T-cell proliferation assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cells

Immunochromatographic enhancement strategy for SARS-CoV-2 detection based on nanotechnology

The global outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been catastrophic to both human health and social development. Therefore, developing highly reliable and sensitive point-of-care testing (POCT) for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a priority. Among all available POCTs, the lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA, also known as immunochromatography) has proved to be effective due to its accuracy, portability, convenience, and speed. In areas with a scarcity of laboratory resources and medical personnel, the LFIA provides an affordable option for the diagnosis of COVID-19. This review offers a comprehensive overview of methods for improving the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection using immunochromatography based on nanotechnology, sorted according to the different detection targets (antigens, antibodies, and nucleic acids). It also looks into the performance and properties of the various sensitivity enhancement strategies, before delving into the remaining challenges in COVID-19 diagnosis through LFIA. Ultimately, it seeks to provide helpful guidance in selecting an appropriate strategy for SARS-CoV-2 immunochromatographic detection based on nanotechnology.

Immune response of heterologous versus homologous prime-boost regimens with adenoviral vectored and mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised patients

Due to rare but major adverse reactions to the AstraZeneca adenoviral ChAdOx1-S-nCoV-19 vaccine (ChAd), German health authorities recommended adults under 60 who received one dose of ChAd, to receive a second dose of the BioNTech mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine (BNT) as a booster. Studies in the general population suggest an enhanced efficacy of the heterologous (ChAd-BNT) compared to the homologous (BNT-BNT) vaccination regimen. However, an analysis of the efficacy in patient populations with a high risk of severe COVID-19 due to acquired immunodeficiency is still missing. We therefore compared both vaccination regimens in healthy controls, patients with gynecological tumors after chemotherapy, patients on dialysis and patients with rheumatic diseases concerning the humoral and cellular immune response. The humoral and cellular immune response differed substantially in healthy controls compared to patients with acquired immunodeficiency. Overall, the most significant differences between the two immunization regimens were found in neutralizing antibodies. These were always higher after a heterologous immunization. Healthy controls responded well to both vaccination regimens. However, the formation of neutralizing antibodies was more pronounced after a heterologous immunization. Dialysis patients, on the other hand, only developed an adequate humoral and particularly cellular immune response after a heterologous immunization. Tumor and rheumatic patients also - to a weaker extent compared to dialysis patients - benefited from a heterologous immunization. In conclusion, the heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens (ChAd-BNT) seem to have an advantage over the homologous vaccination regimens, especially in immunocompromised patients such as patients with end-stage kidney disease treated with hemodialysis.

Sandwich mode lateral flow assay for point-of-care detecting SARS-CoV-2

The global corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been announced a pandemic outbreak, and has threatened human life and health seriously. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), as its causative pathogen, is widely detected in the screening of COVID-19 patients, infected people and contaminated substances. Lateral flow assay (LFA) is a popular point-of-care detection method, possesses advantages of quick response, simple operation mode, portable device, and low cost. Based on the above advantages, LFA has been widely developed for detecting SARS-CoV-2. In this review, we summarized the articles about the sandwich mode LFA detecting SARS-CoV-2, classified according to the target detection objects indicating genes, nucleocapsid protein, spike protein, and specific antibodies of SARS-CoV-2. In each part, LFA is further classified and summarized according to different signal detection types. Additionally, the properties of the targets were introduced to clarify their detection significance. The review is expected to provide a helpful guide for LFA sensitization and marker selection of SARS-CoV-2.

Outliers Matter—Correlation between S1 IgG SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies and Neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies

Vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 virus or infection with SARS-CoV-2 will lead to the development of IgG antibodies against the S1 protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, even despite having high levels of IgG antibodies against the S1 protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, (re-)infection may occur. We thus examined 2994 consecutive blood samples of outpatients from the Berlin-Brandenburg area in Germany in which IgG antibodies against the S1 protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus as well as neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 virus antibodies were determined from the same sample. When analyzing the entire study population (2994 outpatients), we saw that S1 IgG antibodies (women: 223.98 ± 3.81; men: 207.80 ± 4.59; p = 0.014) and neutralizing antibodies (women: 66.65 ± 0.82; men: 62.88 ± 1.01; p = 0.021) are slightly higher in women than in men. Curve fitting revealed a good non-linear relationship between S1 IgG and neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, 51 out of the 2994 blood samples from individual subjects were positive with regard to the neutralizing antibodies and at the same time negative for S1 IgG antibodies, and 112 out of the 2994 blood samples from individual subjects were negative with regard to the neutralizing antibodies and at the same time positive for S1 IgG antibodies. In conclusion, our study shows that there is a relevant number of patients who, despite developing significant titers of S1 antibodies, do not have relevant amounts of neutralizing antibody titers and are probably at high risk of (re-)infection.

Impact of hypertension on long-term humoral and cellular response to SARS-CoV-2 infection

It was shown that hypertension delays SARS CoV-2 viral clearance and exacerbates airway hyperinflammation in the respiratory tract. However, it is unknown whether hypertension determines the long-term cellular and humoral response to SARS Cov2. Health care workers (HCWs) after an outbreak of SARS Cov-2 infections were analyzed. Infected HCWs were not vaccinated before blood collection. 5-14 months (median 7 months) after detection of SARS CoV-2 infection, blood was taken to analyze humoral response (S1 IgG and SARS CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies) and cellular (T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 with Lymphocyte Transformation Test). To identify clinical factors that determine the immune response, a multivariate regression analysis was done considering age, BMI, sex, diabetes, hypertension, smoking, COPD, asthma and time between PCR positivity and blood collection as confounding factors. Infected hypertensive HCWs more often needed to be hospitalized than non-hypertensive HCWs, but were less likely to develop anosmia and myalgia. The long-term humoral and cellular immune response was significantly strengthened in hypertensive versus normotensive infected HCWs. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that hypertension was independently associated with the humoral response to SARS CoV-2 infection. Multivariate regression analysis using same confounding factors for the humoral response showed a clear trend for an association with the cellular response to SARS CoV-2 infection as well. In conclusion, SARS CoV-2 infection strengthened immune response to SARS CoV-2 infection in hypertensive HCWs independent of other risk factors.

Accuracy of QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 research use only assay and characterization of the CD4+ and CD8+ T cell-SARS-CoV-2 response: comparison with a homemade interferon-γ release assay

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we aimed to characterize the SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response detected by the QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 research use only assay in terms of accuracy and T cell subsets involved compared with a homemade interferon (IFN)-γ release assay (IGRA).

METHODS

We evaluated T cell response by the standardized QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 tubes (antigen [Ag]1 and Ag2) and a homemade IGRA quantifying IFN-γ response to SARS-CoV-2 spike peptides (homemade-IGRA-SPIKE test). We evaluated the T cell subsets mediating the specific response using flow cytometry.

RESULTS

We prospectively enrolled 66 individuals: COVID-19 or post-COVID-19 subjects and NO-COVID-19-vaccinated subjects, including healthy donors and immunocompromised subjects. The standardized kit detected 62.1% (41/66) of T cell responders. Ag2 tube showed a higher IFN-γ quantitative and qualitative response. Ag1 tube response was mainly mediated by CD4⁺ T cells; Ag2 tube response was mediated by CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. The homemade-IGRA-SPIKE test detected a higher number of responders (52/66, 78.8%) than the QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 assay (P = 0.056). The response was found in both T cell subsets, although a higher magnitude and response rate was observed in the CD4⁺ T cell subset.

CONCLUSION

The QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 response is mediated by CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. A lower number of responders is found compared with the homemade-IGRA-SPIKE test, likely because of the different peptide composition.