Differences in systemic and mucosal SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence in a prospective cohort of Dutch children

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 booster vaccination in IEI patients and their one year clinical follow-up after start of the COVID-19 vaccination program

Purpose

Previous studies have demonstrated that the majority of patients with an inborn error of immunity (IEI) develop a spike (S)-specific IgG antibody and T-cell response after two doses of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine, but little is known about the response to a booster vaccination. We studied the immune responses 8 weeks after booster vaccination with mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines in 171 IEI patients. Moreover, we evaluated the clinical outcomes in these patients one year after the start of the Dutch COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

Methods

This study was embedded in a large prospective multicenter study investigating the immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA-based vaccines in IEI (VACOPID study). Blood samples were taken from 244 participants 8 weeks after booster vaccination. These participants included 171 IEI patients (X-linked agammaglobulinemia (XLA;N=11), combined immunodeficiency (CID;N=4), common variable immunodeficiency (CVID;N=45), isolated or undefined antibody deficiencies (N=108) and phagocyte defects (N=3)) and 73 controls. SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG titers, neutralizing antibodies, and T-cell responses were evaluated. One year after the start of the COVID-19 vaccination program, 334 study participants (239 IEI patients and 95 controls) completed a questionnaire to supplement their clinical data focusing on SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Results

After booster vaccination, S-specific IgG titers increased in all COVID-19 naive IEI cohorts and controls, when compared to titers at 6 months after the priming regimen. The fold-increases did not differ between controls and IEI cohorts. SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses also increased equally in all cohorts after booster vaccination compared to 6 months after the priming regimen. Most SARS-CoV-2 infections during the study period occurred in the period when the Omicron variant had become dominant. The clinical course of these infections was mild, although IEI patients experienced more frequent fever and dyspnea compared to controls and their symptoms persisted longer.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates that mRNA-based booster vaccination induces robust recall of memory B-cell and T-cell responses in most IEI patients. One-year clinical follow-up demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 infections in IEI patients were mild. Given our results, we support booster campaigns with newer variant-specific COVID-19 booster vaccines to IEI patients with milder phenotypes.

Endemic Human Coronavirus-Specific Nasal Immunoglobulin A and Serum Immunoglobulin G Dynamics in Lower Respiratory Tract Infections

Endemic human coronaviruses (HCoV) NL63, 229E, OC43, and HKU1 cause respiratory infection. Following infection, a virus-specific serum antibody rise is usually observed, coinciding with recovery. In some cases, an infection is not accompanied by an immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody rise in serum in the first month after HCoV infection, even though the infection has cleared in that month and the patient has recovered. We investigated the possible role of nasal immunoglobulin A (IgA). We measured spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N)-specific nasal IgA during and after an HCoV lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) and compared the IgA responses between subjects with and without a significant IgG rise in serum (IgG responders (n = 31) and IgG non-responders (n = 14)). We found that most IgG responders also exhibited significant nasal IgA rise in the first month after the infection, whereas such an IgA rise was lacking in most IgG non-responders. Interestingly, the serum IgG non-responders presented with a significantly higher nasal IgA when they entered this study than during the acute phase of the LRTI. Our data suggest that nasal IgA could be part of a fast acute response to endemic HCoV infection and may play a role in clearing the infection.

Clinical and Analytical Performance of ELISA Salivary Serologic Assay to Detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG in Children and Adults

Saliva is a promising matrix with several purposes. Our aim is to verify if salivary anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody determination is suitable for monitoring immune responses. One hundred eighty-seven subjects were enrolled at University-Hospital Padova: 105 females (56.1%) and 82 males (43.9%), 95 (50.8%) children and 92 (49.2%) adults. Subjects self-collected saliva using Salivette; nineteen subjects collected three different samples within the day. A serum sample was obtained for all individuals. The N/S anti-SARS-CoV-2 salivary IgG (sal-IgG) and serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG (ser-IgG) were used for determining anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The mean (min-max) age was 9.0 (1-18) for children and 42.5 (20-61) for adults. Of 187 samples, 63 were negative for sal-IgG (33.7%), while 7 were negative for ser-IgG (3.7%). Spearman's correlation was 0.56 (p < 0.001). Sal-IgG and ser-IgG levels were correlated with age but not with gender, comorbidities, prolonged therapy, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, or time from last COVID-19 infection/vaccination. The repeatability ranged from 23.8% (7.4 kAU/L) to 4.0% (3.77 kAU/L). The linearity of the assay was missed in 4/6 samples. No significant intrasubject differences were observed in sal-IgG across samples collected at different time points. Sal-IgG has good agreement with ser-IgG. Noninvasive saliva collection represents an alternative method for antibody measurement, especially in children.

Saliva Collection Methods Among Children and Adolescents: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Saliva can be used for screening and diagnostic purposes. Although multiple saliva collection methods are available, their use in children can be limited due to lack of cooperation, developmental stage, and age. The aim of this scoping review was to comprehensively appraise the different methods of saliva collection among both children and adolescents by assessing the available scientific literature.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the databases PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Eligible studies on saliva collection methods among children and adolescents were included for this review.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 249 eligible articles, of which 205 had a cross-sectional study design. Four distinct saliva collection methods have surfaced: the drooling method, the absorption method, the spitting method, and the suction method. Among infants or children under the age of 6 years, the suction and absorption methods were most preferred. The drooling and spitting methods were only applicable among children above the age of 3 years. When children were not willing to cooperate, the absorption method was most feasible. In adolescents and older children, no specific method was found to be preferred over another method.

CONCLUSION

Overall, saliva collection is well tolerated by children and adolescents, with the absorption and suction methods being preferred with young and uncooperative children.

Robust Vaccine-Induced as Well as Hybrid B- and T-Cell Immunity across SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Platforms in People with HIV

Few studies have comprehensively compared severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine-induced and hybrid B- and T-cell responses in people with HIV (PWH) to those in comparable controls without HIV. We included 195 PWH and 246 comparable controls from the AGEhIV COVID-19 substudy. A positive nucleocapsid antibody (INgezim IgA/IgM/IgG) or self-reported PCR test defined prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike (anti-S) IgG titers and anti-S IgG production by memory B cells were assessed. Neutralizing antibody titers were determined in a subset of participants. T-cell responses were assessed by gamma interferon (IFN-γ) release and activation-induced marker assay. We estimated mean differences in postvaccination immune responses (β) between levels of determinants. Anti-S IgG titers and anti-S IgG production by memory B cells were not different between PWH and controls. Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (β = 0.77), receiving mRNA vaccine (β = 0.56), female sex (β = 0.24), fewer days between last vaccination and sampling (β = 0.07), and a CD4/CD8 ratio of <1.0 (β = -0.39) were independently associated with anti-S IgG titers, but HIV status was not. Neutralization titers against the ancestral and Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants were not different between PWH and controls. IFN-γ release was higher in PWH. Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (β = 2.39), HIV-positive status (β = 1.61), and fewer days between last vaccination and sampling (β = 0.23) were independently associated with higher IFN-γ release. The percentages of SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, however, were not different between PWH and controls. Individuals with well-controlled HIV generally mount robust vaccine-induced as well as hybrid B- and T-cell immunity across SARS-CoV-2 vaccine platforms similar to controls. Determinants of a reduced vaccine response were likewise largely similar in both groups and included a lower CD4/CD8 ratio. IMPORTANCE Some studies have suggested that people with HIV may respond less well to vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. We comprehensively compared B- and T-cell responses to different COVID-19 vaccines in middle-aged persons with well-treated HIV and individuals of the same age without HIV, who were also highly comparable in terms of demographics and lifestyle, including those with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Individuals with HIV generally mounted equally robust immunity to the different vaccines. Even stronger immunity was observed in both groups after prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. These findings are reassuring with respect to the efficacy of SARS-Cov-2 vaccines for the sizable and increasing global population of people with HIV with access and a good response to HIV treatment.

Immune Responses 6 Months After mRNA-1273 COVID-19 Vaccination and the Effect of a Third Vaccination in Patients with Inborn Errors of Immunity

PURPOSE

Patients with inborn errors of immunity (IEI) are at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Effective long-term protection against COVID-19 is therefore of great importance in these patients, but little is known about the decay of the immune response after primary vaccination. We studied the immune responses 6 months after two mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines in 473 IEI patients and subsequently the response to a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in 50 patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID).

METHODS

In a prospective multicenter study, 473 IEI patients (including X-linked agammaglobulinemia (XLA) (N = 18), combined immunodeficiency (CID) (N = 22), CVID (N = 203), isolated or undefined antibody deficiencies (N = 204), and phagocyte defects (N = 16)), and 179 controls were included and followed up to 6 months after two doses of the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine. Additionally, samples were collected from 50 CVID patients who received a third vaccine 6 months after primary vaccination through the national vaccination program. SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG titers, neutralizing antibodies, and T cell responses were assessed.

RESULTS

At 6 months after vaccination, the geometric mean antibody titers (GMT) declined in both IEI patients and healthy controls, when compared to GMT 28 days after vaccination. The trajectory of this decline did not differ between controls and most IEI cohorts; however, antibody titers in CID, CVID, and isolated antibody deficiency patients more often dropped to below the responder cut-off compared to controls. Specific T cell responses were still detectable in 77% of controls and 68% of IEI patients at 6 months post vaccination. A third mRNA vaccine resulted in an antibody response in only two out of 30 CVID patients that did not seroconvert after two mRNA vaccines.

CONCLUSION

A similar decline in IgG titers and T cell responses was observed in patients with IEI when compared to healthy controls 6 months after mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccination. The limited beneficial benefit of a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in previous non-responder CVID patients implicates that other protective strategies are needed for these vulnerable patients.