trial for high-dose convalescent plasma in severe COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUNDResults of many randomized trials on COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) have been reported, but information on long-term outcome after CCP treatment is limited. The objectives of this extended observation of the randomized CAPSID trial are to assess long-term outcome and disease burden in patients initially treated with or without CCP.METHODSOf 105 randomized patients, 50 participated in the extended observation. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed by questionnaires and a structured interview. CCP donors (n = 113) with asymptomatic to moderate COVID-19 were included as a reference group.RESULTSThe median follow-up of patients was 396 days, and the estimated 1-year survival was 78.7% in the CCP group and 60.2% in the control (P = 0.08). The subgroup treated with a higher cumulative amount of neutralizing antibodies showed a better 1-year survival compared with the control group (91.5% versus 60.2%, P = 0.01). Medical events and QoL assessments showed a consistent trend for better results in the CCP group without reaching statistical significance. There was no difference in the increase in neutralizing antibodies after vaccination between the CCP and control groups.CONCLUSIONThe trial demonstrated a trend toward better outcome in the CCP group without reaching statistical significance. A predefined subgroup analysis showed a significantly better outcome (long-term survival, time to discharge from ICU, and time to hospital discharge) among those who received a higher amount of neutralizing antibodies compared with the control group. A substantial long-term disease burden remains after severe COVID-19.Trial registrationEudraCT 2020-001310-38 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04433910.FundingBundesministerium für Gesundheit (German Federal Ministry of Health).

Nucleocapsid-specific antibody function is associated with therapeutic benefits from COVID-19 convalescent plasma therapy

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP), a passive polyclonal antibody therapeutic agent, has had mixed clinical results. Although antibody neutralization is the predominant approach to benchmarking CCP efficacy, CCP may also influence the evolution of the endogenous antibody response. Using systems serology to comprehensively profile severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) functional antibodies of hospitalized people with COVID-19 enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of CCP (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04397757), we find that the clinical benefits of CCP are associated with a shift toward reduced inflammatory Spike (S) responses and enhanced nucleocapsid (N) humoral responses. We find that CCP has the greatest clinical benefit in participants with low pre-existing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody function and that CCP-induced immunomodulatory Fc glycan profiles and N immunodominant profiles persist for at least 2 months. We highlight a potential mechanism of action of CCP associated with durable immunomodulation, outline optimal patient characteristics for CCP treatment, and provide guidance for development of a different class of COVID-19 hyperinflammation-targeting antibody therapeutic agents.

Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in Hospitalized Patients-An Open-Label Phase II Clinical Trial

Background: COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is an important antiviral option for selected patients with COVID-19. Materials and Methods: In this open-label, phase 2, clinical trial conducted from 30 April 2020 till 10 May 2021 in the Republic of North Macedonia, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of CCP in hospitalized patients. Treatment was with a single unit of CCP having an anti-RBD IgG concentration higher than 5 AU/mL. Results: There were 189 patients that completed the study, of which 65 (34.4%) had WHO 8-point clinical progression scale score of 3 (requiring hospital care but not oxygen support), 65 (34.4%) had a score of 4 (hospitalized and requiring supplemental oxygen by mask or nasal prongs), and 59 (31.2%) had a score of 5 (hospitalized and requiring supplemental oxygen by non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen). Mean age was 57 years (range 22−94), 78.5% were males, 80.4% had elevated body mass index, and 70.9% had comorbidity. Following CCP transfusion, we observed clinical improvement with increase rates in oxygenation-free days of 32.3% and 58.5% at 24 h and seven days after CCP transfusion, a decline in WHO scores, and reduced progression to severe disease (only one patient was admitted to ICU after CCP transfusion). Mortality in the entire cohort was 11.6% (22/189). We recorded 0% mortality in WHO score 3 (0/65) and in patients that received CCP transfusion in the first seven days of disease, 4.6% mortality in WHO score 4 (3/65), and 30.5% mortality in WHO score 5 (18/59). Mortality correlated with WHO score (Chi-square 19.3, p < 0.001) and with stay in the ICU (Chi-square 55.526, p ≤ 0.001). No severe adverse events were reported. Conclusions: This study showed that early administration of CCP to patients with moderate disease was a safe and potentially effective treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04397523).

A Critical Analysis of the Use of Cilgavimab plus Tixagevimab Monoclonal Antibody Cocktail (Evusheld™) for COVID-19 Prophylaxis and Treatment

Evusheld® (tixagevimab + cilgavimab; AZD7442) was the first anti-Spike monoclonal antibody (mAb) cocktail designed not only for treatment but also with pre-exposure prophylaxis in mind. The immunoglobulins were engineered for prolonged half-life by modifying the Fc fragment, thus creating a long-acting antibody (LAAB). We review here preclinical development, baseline and treatment-emergent resistance, clinical efficacy from registration trials, and real-world post-marketing evidence. The combination was initially approved for pre-exposure prophylaxis at the time of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta VOC wave based on a trial conducted in unvaccinated subjects when the Alpha VOC was dominant. Another trial also conducted at the time of the Alpha VOC wave proved efficacy as early treatment in unvaccinated patients and led to authorization at the time of the BA.4/5 VOC wave. Tixagevimab was ineffective against any Omicron sublineage, so cilgavimab has so far been the ingredient which has made a difference. Antibody monotherapy has a high risk of selecting for immune escape variants in immunocompromised patients with high viral loads, which nowadays represent the main therapeutic indication for antibody therapies. Among Omicron sublineages, cilgavimab was ineffective against BA.1, recovered efficacy against BA.2 and BA.2.12.1, but lost efficacy again against BA.4/BA.5 and BA.2.75. Our analysis indicated that Evusheld® has been used during the Omicron VOC phase without robust clinical data of efficacy against this variant and suggested that several regulatory decisions regarding its use lacked consistency. There is an urgent need for new randomized controlled trials in vaccinated, immunocompromised subjects, using COVID-19 convalescent plasma as a control arm.

Prescription of Anti-Spike Monoclonal Antibodies in COVID-19 Patients with Resistant SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Italy

Anti-Spike monoclonal antibodies have been considered a promising approach to COVID-19 therapy. Unfortunately, the advent of resistant lineages jeopardized their effectiveness and prompted limitations in their clinical use. Change in the dominant variant can be fast to such an extent that, in the absence of timely medical education, prescribers can keep using these drugs for relatively long periods even in patients with resistant variants. Therefore, many patients could have been exposed to drugs with unlikely benefits and probable risks. We show here that about 20% of bamlanivimab+etesevimab, 30% of casirivimab+imdevimab, and 30% of sotrovimab courses were administered in Italy during periods in which a fully resistant variant was dominant. Additionally, for monoclonal antibody cocktails, the vast majority of usage occurred against variants for which one of the mAbs within the cocktail was ineffective. Given the high costs of these drugs and their potential side effects, it would be important to consider a frequent review of the appropriateness of these drugs and timely communication when the benefit/risk balance is no longer favorable.

Neutralizing antibody levels against Sars-CoV-2 Variants of concern delta and omicron in vaccine Breakthrough-Infected blood donors

BACKGROUND

Novel SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) Delta and Omicron are able to escape some monoclonal antibody therapies, making again COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) a potential frontline treatment.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS

In this study, we investigated the kinetics of anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) against VOCs Delta and Omicron in vaccine breakthrough infected plasma donors. Serum samples from 19 donors were collected at the time of plasma donation and tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 nAbs (using live authentic VOC viral neutralization test) and IgG (Liaison® SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 and Liaison® SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG assays, DiaSorin). Measures were correlated with different variables, including the time between last vaccine dose and CCP donation, and time between SARS-COV-2 infection and CCP donation.

RESULTS

nAb titers against VOC Delta and Omicron were directly related to the time interval since last vaccine dose to CCP donation, but inversely related to time since COVID19 breakthrough infection.

DISCUSSION

SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection in vaccinated in donors boosts nAb titers against VOCs Delta and Omicron, but such titers decay shortly after infection. Therefore, CCP must be collected early after vaccine breakthrough infection.