Omicron infection-associated T- and B-cell immunity in antigen-naive and triple-COVID-19-vaccinated individuals.

Since early 2022, various Omicron variants have dominated the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in most countries. All Omicron variants are B-cell immune escape variants, and antibodies induced by first-generation COVID-19 vaccines or by infection with earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants largely fail to protect individuals from Omicron infection. In the present study, we investigated the effect of Omicron infections in triple-vaccinated and in antigen-naive individuals. We show that Omicron breakthrough infections occurring 2-3.5 months after the third vaccination restore B-cell and T-cell immune responses to levels similar to or higher than those measured 14 days after the third vaccination, including the induction of Omicron-neutralizing antibodies. Antibody responses in breakthrough infection derived mostly from cross-reacting B cells, initially induced by vaccination, whereas Omicron infections in antigen-naive individuals primarily generated B cells binding to the Omicron but not the Wuhan spike protein. Although antigen-naive individuals mounted considerable T-cell responses after infection, B-cell responses were low, and neutralizing antibodies were frequently below the limit of detection. In summary, the detection of Omicron-associated B-cell responses in primed and in antigen-naive individuals supports the application of Omicron-adapted COVID-19 vaccines, but calls into question their suitability if they also contain/encode antigens of the original Wuhan virus.

Targeted proteomics identifies circulating biomarkers associated with active COVID-19 and post-COVID-19.

The ongoing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is caused by the highly infectious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). There is an urgent need for biomarkers that will help in better stratification of patients and contribute to personalized treatments. We performed targeted proteomics using the Olink platform and systematically investigated protein concentrations in 350 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 186 post-COVID-19 individuals, and 61 healthy individuals from 3 independent cohorts. Results revealed a signature of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, which is represented by inflammatory biomarkers, chemokines and complement-related factors. Furthermore, the circulating proteome is still significantly affected in post-COVID-19 samples several weeks after infection. Post-COVID-19 individuals are characterized by upregulation of mediators of the tumor necrosis (TNF)-α signaling pathways and proteins related to transforming growth factor (TGF)-ß. In addition, the circulating proteome is able to differentiate between patients with different COVID-19 disease severities, and is associated with the time after infection. These results provide important insights into changes induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection at the proteomic level by integrating several cohorts to obtain a large disease spectrum, including variation in disease severity and time after infection. These findings could guide the development of host-directed therapy in COVID-19.

The SARS-CoV-2 Delta-Omicron Recombinant Lineage (XD) Exhibits Immune-Escape Properties Similar to the Omicron (BA.1) Variant.

Recently, a recombinant SARS-CoV-2 lineage, XD, emerged that harbors a spike gene that is largely derived from the Omicron variant BA.1 in the genetic background of the Delta variant. This finding raised concerns that the recombinant virus might exhibit altered biological properties as compared to the parental viruses and might pose an elevated threat to human health. Here, using pseudotyped particles, we show that ACE2 binding and cell tropism of XD mimics that of BA.1. Further, XD and BA.1 displayed comparable sensitivity to neutralization by antibodies induced upon vaccination with BNT162b2/Comirnaty (BNT) or BNT vaccination followed by breakthrough infection. Our findings reveal important biological commonalities between XD and Omicron BA.1 host cell entry and its inhibition by antibodies.

SARS-CoV-2 variants C.1.2 and B.1.621 (Mu) partially evade neutralization by antibodies elicited upon infection or vaccination.

Rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants C.1.2 and B.1.621 (Mu variant) in Africa and the Americas, respectively, as well as a high number of mutations in the viral spike proteins raised concerns that these variants might pose an elevated threat to human health. Here, we show that C.1.2 and B.1.621 spike proteins mediate increased entry into certain cell lines but do not exhibit increased ACE2 binding. Further, we demonstrate that C.1.2 and B.1.621 are resistant to neutralization by bamlanivimab but remain sensitive to inhibition by antibody cocktails used for COVID-19 therapy. Finally, we show that C.1.2 and B.1.621 partially escape neutralization by antibodies induced upon infection and vaccination, with escape of vaccine-induced antibodies being as potent as that measured for B.1.351 (Beta variant), which is known to be highly neutralization resistant. Collectively, C.1.2 and B.1.621 partially evade control by vaccine-induced antibodies, suggesting that close monitoring of these variants is warranted.

Host Cell Entry and Neutralization Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Lineages B.1.620 and R.1.

The spike (S) protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) facilitates viral entry into host cells and is the key target for neutralizing antibodies. The SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.620 carries fifteen mutations in the S protein and is spread in Africa, the US and Europe, while lineage R.1 harbors four mutations in S and infections were observed in several countries, particularly Japan and the US. However, the impact of the mutations in B.1.620 and R.1 S proteins on antibody-mediated neutralization and host cell entry are largely unknown. Here, we report that these mutations are compatible with robust ACE2 binding and entry into cell lines, and they markedly reduce neutralization by vaccine-induced antibodies. Our results reveal evasion of neutralizing antibodies by B.1.620 and R.1, which might have contributed to the spread of these lineages.

Longitudinal cellular and humoral immune responses after triple BNT162b2 and fourth full-dose mRNA-1273 vaccination in haemodialysis patients.

Haemodialysis patients respond poorly to vaccination and continue to be at-risk for severe COVID-19. Therefore, dialysis patients were among the first for which a fourth COVID-19 vaccination was recommended. However, targeted information on how to best maintain immune protection after SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations in at-risk groups for severe COVID-19 remains limited. We provide, to the best of our knowledge, for the first time longitudinal vaccination response data in dialysis patients and controls after a triple BNT162b2 vaccination and in the latter after a subsequent fourth full-dose of mRNA-1273. We analysed systemic and mucosal humoral IgG responses against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) and ACE2-binding inhibition towards variants of concern including Omicron and Delta with multiplex-based immunoassays. In addition, we assessed Spike S1-specific T-cell responses by interferon γ release assay. After triple BNT162b2 vaccination, anti-RBD B.1 IgG and ACE2 binding inhibition reached peak levels in dialysis patients, but remained inferior compared to controls. Whilst we detected B.1-specific ACE2 binding inhibition in 84% of dialysis patients after three BNT162b2 doses, binding inhibition towards the Omicron variant was only detectable in 38% of samples and declining to 16% before the fourth vaccination. By using mRNA-1273 as fourth dose, humoral immunity against all SARS-CoV-2 variants tested was strongly augmented with 80% of dialysis patients having Omicron-specific ACE2 binding inhibition. Modest declines in T-cell responses in dialysis patients and controls after the second vaccination were restored by the third BNT162b2 dose and significantly increased by the fourth vaccination. Our data support current advice for a four-dose COVID-19 immunisation scheme for at-risk individuals such as haemodialysis patients. We conclude that administration of a fourth full-dose of mRNA-1273 as part of a mixed mRNA vaccination scheme to boost immunity and to prevent severe COVID-19 could also be beneficial in other immune impaired individuals. Additionally, strategic application of such mixed vaccine regimens may be an immediate response against SARS-CoV-2 variants with increased immune evasion potential.

BNT162b2-boosted immune responses six months after heterologous or homologous ChAdOx1nCoV-19/BNT162b2 vaccination against COVID-19.

Heterologous prime/boost vaccination with a vector-based approach (ChAdOx-1nCov-19, ChAd) followed by an mRNA vaccine (e.g. BNT162b2, BNT) has been reported to be superior in inducing protective immunity compared to repeated application of the same vaccine. However, data comparing immunity decline after homologous and heterologous vaccination as well as effects of a third vaccine application after heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination are lacking. Here we show longitudinal monitoring of ChAd/ChAd (n = 41) and ChAd/BNT (n = 88) vaccinated individuals and the impact of a third vaccination with BNT. The third vaccination greatly augments waning anti-spike IgG but results in only moderate increase in spike-specific CD4 + and CD8 + T cell numbers in both groups, compared to cell frequencies already present after the second vaccination in the ChAd/BNT group. More importantly, the third vaccination efficiently restores neutralizing antibody responses against the Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants of the virus, but neutralizing activity against the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant remains severely impaired. In summary, inferior SARS-CoV-2 specific immune responses following homologous ChAd/ChAd vaccination can be compensated by heterologous BNT vaccination, which might influence the choice of vaccine type for subsequent vaccination boosts.

Effects of Pre-Existing Mental Conditions on Fatigue and Psychological Symptoms Post-COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Patients who are post-COVID-19 will require more treatment soon. Therefore, it is important to understand the root cause of their psychological and somatic conditions. Previous studies showed contradictory results on the influence of pre-existing mental conditions. The present study examines the influence of these pre-existing conditions and their pre-treatment on the severity of post-COVID-19 symptoms. METHODS: This analysis employs questionnaire data from a large study sample in Germany. Overall, 801 participants were included. All participants rated their health status on a scale from 0 to 100. Fatigue, depression, and anxiety were measured using the FAS, PHQ-9, and GAD-7 scales. RESULTS: All pre-pandemic values showed no significant differences between the groups. The current health status was rated similarly by the recovered patients (µ = 80.5 ± 17.0) and the control group (µ = 81.2 ± 18.0) but significantly worse by acutely infected (µ = 59.0 ± 21.5) and post-COVID-19 patients (µ = 54.2 ± 21.1). Fatigue, depression, and anxiety were similar for recovered patients and the control group. By contrast, there were significant differences between the control and the post-COVID-19 groups concerning fatigue (45.9% vs. 93.1%), depression (19.3% vs. 53.8%), and anxiety (19.3% vs. 22.3%). CONCLUSION: Fatigue and psychological conditions of post-COVID-19 patients are not associated with pre-existing conditions.

Healthcare Workers' Perceptions and Medically Approved COVID-19 Infection Risk: Understanding the Mental Health Dimension of the Pandemic. A German Hospital Case Study.

Introduction: This study analyses how healthcare workers (HCWs) perceived risks, protection and preventive measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to medically approved risks and organizational measures. The aim is to explore "blind spots" of pandemic protection and make mental health needs of HCWs visible. Methods: We have chosen an "optimal-case" scenario of a high-income country with a well-resourced hospital sector and low HCW infection rate at the organizational level to explore governance gaps in HCW protection. A German multi-method hospital study at Hannover Medical School served as empirical case; document analysis, expert information and survey data (n = 1,163) were collected as part of a clinical study into SARS-CoV-2 serology testing during the second wave of the pandemic (November 2020-February 2021). Selected survey items included perceptions of risks, protection and preventive measures. Descriptive statistical analysis and regression were undertaken for gender, profession and COVID-19 patient care. Results: The results reveal a low risk of 1% medically approved infections among participants, but a much higher mean personal risk estimate of 15%. The majority (68.4%) expressed "some" to "very strong" fear of acquiring infection at the workplace. Individual protective behavior and compliance with protective workplace measures were estimated as very high. Yet only about half of the respondents felt strongly protected by the employer; 12% even perceived "no" or "little" protection. Gender and contact with COVID-19 patients had no significant effect on the estimations of infection risks and protective workplace behavior, but nursing was correlated with higher levels of personal risk estimations and fear of infection. Conclusions: A strong mismatch between low medically approved risk and personal risk perceptions of HCWs brings stressors and threats into view, that may be preventable through better information, training/education and risk communication and through investment in mental health and inclusion in pandemic preparedness plans.

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 Vaccination in Melanoma Patients under Immune Checkpoint Blockade.

BACKGROUND: Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is modestly impaired in cancer patients due to a generally weakened immune system. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are expected to enhance immune response. This has already been described to be the case in influenza vaccines, and first data about COVID-19 vaccines show a trend in this direction. AIM: We aimed to investigate the immune response of patients with melanoma under ICI therapy after COVID-19 vaccination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Skin Cancer Center Hanover (Germany), we recruited 60 patients with advanced melanoma who either received ICI therapy during or before the vaccination period. Serological blood analysis was performed using quantitative ELISA for Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein 1 IgG antibodies. RESULTS: We did not observe an enhanced humoral immune response in patients under active or past ICI therapy after COVID-19 vaccination. Nevertheless, there is a tendency of higher antibody levels when ICI therapy was received within the last 6 months before vaccination. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients in our study population under ongoing targeted therapy during vaccination period had significantly higher median antibody levels than patients without any active antitumor treatment. CONCLUSION: Melanoma patients under ICI therapy show comparable antibody response after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to healthy health care professionals. This finding is independent of the timing of ICI therapy.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages show comparable cell entry but differential neutralization by therapeutic antibodies.

The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 evades antibody-mediated neutralization with unprecedented efficiency. At least three Omicron sublineages have been identified-BA.1, BA.2, and BA.3-and BA.2 exhibits increased transmissibility. However, it is currently unknown whether BA.2 differs from the other sublineages regarding cell entry and antibody-mediated inhibition. Here, we show that BA.1, BA.2, and BA.3 enter and fuse target cells with similar efficiency and in an ACE2-dependent manner. However, BA.2 was not efficiently neutralized by seven of eight antibodies used for COVID-19 therapy, including Sotrovimab, which robustly neutralized BA.1. In contrast, BA.2 and BA.3 (but not BA.1) were appreciably neutralized by Cilgavimab, which could constitute a treatment option. Finally, all sublineages were comparably and efficiently neutralized by antibodies induced by BNT162b2 booster vaccination after previous two-dose homologous or heterologous vaccination. Collectively, the Omicron sublineages show comparable cell entry and neutralization by vaccine-induced antibodies but differ in susceptibility to therapeutic antibodies.

SARS-CoV-2-specific immune responses in elderly and immunosuppressed participants and patients with hematologic disease or checkpoint inhibition in solid tumors: study protocol of the prospective, observational CoCo immune study.

BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised people (ICP) and elderly individuals (older than 80 years) are at increased risk for severe coronavirus infections. To protect against serious infection with SARS-CoV-2, ICP are taking precautions that may include a reduction of social contacts and participation in activities which they normally enjoy. Furthermore, for these people, there is an uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of the vaccination. The COVID-19 Contact (CoCo) Immune study strives to characterize the immune response to COVID-19 vaccination in immunocompromised, elderly people, and patients with hematological or oncological diseases. The study uses blood-based screenings to monitor the humoral and cellular immune response in these groups after vaccination. Questionnaires and qualitative interviews are used to describe the level of social participation. METHODS: The CoCo Immune Study is a mixed methods prospective, longitudinal, observational study at two large university hospitals in Northern Germany. Starting in March 2021, it monitors anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses and collects information on social participation in more than 600 participants, at least 18 years old. Inclusion criteria and subcohorts: Participants with (1) regularly intake of immunosuppressive medication (ICP-cohort) or (2) age ≥ 80 years (80 + -cohort). Additionally, patients with current or former (3) myeloid, (4) lymphatic disease or (5) solid tumor under checkpoint inhibition (3-5: HO-cohort). EXCLUSION CRITERIA: (1) refusal to give informed consent, (2) contraindication to blood testing, (3) inability to declare consent. Participants complete a questionnaire at four different time points: prior to full vaccination, and 1, 6 and 12 months after completed vaccination. In addition, participants draw blood samples themselves or through a local health care provider and send them with their questionnaires per post at the respective time points after vaccination. Patients of the HO cohort dispense additional blood samples at week 3 to 12 and at month 6 to 9 after 2nd vaccination to gain additional knowledge in B and T cell responses. Selected participants are invited to qualitative interviews about social participation. DISCUSSION: This observational study is designed to gain insight into the immune response of people with weakened immune systems and to find out how social participation is affected after COVID-19 vaccination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with German Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: DRKS00023972) on 30th December 2020.