Anti-A and SARS-CoV-2: an intriguing association

Impact of COVID status and blood group on complications in patients in hemorrhagic shock

Objective

Among critically injured patients of various blood groups, we sought to compare survival and complication rates between COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative cohorts.

Background

SARS-CoV-2 infections have been shown to cause endothelial injury and dysfunctional coagulation. We hypothesized that, among patients with trauma in hemorrhagic shock, COVID-19-positive status would be associated with increased mortality and inpatient complications. As a secondary hypothesis, we suspected group O patients with COVID-19 would experience fewer complications than non-group O patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We evaluated all trauma patients admitted 4/2020-7/2020. Patients 16 years or older were included if they presented in hemorrhagic shock and received emergency release blood products. Patients were dichotomized by COVID-19 testing and then divided by blood groups.

Results

3281 patients with trauma were evaluated, and 417 met criteria for analysis. Seven percent (29) of patients were COVID-19 positive; 388 were COVID-19 negative. COVID-19-positive patients experienced higher complication rates than the COVID-19-negative cohort, including acute kidney injury, pneumonia, sepsis, venous thromboembolism, and systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Univariate analysis by blood groups demonstrated that survival for COVID-19-positive group O patients was similar to that of COVID-19-negative patients (79 vs 78%). However, COVID-19-positive non-group O patients had a significantly lower survival (38%). Controlling for age, sex and Injury Severity Score, COVID-19-positive patients had a greater than 70% decreased odds of survival (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.81; p=0.019).

Conclusions

COVID-19 status is associated with increased major complications and 70% decreased odds of survival in this group of patients with trauma. However, among patients with COVID-19, blood group O was associated with twofold increased survival over other blood groups. This survival rate was similar to that of patients without COVID-19.

Correlation between ABO blood type, susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To verify the association between the ABO blood type and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity.

METHODS

This review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), using the 2020 PRISMA Checklist and flow diagram, and articles selected for review were analyzed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Rating Scale. The research question was: "Would the ABO blood group influence the risk of infection and clinical course of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2?", The following databases were used: Embase, PubMed, Virtual Health Library (VHL), Web of Science, ScienceDirect and Scopus. The protocol for this review was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), number CRD42021245945.

RESULTS

We found 798 articles across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct and Virtual Health Library and 54 articles were included in the final analysis. Among 30 studies evaluating the risk of COVID-19 infection, 21 found significant correlations with ABO blood groups, 14 of them revealing an increased risk in blood group A and 15 studies showing a decreased risk in blood group O. Most studies found no significant correlation with disease severity or mortality.

CONCLUSION

The qualitative assessment of available information suggests that blood group A may be a risk factor for COVID-19 infection and that blood group O may have a protective effect. We were unable to determine a clear association between the ABO blood group and mortality. These conclusions are based on highly heterogenous evidence.

Predictors of high SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G titers in COVID-19 convalescent whole-blood donors: a cross-sectional study in China

Background

Demographic information has been shown to help predict high antibody titers of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) in CCP donors. However, there is no research on the Chinese population and little evidence on whole-blood donors. Therefore, we aimed to investigate these associations among Chinese blood donors after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, 5,064 qualified blood donors with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection completed a self-reported questionnaire and underwent tests of SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody and ABO blood type. Logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for high SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers according to each factor.

Results

Totally, 1,799 participants (with SARS-CoV-2 IgG titers≥1:160) had high-titer CCPs. Multivariable analysis showed that a 10-year increment in age and earlier donation were associated with higher odds of high-titer CCP, while medical personnel was associated with lower odds. The ORs (95% CIs) of high-titer CCP were 1.17 (1.10-1.23, p< 0.001) and 1.41 (1.25-1.58, p< 0.001) for each 10-year increment in age and earlier donation, respectively. The OR of high-titer CCP was 0.75 (0.60-0.95, p = 0.02) for medical personnel. Female early donors were associated with increased odds of high-titer CCP, but this association was insignificant for later donors. Donating after 8 weeks from the onset was associated with decreased odds of having high-titer CCP compared to donating within 8 weeks from the onset, and the HR was 0.38 (95% CI: 0.22-0.64, p <0.001). There was no significant association between ABO blood type or race and the odds of high-titer CCP.

Discussion

Older age, earlier donation, female early donors, and non-medical-related occupations are promising predictors of high-titer CCP in Chinese blood donors. Our findings highlight the importance of CCP screening at the early stage of the pandemic.

Host genetics impact on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-induced immunoglobulin levels and dynamics: The role of TP53, ABO, APOE, ACE2, HLA-A, and CRP genes

Background: Development and worldwide availability of safe and effective vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) to fight severe symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and block the pandemic have been a great achievement and stimulated researchers on understanding the efficacy and duration of different vaccine types. Methods: We investigated the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgG) and neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) in 195 healthy adult subjects belonging to the staff of the University-Hospital of Ferrara (Italy) starting from 15 days up to 190 days (about 6 months) after the second dose of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA-based vaccine (n = 128) or ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca) adenovirus-based vaccine (n = 67) using a combined approach of serological and genomics investigations. Results: A strong correlation between IgG and NAb levels was detected during the 190 days of follow-up (r 2 = 0.807; p < 0.0001) and was confirmed during the first 90 days (T1) after vaccination (r 2 = 0.789; p = 0.0001) and 91-190 days (T2) after vaccination (r 2 = 0.764; p = 0.0001) for both vaccine types (r 2 = 0.842; p = 0.0001 and r 2 = 0.780; p = 0.0001 for mRNA- and adenovirus-based vaccine, respectively). In addition to age (p < 0.01), sex (p = 0.03), and type of vaccine (p < 0.0001), which partially accounted for the remarkable individual differences observed in the antibody levels and dynamics, interesting genetic determinants appeared as significant modifiers of both IgG and NAb responses among the selected genes investigated (TP53, rs1042522; APOE, rs7412/rs429358; ABO, rs657152; ACE2, rs2285666; HLA-A rs2571381/rs2499; CRP, rs2808635/rs876538; LZTFL1, rs35044562; OAS3, rs10735079; SLC6A20, rs11385942; CFH, rs1061170; and ACE1, ins/del, rs4646994). In detail, regression analysis and mean antibody level comparison yielded appreciable differences after genotype stratification (P1 and P2, respectively, for IgG and NAb distribution) in the whole cohort and/or in the mRNA-based vaccine in the following genes: TP53, rs1042522 (P1 = 0.03; P2 = 0.04); ABO, rs657152 (P1 = 0.01; P2 = 0.03); APOE, rs7412/rs429358 (P1 = 0.0018; P2 = 0.0002); ACE2, rs2285666 (P1 = 0.014; P2 = 0.009); HLA-A, rs2571381/rs2499 (P1 = 0.02; P2 = 0.03); and CRP, rs2808635/rs876538 (P1 = 0.01 and P2 = 0.09). Conclusion: High- or low-responsive subjects can be identified among healthy adult vaccinated subjects after targeted genetic screening. This suggests that favorable genetic backgrounds may support the progression of an effective vaccine-induced immune response, though no definite conclusions can be drawn on the real effectiveness ascribed to a specific vaccine or to the different extent of a genotype-driven humoral response. The interplay between data from the polygenic predictive markers and serological screening stratified by demogeographic information can help to recognize the individual humoral response, accounting for ethnic and geographical differences, in both COVID-19 and anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations.

Lower Levels of ABO Anti-A and Anti-B of IgM, IgG and IgA Isotypes in the Serum but Not the Saliva of COVID-19 Convalescents

Individuals with ABO type O, naturally possessing anti-A and anti-B antibodies in their serum, are underrepresented among patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 compared with healthy controls. The ABO antibodies might play a role in the viral transmission. Therefore, we aimed to quantify anti-A/anti-B, including their subclasses IgM, IgG and IgA, in the serum and saliva of Caucasians (n = 187) after mild COVID-19 to compare them with individuals who had never been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Two samples were collected within two months after the diagnosis (median days: 44) and two months later. ABO antibodies were determined by flow cytometry. Additionally, total IgA in saliva and antibodies specific to SARS-CoV-2 were tested by ELISA. COVID-19 convalescents had significantly lower levels of anti-A/anti-B IgM, IgG and IgA in their serum than control subjects (p < 0.001). Interestingly, no significant differences were observed in saliva. ABO antibody levels remained stable over the period considered. No relation of ABO to the level of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies was observed. Total IgA was lower in convalescents than in controls (p = 0.038). Whereas ABO antibodies in the saliva may not contribute to the pathogenesis of COVID-19, individual pre-existing high serum concentrations of anti-A/anti-B may have a protective effect against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Antibody response to BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine is not influenced by AB0 blood group in subjects with transfusion-dependent thalassemia

Not applicable.

ABO blood group does not influence the level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in convalescent plasma donors

BACKGROUND

The association of the ABO blood group with COVID-19 disease has been confirmed by several studies, with the blood group A patients being more susceptible and prone to a more severe clinical course of the disease. Additionally, several authors also addressed the association of ABO-types and the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in convalescents, mostly supporting a theory that the non-O blood group convalescents present with higher levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Since previous findings were based on small convalescent cohorts, we quantified the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in total 3187 convalescent plasma donors with three commercial serological and one standard neutralizing antibody test. The majority of donors had undergone a mild form of the disease and the median time of sampling was 66 days after diagnosis.

RESULTS

None of the antibody quantitation results showed any significant association with the ABO blood group types. The same result was evident in the subgroup of vaccinated individuals (n=370) and the subgroups when stratified according to post-COVID-19 periods (0-60, 60-120, and 120-180 days).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we found no evidence to confirm that the ABO blood group types influence the level of SARS-CoV-2 antibody response in COVID-19 convalescent plasma donors.

Blood group O convalescent plasma donations have significantly lower levels of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies compared to blood group A donations

Background

COVID‐19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is plasma collected from individuals who have recovered from SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. The FDA Emergency Use Authorization restricts use of CCP to high‐titer units only. The purpose of this study was to determine if donor ABO blood group was associated with SARS‐CoV‐2 antibody response, and subsequent qualification as high‐titer CCP.

Methods

All CCP donations collected from April 21, 2020 to September 1, 2020 were included. The Abbott ARCHITECT semi‐quantitative chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay was used to assess IgG antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein of SARS‐CoV‐2. Units with a S/C value ≥4.5 were considered high titer.

Results

A total of 232 CCP donations were evaluated. There were no significant differences in the distribution of sex, age, and interval from symptom resolution to donation by ABO blood group. The mean SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG antibody S/C value was significantly lower in blood group O donations (3.6), compared to blood group A (5.0) donations (p < .001). There was no difference in antibody response between the other blood group pairings. Blood group O donations resulted in a lower percentage of high‐titer units (35%), compared to blood group A (60%), B (58%), and AB (65%) donations.

Conclusion

Blood group O donations were found to have significantly lower levels of SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG nucleocapsid antibodies compared to blood group A donations and were less likely to produce CCP units that qualified as high titer. These findings may aid donor recruitment to promote availability of high‐titer CCP to meet patient needs.