Novel SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody and neutralization assays reveal wide range of humoral immune response during COVID-19

Polyclonal hyper immunoglobulin: A proven treatment and prophylaxis platform for passive immunization to address existing and emerging diseases

Passive immunization with polyclonal hyper immunoglobulin (HIG) therapy represents a proven strategy by transferring immunoglobulins to patients to confer immediate protection against a range of pathogens including infectious agents and toxins. Distinct from active immunization, the protection is passive and the immunoglobulins will clear from the system; therefore, administration of an effective dose must be maintained for prophylaxis or treatment until a natural adaptive immune response is mounted or the pathogen/agent is cleared. The current review provides an overview of this technology, key considerations to address different pathogens, and suggested improvements. The review will reflect on key learnings from development of HIGs in the response to public health threats due to Zika, influenza, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

Evaluation and Comparison of Serological Methods for COVID-19 Diagnosis

The worldwide pandemic of COVID-19 has become a global public health crisis. Various clinical diagnosis methods have been developed to distinguish COVID-19-infected patients from healthy people. The nucleic acid test is the golden standard for virus detection as it is suitable for early diagnosis. However, due to the low amount of viral nucleic acid in the respiratory tract, the sensitivity of nucleic acid detection is unsatisfactory. As a result, serological screening began to be widely used with the merits of simple procedures, lower cost, and shorter detection time. Serological tests currently include the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), and chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA). This review describes various serological methods, discusses the performance and diagnostic effects of different methods, and points out the problems and the direction of optimization, to improve the efficiency of clinical diagnosis. These increasingly sophisticated and diverse serological diagnostic technologies will help human beings to control the spread of COVID-19.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2, Symptom Profiles and Sero-Neutralization in a Suburban Area, France

The World Health Organisation recommends monitoring the circulation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We investigated anti-SARS-CoV-2 total immunoglobulin (IgT) antibody seroprevalence and in vitro sero-neutralization in Nancy, France, in spring 2020. Individuals were randomly sampled from electoral lists and invited with household members over 5 years old to be tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 (IgT, i.e., IgA/IgG/IgM) antibodies by ELISA (Bio-rad); the sero-neutralization activity was evaluated on Vero CCL-81 cells. Among 2006 individuals, the raw seroprevalence was 2.1% (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 2.9), was highest for 20- to 34-year-old participants (4.7% (2.3 to 8.4)), within than out of socially deprived area (2.5% vs. 1%, p = 0.02) and with than without intra-family infection (p < 10^-6). Moreover, 25% of participants presented at least one COVID-19 symptom associated with SARS-CoV-2 positivity (p < 10^-13), with highly discriminant anosmia or ageusia (odds ratio 27.8 [13.9 to 54.5]); 16.3% (6.8 to 30.7) of seropositive individuals were asymptomatic. Positive sero-neutralization was demonstrated in vitro for 31/43 seropositive subjects. Regarding the very low seroprevalence, a preventive effect of the lockdown in March 2020 can be assumed for the summer, but a second COVID-19 wave, as expected, could be subsequently observed in this poorly immunized population.

Detection of Anti-Nucleocapsid Antibody in COVID-19 Patients in Bangladesh Is not Correlated with Previous Dengue Infection

BACKGROUND

The assessment of antibody responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 is potentially confounded by exposures to flaviviruses. The aims of the present research were to determine whether anti-dengue antibodies affect the viral load and the detection of anti-coronavirus nucleocapsid (N)-protein antibodies in coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Bangladesh.

METHODS

Viral RNA was evaluated in swab specimens from 115 COVID-19 patients by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rT-PCR). The anti-N-protein antibodies, anti-dengue virus E-protein antibodies and the dengue non-structural protein-1 were determined in serum from 115 COVID-19 patients, 30 acute dengue fever pre-COVID-19 pandemic and nine normal controls by ELISA.

RESULTS

The concentrations of viral RNA in the nasopharyngeal; Ct median (95% CI); 22 (21.9-23.3) was significantly higher than viral RNA concentrations in oropharyngeal swabs; and 29 (27-30.5) p < 0.0001. Viral RNA concentrations were not correlated with-dengue IgG levels. The anti-nucleocapsid antibodies were IgA 27% positive and IgG 35% positive at days 1 to 8 post-onset of COVID-19 symptoms versus IgA 0% and IgG 0% in dengue patients, p < 0.0001. The levels of anti- nucleocapsid IgA or IgG versus the levels of anti-dengue IgM or IgG revealed no significant correlations.

CONCLUSIONS

Viral RNA and anti-nucleocapsid antibodies were detected in COVID-19 patients from dengue-endemic regions of Bangladesh, independently of the dengue IgG levels.

Convalescent Plasma for the Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by a novel coronavirus termed SARS-CoV-2, has spread quickly worldwide. Convalescent plasma (CP) obtained from patients following recovery from COVID-19 infection and development of antibodies against the virus is an attractive option for either prophylactic or therapeutic treatment, since antibodies may have direct or indirect antiviral activities and immunotherapy has proven effective in principle and in many clinical reports.

OBJECTIVE

We seek to characterize the latest advances and evidence in the use of CP for COVID-19 through a systematic review and quantitative analysis, identify knowledge gaps in this setting, and offer recommendations and directives for future research.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were continuously searched for studies assessing the use of CP for COVID-19, including clinical studies, commentaries, reviews, guidelines or protocols, and in vitro testing of CP antibodies. The screening process and data extraction were performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Quality appraisal of all clinical studies was conducted using a universal tool independent of study designs. A meta-analysis of case-control and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Substantial literature has been published covering various aspects of CP therapy for COVID-19. Of the references included in this review, a total of 243 eligible studies including 64 clinical studies, 79 commentary articles, 46 reviews, 19 guidance and protocols, and 35 in vitro testing of CP antibodies matched the criteria. Positive results have been mostly observed so far when using CP for the treatment of COVID-19. There were remarkable heterogeneities in the CP therapy with respect to patient demographics, donor antibody titers, and time and dose of CP administration. The studies assessing the safety of CP treatment reported low incidence of adverse events. Most clinical studies, in particular case reports and case series, had poor quality. Only 1 RCT was of high quality. Randomized and nonrandomized data were found in 2 and 11 studies, respectively, and were included for meta-analysis, suggesting that CP could reduce mortality and increase viral clearance. Despite promising pilot studies, the benefits of CP treatment can only be clearly established through carefully designed RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is developing support for CP therapy, particularly for patients who are critically ill or mechanically ventilated and resistant to antivirals and supportive care. These studies provide important lessons that should inform the planning of well-designed RCTs to generate more robust knowledge for the efficacy of CP in patients with COVID-19. Future research is necessary to fill the knowledge gap regarding prevention and treatment for patients with COVID-19 with CP while other therapeutics are being developed.

Antibody isotype diversity against SARS-CoV-2 is associated with differential serum neutralization capacities

Understanding antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 is indispensable for the development of containment measures to overcome the current COVID-19 pandemic. Recent studies showed that serum from convalescent patients can display variable neutralization capacities. Still, it remains unclear whether there are specific signatures that can be used to predict neutralization. Here, we performed a detailed analysis of sera from a cohort of 101 recovered healthcare workers and we addressed their SARS-CoV-2 antibody response by ELISA against SARS-CoV-2 Spike receptor binding domain and nucleoprotein. Both ELISA methods detected sustained levels of serum IgG against both antigens. Yet, the majority of individuals from our cohort generated antibodies with low neutralization capacity and only 6% showed high neutralizing titers against both authentic SARS-CoV-2 virus and the Spike pseudotyped virus. Interestingly, higher neutralizing sera correlate with detection of -IgG, IgM and IgA antibodies against both antigens, while individuals with positive IgG alone showed poor neutralization response. These results suggest that having a broader repertoire of antibodies may contribute to more potent SARS-CoV-2 neutralization. Altogether, our work provides a cross sectional snapshot of the SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody response in recovered healthcare workers and provides preliminary evidence that possessing multiple antibody isotypes can play an important role in predicting SARS-CoV-2 neutralization.

IgA2 Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Correlate with NET Formation and Fatal Outcome in Severely Diseased COVID-19 Patients

Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) leads to an adaptive immune response in the host and the formation of anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies. While IgG responses against SARS-CoV-2 have been characterized quite well, less is known about IgA. IgA2 activates immune cells and induces inflammation and neutrophil extracellular trap (NET) formation which may contribute to organ injury and fatal outcome in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein specific antibody levels were measured in plasma samples of 15 noninfected controls and 82 SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with no or mild symptoms, moderate symptoms (hospitalization) or severe disease (intensive care unit, ICU). Antibody levels were compared to levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and circulating extracellular DNA (ecDNA) as markers for general inflammation and NET formation, respectively. While levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG were similar in all patient groups, IgA2 antibodies were restricted to severe disease and showed the strongest discrimination between nonfatal and fatal outcome in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. While anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA2 levels correlated with CRP levels in severely diseased patients, only anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA2 correlated with ecDNA. These data suggest that the formation of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA2 during SARS-CoV-2 infection is a marker for more severe disease related to NET formation and poor outcome.

Elevated SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies Distinguish Severe Disease in Early COVID-19 Infection

Background

SARS-CoV-2 has caused over 36,000,000 cases and 1,000,000 deaths globally. Comprehensive assessment of the multifaceted anti-viral antibody response is critical for diagnosis, differentiation of severe disease, and characterization of long-term immunity. Initial observations suggest that severe disease is associated with higher antibody levels and greater B cell/plasmablast responses. A multi-antigen immunoassay to define the complex serological landscape and clinical associations is essential.

Methods

We developed a multiplex immunoassay and evaluated serum/plasma from adults with RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections during acute illness (N=52) and convalescence (N=69); and pre-pandemic (N=106) and post-pandemic (N=137) healthy adults. We measured IgA, IgG, and/or IgM against SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid (N), Spike domain 1 (S1), receptor binding domain (S1-RBD) and S1-N-terminal domain (S1-NTD).

Results

To diagnose infection, the combined [IgA+IgG+IgM] or IgG for N, S1, and S1-RBD yielded AUC values -0.90 by ROC curves. From days 6-30 post-symptom onset, the levels of antigen-specific IgG, IgA or [IgA+IgG+IgM] were higher in patients with severe/critical compared to mild/moderate infections. Consistent with excessive concentrations of antibodies, a strong prozone effect was observed in sera from severe/critical patients. Notably, mild/moderate patients displayed a slower rise and lower peak in anti-N and anti-S1 IgG levels compared to severe/critical patients, but anti-RBD IgG and neutralization responses reached similar levels at 2-4 months.

Conclusion

This SARS-CoV-2 multiplex immunoassay measures the magnitude, complexity and kinetics of the antibody response against multiple viral antigens. The IgG and combined-isotype SARS-CoV-2 multiplex assay is highly diagnostic of acute and convalescent disease and may prognosticate severity early in illness.

One Sentence Summary

In contrast to patients with moderate infections, those with severe COVID-19 develop prominent, early antibody responses to S1 and N proteins.

The triggering of post-COVID-19 autoimmunity phenomena could be associated with both transient immunosuppression and an inappropriate form of immune reconstitution in susceptible individuals

With the progression of the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been different reports about the development of autoimmune diseases once the infection is controlled. After entering the respiratory epithelial cells, SARS-CoV-2—the virus that causes the disease—triggers a severe inflammatory state in some patients known as “cytokine storm” and the development of thrombotic phenomena—both conditions being associated with high mortality. Patients additionally present severe lymphopenia and, in some cases, complement consumption and autoantibody development. There is a normalization of lymphocytes once the infection is controlled. After this, autoimmune conditions of unknown etiology may occur. A hypothesis for the development of post-COVID-19 autoimmunity is proposed based on the consequences of both a transient immunosuppression (both of innate and acquired immunity) in which self-tolerance is lost and an inappropriate form of immune reconstitution that amplifies the process.

Longitudinal analysis of clinical serology assay performance and neutralising antibody levels in COVID19 convalescents

OBJECTIVES

To investigate longitudinal trajectory of SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibodies and the performance of serological assays in diagnosing prior infection and predicting serum neutralisation titres with time Design Retrospective longitudinal analysis of a COVID19 case cohort . Setting NHS outpatient clinics Participants Individuals with RT-PCR diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection that did not require hospitalization Main outcome measures The sensitivity with which prior infection was detected and quantitative antibody titres were assessed using four SARS-CoV-2 serologic assay platforms. Two platforms employed SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) based antigens and two employed nucleocapsid (N) based antigens. Serum neutralising antibody titres were measured using a validated pseudotyped virus SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation assay. The ability of the serological assays to predict neutralisation titres at various times after PCR diagnosis was assessed. Results The three of the four serological assays had sensitivities of 95 to100% at 21-40 days post PCR-diagnosis, while a fourth assay had a lower sensitivity of 85%. The relative sensitivities of the assays changed with time and the sensitivity of one assay that had an initial sensitivity of >95% declined to 85% at 61-80 post PCR diagnosis, and to 71% at 81-100 days post diagnosis. Median antibody titres decreased in one serologic assay but were maintained over the observation period in other assays. The trajectories of median antibody titres measured in serologic assays over this time period were not dependent on whether the SARS-CoV-2 N or S proteins were used as antigen source. A broad range of SARS-CoV-2 neutralising titres were evident in individual sera, that decreased over time in the majority of participants; the median neutralisation titre in the cohort decreased by 45% over 4 weeks. Each of the serological assays gave quantitative measurements of antibody titres that correlated with SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation titres, but, the S-based serological assay measurements better predicted serum neutralisation potency. The strength of correlation between serologic assay results and neutralisation titres deteriorated with time and decreases in neutralisation titres in individual participants were not well predicted by changes in antibody titres measured using serologic assays.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 serologic assays differed in their comparative diagnostic performance over time. Different assays are more or less well suited for surveillance of populations for prior infection versus prediction of serum neutralisation potency. Continued monitoring of declining neutralisation titres during extended follow up should facilitate the establishment of appropriate serologic correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection.