A novel competition ELISA for the rapid quantification of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies in convalescent plasma.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) ideally contains high titers of (neutralizing) anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Several scalable immunoassays for CCP selection have been developed. We designed an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) that measures neutralizing antibodies (of all isotypes) in plasma by determining the level of competition between CCP and a mouse neutralizing antibody for binding to the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Plasma was collected from 72 convalescent individuals and inhibition of viral infection was determined by plaque reduction neutralization (PRNT50). The level of neutralizing antibodies was measured in the novel competition ELISA and in a commercially available ELISA that measures inhibition of recombinant ACE2 binding to immobilized RBD. These results were compared with a high throughput chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA). RESULTS: The results from both ELISAs were correlating, in particular for high titer CCP (PRNT50 ≥ 1:160) (Spearman r = .73, p < .001). Moderate correlation was found between the competition ELISA and CMIA (r = .57 for high titer and r = .62 for low titer CCP, p < .001). Receiver operator characteristic analysis showed that the competition ELISA selected CCP with a sensitivity and specificity of 61% and 100%, respectively. However, discrimination between low and high titer CCP had a lower resolution (sensitivity: 34% and specificity: 89%). CONCLUSION: The competition ELISA screens for neutralizing antibodies in CCP by competition for just a single epitope. It exerts a sensitivity of 61% with no false identifications. These ELISA designs can be used for epitope mapping or for selection of CCP.

Iron supplementation limits the deleterious effects of repeated blood donation on endurance sport performance but not on iron status.

BACKGROUND: Every day, blood banks worldwide face the challenge of ensuring an adequate blood supply. Iron deficiency is by far the most common cause of deferral of blood donors. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of iron supplementation after repeated blood donation on iron status and physiological performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-four moderately trained and iron-replete subjects were randomly divided into a whole blood donation (n=36) and a placebo donation (n=8) group. One third of the donation group received no iron supplementation, whereas one third received 20 mg iron and one third received 80 mg iron daily for 28 days. The subjects were intended to make three donations 3 months apart, and recovery of endurance capacity, assessed by an incremental maximal cycling test, and haematological parameters was monitored up to 28 days after each donation. RESULTS: Negative effects of repeated blood donation were found for markers of iron storage, markers of functional iron and/or iron metabolism regulation, and physiological markers. Iron supplementation did not affect iron storage but did limit, at the highest dose of 80 mg, the effect of blood donations on functional iron and/or iron metabolism regulation, and at both 20 and 80 mg the negative effects on maximal power output and peak oxygen consumption. DISCUSSION: Iron supplementation limited the deleterious effects of repeated blood donation on endurance sport performance but not on decline in iron status in iron-replete young men. These results underline the importance of iron supplementation to minimise the deleterious effects of blood donation on physiological functions, and the necessity to optimise the supplementation strategy to preserve iron status.