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.

Nucleocapsid-specific T cell responses associate with control of SARS-CoV-2 in the upper airways before seroconversion.

Despite intensive research since the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, it has remained unclear precisely which components of the early immune response protect against the development of severe COVID-19. Here, we perform a comprehensive immunogenetic and virologic analysis of nasopharyngeal and peripheral blood samples obtained during the acute phase of infection with SARS-CoV-2. We find that soluble and transcriptional markers of systemic inflammation peak during the first week after symptom onset and correlate directly with upper airways viral loads (UA-VLs), whereas the contemporaneous frequencies of circulating viral nucleocapsid (NC)-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells correlate inversely with various inflammatory markers and UA-VLs. In addition, we show that high frequencies of activated CD4+ and CD8+ T cells are present in acutely infected nasopharyngeal tissue, many of which express genes encoding various effector molecules, such as cytotoxic proteins and IFN-γ. The presence of IFNG mRNA-expressing CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in the infected epithelium is further linked with common patterns of gene expression among virus-susceptible target cells and better local control of SARS-CoV-2. Collectively, these results identify an immune correlate of protection against SARS-CoV-2, which could inform the development of more effective vaccines to combat the acute and chronic illnesses attributable to COVID-19.

The interplay of viral loads, clinical presentation, and serological responses in SARS-CoV-2 - Results from a prospective cohort of outpatient COVID-19 cases.

Risk factors for disease progression and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infections require an understanding of acute and long-term virological and immunological dynamics. Fifty-one RT-PCR positive COVID-19 outpatients were recruited between May and December 2020 in Munich, Germany, and followed up at multiple defined timepoints for up to one year. RT-PCR and viral culture were performed and seroresponses measured. Participants were classified applying the WHO clinical progression scale. Short symptom to test time (median 5.0 days; p = 0.0016) and high viral loads (VL; median maximum VL: 3∙108 copies/mL; p = 0.0015) were indicative for viral culture positivity. Participants with WHO grade 3 at baseline had significantly higher VLs compared to those with WHO 1 and 2 (p = 0.01). VLs dropped fast within 1 week of symptom onset. Maximum VLs were positively correlated with the magnitude of Ro-N-Ig seroresponse (p = 0.022). Our results describe the dynamics of VLs and antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in mild to moderate cases that can support public health measures during the ongoing global pandemic.

Head-to-head evaluation of seven different seroassays including direct viral neutralisation in a representative cohort for SARS-CoV-2.

A number of seroassays are available for SARS-CoV-2 testing; yet, head-to-head evaluations of different testing principles are limited, especially using raw values rather than categorical data. In addition, identifying correlates of protection is of utmost importance, and comparisons of available testing systems with functional assays, such as direct viral neutralisation, are needed.We analysed 6658 samples consisting of true-positives (n=193), true-negatives (n=1091), and specimens of unknown status (n=5374). For primary testing, we used Euroimmun-Anti-SARS-CoV-2-ELISA-IgA/IgG and Roche-Elecsys-Anti-SARS-CoV-2. Subsequently virus-neutralisation, GeneScriptcPass, VIRAMED-SARS-CoV-2-ViraChip, and Mikrogen-recomLine-SARS-CoV-2-IgG were applied for confirmatory testing. Statistical modelling generated optimised assay cut-off thresholds. Sensitivity of Euroimmun-anti-S1-IgA was 64.8%, specificity 93.3% (manufacturer's cut-off); for Euroimmun-anti-S1-IgG, sensitivity was 77.2/79.8% (manufacturer's/optimised cut-offs), specificity 98.0/97.8%; Roche-anti-N sensitivity was 85.5/88.6%, specificity 99.8/99.7%. In true-positives, mean and median Euroimmun-anti-S1-IgA and -IgG titres decreased 30/90 days after RT-PCR-positivity, Roche-anti-N titres decreased significantly later. Virus-neutralisation was 80.6% sensitive, 100.0% specific (≥1:5 dilution). Neutralisation surrogate tests (GeneScriptcPass, Mikrogen-recomLine-RBD) were >94.9% sensitive and >98.1% specific. Optimised cut-offs improved test performances of several tests. Confirmatory testing with virus-neutralisation might be complemented with GeneScriptcPassTM or recomLine-RBD for certain applications. Head-to-head comparisons given here aim to contribute to the refinement of testing strategies for individual and public health use.