Neutralizing antibody response to XBB.1.5, BA.2.86, FL.1.5.1, and JN.1 six months after the BNT162b2 bivalent booster.

OBJECTIVES: An increase evasion of the SARS-CoV-2 virus toward vaccination strategies and natural immunity has been rapidly described notably because of the mutations in the spike receptor binding domain and the N-terminal domain. METHODS: Participants of the CRO-VAX HCP study who received the bivalent booster were followed up at 6 months. A pseudovirus-neutralization test was used to assess the neutralization potency of antibodies against D614G, Delta, BA.1, BA.5, XBB.1.5, BA.2.86, FL.1.5.1, and JN-1. RESULTS: The neutralizing capacity of antibodies against the Omicron variant or its subvariants was significantly reduced compared with D614G and Delta (P <0.0001). The lowest neutralizing response that was observed with JN-1 (geometric mean titers [GMTs] = 22.1) was also significantly lower than XBB.1.5 (GMT = 29.5, P <0.0001), BA.2.86 (GMT = 29.6, P <0.0001), and FL.1.5.1 (GMT = 25.2, P <0.0001). Participants who contracted a breakthrough infection because of XBB.1.5 had significantly higher neutralizing antibodies against all variants than uninfected participants, especially against the Omicron variant and its subvariants. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that JN.1 is one of the most immune-evading variants to date and that the BA.2.86 subvariant did not show an increased immunity escape compared with XBB.1.5. The stronger response in breakthrough infection cases with the Omicron variant and its subvariants supports the need to use vaccine antigens that target circulating variants.

Durability of humoral and cellular immunity six months after the BNT162b2 bivalent booster.

Studies about the duration of the humoral and cellular response following the bivalent booster administration are still scarce. We aimed at assessing the humoral and cellular response in a cohort of healthcare workers that received this booster. Blood samples were collected before the administration of the bivalent booster from Pfizer-BioNTech and after 14, 28, 90, and 180 days. Neutralizing antibodies against either the D614G strain, the delta variant, the BA.5 variant, or the XBB.1.5 subvariant were measured. The cellular response was assessed by measurement of the release of interferon gamma from T cells in response to an in vitro SARS-CoV-2 stimulation. A substantial waning of neutralizing antibodies was observed after 6 months (23.1-fold decrease), especially considering the XBB.1.5 subvariant. The estimated T1/2 of neutralizing antibodies was 16.1 days (95% CI = 10.2-38.4 days). Although most participants still present a robust cellular response after 6 months (i.e., 95%), a significant decrease was also observed compared to the peak response (0.95 vs. 0.41 UI/L, p = 0.0083). A significant waning of the humoral and cellular response was observed after 6 months. These data can also help competent national authorities in their recommendation regarding the administration of an additional booster.

Application of analytical performance specifications for urine test strip methods: Importance of reflectance signals.

INTRODUCTION: Urinalysis is essential for diagnosing kidney-related medical conditions. Urine test strip analysis serves as an initial and efficient screening method for reflex testing with accurate quantitative methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Freshly voided urines (n = 206) were analysed using two urine test strip brands on UC-MAX (Menarini) and cobas u 601 (Roche Diagnostics) instruments. Ordinal scale categories and reflectance signals (if available) were both used for the comparison with reference quantitative methods for glucose, proteins and albumin (cobas 503). Samples were considered positive when glucose > 15 or ≥ 54 mg/dL, proteins ≥ 200 mg/L and albumin ≥ 10 mg/L. Optimized reflectance thresholds were calculated by ROC curve analysis. Analytical performance specifications (APS) for trueness of test strip were gathered from the EFLM guideline (FPD, FNG, FNC). RESULTS: Reflectance signals were significantly lower in urine samples considered positive by the reference method (p < 0.0001). Reflectance signals were also correlated with quantitative measurements, showing strong correlation (0.754 to 0.969). Only the use of optimized reflectance thresholds on cobas u 601 achieved at least the minimum EFLM APS (FPD < 20%, FNG < 50% and FNC < 10%). CONCLUSION: The use of reflectance signals from urine test strips enhanced accuracy for glucose, proteins, and albumin measurement and may contribute to improve diagnosis of diverse kidney-related conditions.

Peri-infection titers of neutralizing and binding antibodies as a predictor of COVID-19 breakthrough infections in vaccinated healthcare professionals: importance of the timing.

OBJECTIVES: The BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine is highly effective in reducing COVID-19 infection, hospitalization and death. However, many subjects developed a breakthrough infection despite a full vaccination scheme. Since the waned efficacy of mRNA vaccines is correlated with the decrease of antibodies occurring over time, we aimed at evaluating whether lower levels of antibodies were associated with an increased risk of breakthrough infection in a cohort of breakthrough subjects that received three vaccine doses. METHODS: Total binding antibodies against the RBD of the S1 subunit (Roche Diagnostics, Machelen, Belgium) and neutralizing antibodies using the Omicron B.1.1.529 variant pseudovirus were measured. Based on individual kinetic curves, the antibody titer of each subject was interpolated just before the breakthrough infection and compared to a matched-control group that did not develop a breakthrough infection. RESULTS: Lower levels of total binding and neutralizing antibodies were observed compared to the control group (6.900 [95% CI; 5.101-9.470] vs. 11.395 BAU/mL [8.627-15.050] [p=0.0301] and 26.6 [18.0-39.3] vs. 59.5 dilution titer-1 [32.3-110] [p=0.0042], respectively). The difference between breakthrough and control subjects was mostly observed for neutralizing antibodies before three months after the homologous booster administration (46.5 [18.2-119] vs. 381 [285-509] [p=0.0156]). Considering the measurement of total binding antibodies before 3 months, there was no significant difference (p=0.4375). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our results showed that subjects that developed a breakthrough infection had lower levels of neutralizing and total binding antibodies compared to controls. The difference was mostly noticeable considering neutralizing antibodies, especially for infections occurring before 3 months after the booster administration.

Variability among commercial batches of normal pooled plasma in lupus anticoagulant testing.

INTRODUCTION: Lupus anticoagulant (LA) testing requires normal pooled plasma (NPP) in performing mixing studies and can be used for normalized ratios of clotting times (CTs). The aims were to demonstrate whether significant differences in clotting times between two batches of a same commercial NPP (CRYOcheck™) directly affect NPP-based cut-off values. METHODS: Diluted Russell Viper venom time (DRVVT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) were used for LA testing. Screening, mixing and confirm tests were performed with Stago® instruments and reagents. Two batches of commercial NPP (A1291 and A1301 from CRYOcheck™; frozen) were compared in the determination of cut-off values. Cut-off values were defined as 99th percentile values of 60 healthy donors and compared with Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Cut-off values obtained with the two NPP batches were significantly different for DRVVT (screen normalized ratio: 1.09 vs. 1.24, screen mix: 41.9 s vs. 38.9 s; index of circulating anticoagulant: 5.0 vs. 8.4; all had p-value <.001). On the contrary, no significant differences were observed for aPTT (screen normalized ratio: 1.32 vs. 1.34; p-value = .4068, screen mix: 37.8 s vs. 38.1 s; p-value = .1153) except for index of circulating anticoagulant: 9.6 versus 10.4 (p-value <.05). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that differences between two commercial NPP batches produced by a same manufacturer influenced LA cut-off values used for mixing studies and normalized ratios. Adequate cut-off setting, taking into account NPP CTs, is important to provide accurate conclusion about the presence or absence of a LA and avoid potential clinical impact.

Reassessment of dextran sulfate in anti-Xa assay for unfractionated heparin laboratory monitoring.

Background: Anti-Xa assays are used for unfractionated heparin (UFH) monitoring. Dextran sulfate (DS) is used in some assays to overcome the artifactual preanalytical release of platelet factor 4. However, the practical implications of this test modification have not been studied extensively. Objectives: To investigate the impact of the presence of DS in the anti-Xa assay for UFH laboratory monitoring. Methods: We studied factor Xa inhibition, using an assay without DS (Stago Liquid Anti-Xa), in normal pool plasma spiked with various concentrations of UFH (up to 1 IU/mL) in the presence of increasing concentrations of DS (up to 2560 µg/mL). We also investigated the effect of DS on FXa inhibition measured after the addition of UFH and heparin antagonists (protamine and Polybrene; Sigma Aldrich). Eventually, we compared the anti-Xa levels measured using the assay without DS to those measured with an assay containing DS (BIOPHEN Heparin LRT, Hyphen BioMed). Results: DS per se had a detectable anti-Xa effect. FXa inhibition in UFH-spiked plasma linearly increased with increasing concentrations of added DS, with a plateau at approximately 160 µg/mL DS, at which the apparent anti-Xa level had almost doubled. In the presence of heparin antagonists, the addition of DS increased anti-Xa levels, corresponding to the dissociation of the UFH-antagonists complexes in vitro. With the anti-Xa assay containing DS, UFH inhibition was not detected. Conclusion: In the presence of high concentrations of DS, FXa inhibition was much higher than that predicted from added UFH amounts, presumably related to the greater availability of UFH for interaction with antithrombin. While the relevance of measuring this "masked" heparin has not been demonstrated, the presence of DS renders the result inaccurate in the presence of protamine or Polybrene.