Studying temporal titre evolution of commercial SARS-CoV-2 assays reveals significant shortcomings of using BAU standardization for comparison.

BACKGROUND: Measuring specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies has become one of the main epidemiological tools to survey the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, but also vaccination response. The WHO made available a set of well-characterized samples derived from recovered individuals to allow normalization between different quantitative anti-Spike assays to defined Binding Antibody Units (BAU). METHODS: To assess sero-responses longitudinally, a cohort of ninety-nine SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive subjects was followed up together with forty-five vaccinees without previous infection but with two vaccinations. Sero-responses were evaluated using a total of six different assays: four measuring anti-Spike proteins (converted to BAU), one measuring anti-Nucleocapsid proteins and one SARS-CoV-2 surrogate virus neutralization. Both cohorts were evaluated using the Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2-ELISA anti-S1 IgG and the Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-S1 assay. RESULTS: In SARS-CoV-2-convalesce subjects, the BAU-sero-responses of Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2-ELISA anti-S1 IgG and Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-S1 peaked both at 47 (43-51) days, the first assay followed by a slow decay thereafter (> 208 days), while the second assay not presenting any decay within one year. Both assay values in BAUs are only equivalent a few months after infection, elsewhere correction factors up to 10 are necessary. In contrast, in infection-naive vaccinees the assays perform similarly. CONCLUSION: The results of our study suggest that the establishment of a protective correlate or vaccination booster recommendation based on different assays, although BAU-standardised, is still challenging. At the moment the characteristics of the available assays used are not related, and the BAU-standardisation is unable to correct for that.

Antibody titer levels and the effect on subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection in a large US-based cohort.

Despite a growing amount of data around the kinetics and durability of the antibody response induced by vaccination and previous infection, there is little understanding of whether or not a given quantitative level of antibodies correlates to protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection or reinfection. In this study, we examine SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody titers and subsequent SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests in a large cohort of US-based patients. We analyzed antibody test results in a cohort of 22,204 individuals, 6.8% (n = 1,509) of whom eventually tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, suggesting infection or reinfection. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted to understand the effect of various levels of anti-spike RBD antibody titers (classified into discrete ranges) on subsequent RT-PCR positivity rates. Statistical analyses included fitting a Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the age-, sex- and exposure-adjusted hazard ratios for S antibody titer, using zip-code positivity rates by week as a proxy for COVID-19 exposure. It was found that the best models of the temporally associated infection risk were those based on log antibody titer level (HR = 0.836 (p < 0.05)). When titers were binned, the hazard ratio associated with antibody titer >250 Binding Antibody Units (BAU) was 0.27 (p < 0.05, 95% CI [0.18, 0.41]), while the hazard ratio associated with previous infection was 0.20 (p < 0.05, 95% CI [0.10, 0.39]). Fisher exact odds ratio (OR) for Ab titers <250 BAU showed OR = 2.84 (p < 0.05; 95% CI: [2.30, 3.53]) for predicting the outcome of a subsequent PCR test. Antibody titer levels correlate with protection against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection or reinfection when examining a cohort of real-world patients who had the spike RBD antibody assay performed.

Lasting SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG Antibody response in health care workers from Venezuela, 6 months after vaccination with Sputnik V.

BACKGROUND: Scarce information is available regarding the long-term immunogenicity of the Sputnik V vaccine. Here Sputnik V vaccinated subjects were evaluated 6 months after receiving the 2-dose prime-boost schedule. METHODS: Eighty-six hospital workers from Venezuela, 32 with a previous COVID-19 infection and 54 SARS-CoV-2 naïve subjects, were enrolled. IgG antibodies levels against the wild-type Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) were measured in an ELISA and with an in vitro ACE2-surrogate RBD binding inhibition assay at day 42 and day 180 after receiving the second dose. IgG levels were expressed in BAU/ml. Binding inhibition antibodies were expressed in IU/ml. RESULTS: On average, RBD-IgG levels decreased by approximately 50% between the two time-points in the COVID-19 naïve cohort (geometric mean concentration (GMC) 675 BAU/mL vs. 327 BAU/ml) and decreased by approximately 25% in the previously infected cohort (GMC 1209 BAU/mL vs 910 BAU/ml). Within our cohort, 94% showed a "good to excellent" neutralizing activity measured with the in vitro test 6 months after vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: The Sputnik V vaccine provided long-term and durable humoral immunity in our cohort specially if a person has been both vaccinated and had a previous infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Impaired SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell reactivity in patients with cirrhosis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

Background & Aims: Cirrhosis entails elevated risk of COVID-19-associated mortality. This study determined T cell-mediated and antibody reactivity against the spike 1 (S1) protein of SARS-CoV-2 among 48 patients with cirrhosis and 39 healthy controls after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell reactivity was measured by induced level of T cell-derived interferon-γ (IFN-γ) in blood cells stimulated ex vivo with multimeric peptides spanning the N-terminal portion of S1. S1-induced IFN-γ was quantified before and after the 1st and 2nd vaccination (BNT162b2, Pfizer-BioNTech or mRNA-1273, Moderna) alongside serum IgG against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) within S1 (anti-RBD-S1 IgG). Results: T-cell reactivity against S1 was reduced in patients with cirrhosis after the 1st (p <0.001 vs. controls) and 2nd (p <0.001) vaccination. Sixty-eight percent of patients lacked detectable S1-specific T-cell reactivity after the 1st vaccination vs. 19% in controls (odds ratio 0.11, 95% CI 0.03-0.48, p = 0.003) and 36% remained devoid of reactivity after the 2nd vaccination vs. 6% in controls (odds ratio 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.59, p = 0.009). T-cell reactivity in cirrhosis remained significantly impaired after correction for potential confounders in multivariable analysis. Advanced cirrhosis (Child-Pugh class B) was associated with absent or lower T-cell responses (p <0.05 vs. Child-Pugh class A). The deficiency of T-cell reactivity was paralleled by lower levels of anti-RBD-S1 IgG after the 1st (p <0.001 vs. controls) and 2nd (p <0.05) vaccination. Conclusions: Patients with cirrhosis show deficient T-cell reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 antigens along with diminished levels of anti-RBD-S1 IgG after dual COVID-19 vaccination, highlighting the need for vigilance and additional preventative measures. Clinical trial registration: EudraCT 2021-000349-42. Lay summary: T cells are a pivotal component in the defence against viruses. We show that patients with cirrhosis have impaired SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses and lower antibody levels after mRNA vaccination against COVID-19 compared with healthy controls. Patients with more advanced liver disease exhibited particularly inferior vaccine responses. These results call for additional preventative measures in these patients.

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 Spike Antibody Response in COVID-19 Patients Using Three Fully Automated Immunoassays and a Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test.

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays against the spike (S) protein are useful for monitoring immune response after infection or vaccination. We compared the results of three chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs) (Abbott, Roche, Siemens) and a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT, GenScript) using 191 sequential samples from 32 COVID-19 patients. All assays detected >90% of samples collected 14 days after symptom onset (Abbott 97.4%, Roche 96.2%, Siemens 92.3%, and GenScript 96.2%), and overall agreement among the four assays was 91.1% to 96.3%. When we assessed time-course antibody levels, the Abbott and Siemens assays showed higher levels in patients with severe disease (p < 0.05). Antibody levels from the three CLIAs were correlated (r = 0.763-0.885). However, Passing-Bablok regression analysis showed significant proportional differences between assays and converting results to binding antibody units (BAU)/mL still showed substantial bias. CLIAs had good performance in predicting sVNT positivity (Area Under the Curve (AUC), 0.959-0.987), with Abbott having the highest AUC value (p < 0.05). SARS-CoV-2 S protein antibody levels as assessed by the CLIAs were not interchangeable, but showed reliable performance for predicting sVNT results. Further standardization and harmonization of immunoassays might be helpful in monitoring immune status after COVID-19 infection or vaccination.