Viral infection neutralization tests: A focus on severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 with implications for convalescent plasma therapy

A comprehensive review on immunogen and immune-response proteins of SARS-CoV-2 and their applications in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of COVID-19

Exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) prompts humoral immune responses in the human body. As the auxiliary diagnosis of a current infection, the existence of viral proteins can be checked from specific antibodies (Abs) induced by immunogenic viral proteins. For people with a weakened immune system, Ab treatment can help neutralize viral antigens to resist and treat the disease. On the other hand, highly immunogenic viral proteins can serve as effective markers for detecting prior infections. Additionally, the identification of viral particles or the presence of antibodies may help establish an immune defense against the virus. These immunogenic proteins rather than SARS-CoV-2 can be given to uninfected people as a vaccination to improve their coping ability against COVID-19 through the generation of memory plasma cells. In this work, we review immunogenic and immune-response proteins derived from SARS-CoV-2 with regard to their classification, origin, and diverse applications (e.g., prevention (vaccine development), diagnostic testing, and treatment (via neutralizing Abs)). Finally, advanced immunization strategies against COVID-19 are discussed along with the contemporary circumstances and future challenges.

The Role of Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19: A Conclusive Post-Pandemic Review

COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) has represented the frontline response to the COVID-19 pandemic, largely because of encouraging historical evidences in previous pandemics, biological plausibility, and the initial unavailability of targeted antivirals. Unfortunately, investigator-initiated randomized clinical trials in 2020, launched during a stressful pandemic peak, were designed mostly at addressing the main unmet need, i.e., treating critically ill hospitalized patients who were unlikely to benefit from any antiviral therapy. The failure of most of these drugs, in combination with the lack of any sponsor, led to the false belief that convalescent plasma was useless. With the relaxing pandemic stages, evidences have instead mounted that, when administered properly (i.e., within 5 days from onset of symptoms and at high titers of neutralizing antibodies), CCP is as effective as other antivirals at preventing disease progression in outpatients, and also reduces mortality in hospitalized patients. Recently, the focus of clinical use has been on immunosuppressed patients with persistent seronegativity and infection, where a randomized clinical trial has shown a reduction in mortality. Lessons learnt during the COVID-19 pandemic will be of utmost importance for future pandemics.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Testing: Role and Indications

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, over 769 million confirmed COVID-19 cases, including close to 7 million COVID-19-related deaths, have been reported. Although mortality rates have dropped notably compared to the first months of the pandemic, spikes in reported cases and mortality rates continue to be registered. Both recent spikes in case numbers and the continued emergence of new variants suggest that vulnerable patient groups, including older adults, immunocompromised patients, and patients with severe comorbidities, are going to continue to be affected by COVID-19. In order to curb the pandemic, relieve the pressure on primary care facilities, and reduce mortality rates, global vaccination programs have been established by the WHO, with over 13.5 billion vaccine doses having been administered globally. In most immunocompetent individuals, vaccination against COVID-19 results in the production of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies. However, certain patient subsets have inadequate or reduced immune responses, and immune responses are known to decrease with age. General recommendations on the timing of booster vaccinations may therefore be insufficient to protect vulnerable patients. This review aims to evaluate the clinical role of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, focusing on measurement indications, prognostic value, and potential as a correlate of protection to guide future booster vaccination strategies.

Rehoming and Other Refinements and Replacement in Procedures Using Golden Hamsters in SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Research

Effective vaccines are needed to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. Forty golden hamsters were inoculated with two promising vaccine candidates and eighteen animals were used in pilot trials with viral challenge. ELISA assays were performed to determine endpoint serum titres for specific antibodies and virus neutralisation tests were used to evaluate the efficacy of antibodies. All tests with serum from vaccinated hamsters were negative even after booster vaccinations and changes in vaccination protocol. We concluded that antibodies did not have sufficient neutralising properties. Refinements were observed at all steps, and the in vitro method (virus neutralisation test) presented a replacement measure and ultimately lead to a reduction in the total number of animals used in the project. The institutional animal welfare officer and institutional designated veterinarian approved the reuse or rehoming of the surplus animals. Simple socialization procedures were performed and ultimately 19 animals were rehomed, and feedback was collected. Recently, FELASA published recommendations for rehoming of animals used for scientific and educational purposes, with species-specific guidelines, including mice, rats, and rabbits. Based on our positive experience and feedback from adopters, we concluded that the rehoming of rodents, including hamsters, is not only possible, but highly recommended.

Longitudinal analysis of anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers in vaccinees using a novel giant magnetoresistive (GMR) assay

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to monitor important correlates of immunity on a population-wide level. To this end, we have developed a competitive assay to assess neutralizing antibody (NAb) titer on the giant magnetoresistive (GMR) biosensor platform. We compared the clinical performance of our biosensor with established techniques such as Ortho's VITROS Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Quantitative Antibody test. Results obtained between the VITROS test and the GMR assay showed correlation (r = -0.93). We then validated the assay with patient plasma samples that had been tested using focus reduction neutralization testing (FRNT). The results obtained from our GMR assay exhibit a previously identified trend of increased NAb titers 2 weeks post-vaccination. We further evaluated NAb titers 6 months post-vaccination and observed waning neutralizing antibody titers over that time in vaccinated patients. In addition, we calibrated our assay to an arbitrary unit (IU/mL) using World Health Organization (WHO) reference plasma provided by the National Institute of Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC). Our biosensor provides highly specific and sensitive results in serum and plasma with analytical, clinical, and point-of-care (POC) applications due to quick turnaround times on samples and the cost-effectiveness of the platform.

Complement Activation-Independent Attenuation of SARS-CoV-2 Infection by C1q and C4b-Binding Protein

The complement system is a key component of the innate immune response to viruses and proinflammatory events. Exaggerated complement activation has been attributed to the induction of a cytokine storm in severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, there is also an argument for the protective role of complement proteins, given their local synthesis or activation at the site of viral infection. This study investigated the complement activation-independent role of C1q and C4b-binding protein (C4BP) against SARS-CoV-2 infection. The interactions of C1q, its recombinant globular heads, and C4BP with the SARS-CoV-2 spike and receptor binding domain (RBD) were examined using direct ELISA. In addition, RT-qPCR was used to evaluate the modulatory effect of these complement proteins on the SARS-CoV-2-mediated immune response. Cell binding and luciferase-based viral entry assays were utilised to assess the effects of C1q, its recombinant globular heads, and C4BP on SARS-CoV-2 cell entry. C1q and C4BP bound directly to SARS-CoV-2 pseudotype particles via the RBD domain of the spike protein. C1q via its globular heads and C4BP were found to reduce binding as well as viral transduction of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein expressing lentiviral pseudotypes into transfected A549 cells expressing human ACE2 and TMPRSS2. Furthermore, the treatment of the SARS-CoV-2 spike, envelope, nucleoprotein, and membrane protein expressing alphaviral pseudotypes with C1q, its recombinant globular heads, or C4BP triggered a reduction in mRNA levels of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines such as IL-1β, IL-8, IL-6, TNF-α, IFN-α, and RANTES (as well as NF-κB) in A549 cells expressing human ACE2 and TMPRSS2. In addition, C1q and C4BP treatment also reduced SARS-CoV-2 pseudotype infection-mediated NF-κB activation in A549 cells expressing human ACE2 and TMPRSS2. C1q and C4BP are synthesised primarily by hepatocytes; however, they are also produced by macrophages, and alveolar type II cells, respectively, locally at the pulmonary site. These findings support the notion that the locally produced C1q and C4BP can be protective against SARS-CoV-2 infection in a complement activation-independent manner, offering immune resistance by inhibiting virus binding to target host cells and attenuating the infection-associated inflammatory response.

One-Year Follow-Up of COVID-19 Patients Indicates Substantial Assay-Dependent Differences in the Kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies

Determination of antibody levels against the nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) proteins of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to estimate the humoral immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. Differences in the design and specification of antibody assays challenge the interpretation of test results, and comparative studies are often limited to single time points per patient. We determined the longitudinal kinetics of antibody levels of 145 unvaccinated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients at four visits over 1 year upon convalescence using 8 commercial SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays (from Abbott, DiaSorin, Roche, Siemens, and Technoclone), as well as a virus neutralization test (VNT). A linear regression model was used to investigate whether antibody results obtained in the first 6 months after disease onset could predict the VNT results at 12 months. Spike protein-specific antibody tests showed good correlation to the VNT at individual time points (rS, 0.74 to 0.92). While longitudinal assay comparison with the Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S test showed almost constant antibody concentrations over 12 months, the VNT and all other tests indicated a decline in serum antibody levels (median decrease to 14% to 36% of baseline). The antibody level at 3 months was the best predictor of the VNT results at 12 months after disease onset. The current standardization to a WHO calibrator for normalization to binding antibody units (BAU) is not sufficient for the harmonization of SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests. Assay-specific differences in absolute values and trends over time need to be considered when interpreting the course of antibody levels in patients. IMPORTANCE Determination of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 will play an important role in detecting a sufficient immune response. Although all the manufacturers expressed antibody levels in binding antibody units per milliliter, thus suggesting comparable results, we found discrepant behavior between the eight investigated assays when we followed the antibody levels in a cohort of 145 convalescent patients over 1 year. While one assay yielded constant antibody levels, the others showed decreasing antibody levels to a varying extent. Therefore, the comparability of the assays must be improved regarding the long-term kinetics of antibody levels. This is a prerequisite for establishing reliable antibody level cutoffs for sufficient individual protection against SARS-CoV-2.

On the Need to Determine the Contribution of Anti-Nucleocapsid Antibodies as Potential Contributors to COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Efficacy

Historically the therapeutic potential of polyclonal passive immunotherapies in viral diseases has been related to antiviral neutralizing antibodies, but there is also considerable evidence that non-neutralizing antibodies can translate into clinical benefit as well. In the setting of SARS-CoV-2 infection, we review here in vitro and in vivo evidence supporting a contributing role for anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. Retrospective investigation of anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels in randomized clinical trials of COVID-19 convalescent plasma is warranted to better understand whether there is an association with efficacy or lack thereof.

Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in Hospitalized Patients-An Open-Label Phase II Clinical Trial

Background: COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is an important antiviral option for selected patients with COVID-19. Materials and Methods: In this open-label, phase 2, clinical trial conducted from 30 April 2020 till 10 May 2021 in the Republic of North Macedonia, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of CCP in hospitalized patients. Treatment was with a single unit of CCP having an anti-RBD IgG concentration higher than 5 AU/mL. Results: There were 189 patients that completed the study, of which 65 (34.4%) had WHO 8-point clinical progression scale score of 3 (requiring hospital care but not oxygen support), 65 (34.4%) had a score of 4 (hospitalized and requiring supplemental oxygen by mask or nasal prongs), and 59 (31.2%) had a score of 5 (hospitalized and requiring supplemental oxygen by non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen). Mean age was 57 years (range 22−94), 78.5% were males, 80.4% had elevated body mass index, and 70.9% had comorbidity. Following CCP transfusion, we observed clinical improvement with increase rates in oxygenation-free days of 32.3% and 58.5% at 24 h and seven days after CCP transfusion, a decline in WHO scores, and reduced progression to severe disease (only one patient was admitted to ICU after CCP transfusion). Mortality in the entire cohort was 11.6% (22/189). We recorded 0% mortality in WHO score 3 (0/65) and in patients that received CCP transfusion in the first seven days of disease, 4.6% mortality in WHO score 4 (3/65), and 30.5% mortality in WHO score 5 (18/59). Mortality correlated with WHO score (Chi-square 19.3, p < 0.001) and with stay in the ICU (Chi-square 55.526, p ≤ 0.001). No severe adverse events were reported. Conclusions: This study showed that early administration of CCP to patients with moderate disease was a safe and potentially effective treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04397523).

COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma and Clinical Trials: Understanding Conflicting Outcomes

Convalescent plasma (CP) recurs as a frontline treatment in epidemics because it is available as soon as there are survivors. The COVID-19 pandemic represented the first large-scale opportunity to shed light on the mechanisms of action, safety, and efficacy of CP using modern evidence-based medicine approaches. Studies ranging from observational case series to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported highly variable efficacy results for COVID-19 CP (CCP), resulting in uncertainty. We analyzed variables associated with efficacy, such as clinical settings, disease severity, CCP SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) antibody levels and function, dose, timing of administration (variously defined as time from onset of symptoms, molecular diagnosis, diagnosis of pneumonia, or hospitalization, or by serostatus), outcomes (defined as hospitalization, requirement for ventilation, clinical improvement, or mortality), CCP provenance and time for collection, and criteria for efficacy. The conflicting trial results, along with both recent WHO guidelines discouraging CCP usage and the recent expansion of the FDA emergency use authorization (EUA) to include outpatient use of CCP, create confusion for both clinicians and patients about the appropriate use of CCP. A review of 30 available RCTs demonstrated that signals of efficacy (including reductions in mortality) were more likely if the CCP neutralizing titer was >160 and the time to randomization was less than 9 days. The emergence of the Omicron variant also reminds us of the benefits of polyclonal antibody therapies, especially as a bridge to the development and availability of more specific therapies.

A Critical Analysis of the Use of Cilgavimab plus Tixagevimab Monoclonal Antibody Cocktail (Evusheld™) for COVID-19 Prophylaxis and Treatment

Evusheld® (tixagevimab + cilgavimab; AZD7442) was the first anti-Spike monoclonal antibody (mAb) cocktail designed not only for treatment but also with pre-exposure prophylaxis in mind. The immunoglobulins were engineered for prolonged half-life by modifying the Fc fragment, thus creating a long-acting antibody (LAAB). We review here preclinical development, baseline and treatment-emergent resistance, clinical efficacy from registration trials, and real-world post-marketing evidence. The combination was initially approved for pre-exposure prophylaxis at the time of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta VOC wave based on a trial conducted in unvaccinated subjects when the Alpha VOC was dominant. Another trial also conducted at the time of the Alpha VOC wave proved efficacy as early treatment in unvaccinated patients and led to authorization at the time of the BA.4/5 VOC wave. Tixagevimab was ineffective against any Omicron sublineage, so cilgavimab has so far been the ingredient which has made a difference. Antibody monotherapy has a high risk of selecting for immune escape variants in immunocompromised patients with high viral loads, which nowadays represent the main therapeutic indication for antibody therapies. Among Omicron sublineages, cilgavimab was ineffective against BA.1, recovered efficacy against BA.2 and BA.2.12.1, but lost efficacy again against BA.4/BA.5 and BA.2.75. Our analysis indicated that Evusheld® has been used during the Omicron VOC phase without robust clinical data of efficacy against this variant and suggested that several regulatory decisions regarding its use lacked consistency. There is an urgent need for new randomized controlled trials in vaccinated, immunocompromised subjects, using COVID-19 convalescent plasma as a control arm.

Immunogenicity and immune-persistence of the CoronaVac or Covilo inactivated COVID-19 Vaccine: a 6-month population-based cohort study

Background

Owing to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the emergency use of different types of COVID-19 vaccines, there is an urgent need to consider the effectiveness and persistence of different COVID-19 vaccines.

Methods

We investigated the immunogenicity of CoronaVac and Covilo, two inactivated vaccines against COVID-19 that each contain inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The levels of neutralizing antibodies to live SARS-CoV-2 and the inhibition rates of neutralizing antibodies to pseudovirus, as well as the immunoglobulin (Ig)G and IgM responses towards the spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) protein of SARS-CoV-2 at 180 days after two-dose vaccination were detected.

Results

The CoronaVac and Covilo vaccines induced similar antibody responses. Regarding neutralizing antibodies to live SARS-CoV-2, 77.9% of the CoronaVac vaccine recipients and 78.3% of the Covilo vaccine recipients (aged 18–59 years) seroconverted by 28 days after the second vaccine dose. Regarding SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, 97.1% of the CoronaVac vaccine recipients and 95.7% of the Covilo vaccine recipients seroconverted by 28 days after the second vaccine dose. The inhibition rates of neutralizing antibody against a pseudovirus of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant were significantly lower compared with those against a pseudovirus of wildtype SARS-CoV-2. Associated with participant characteristics and antibody levels, persons in the older age group and with basic disease, especially a chronic respiratory disease, tended to have lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroconversion rates.

Conclusion

Antibodies that were elicited by these two inactivated COVID-19 vaccines appeared to wane following their peak after the second vaccine dose, but they persisted at detectable levels through 6 months after the second vaccine dose, and the effectiveness of these antibodies against the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 was lower than their effectiveness against wildtype SARS-CoV-2, which suggests that attention must be paid to the protective effectiveness, and its persistence, of COVID-19 vaccines on SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Optimization and evaluation of a live virus SARS-CoV-2 neutralization assay

Virus neutralization assays provide a means to quantitate functional antibody responses that block virus infection. These assays are instrumental in defining vaccine and therapeutic antibody potency, immune evasion by viral variants, and post-infection immunity. Here we describe the development, optimization and evaluation of a live virus microneutralization assay specific for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this assay, SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolates are pre-incubated with serial diluted antibody and added to Vero E6 cells. Replicating virus is quantitated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) targeting the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein and the standardized 50% virus inhibition titer calculated. We evaluated critical test parameters that include virus titration, assay linearity, number of cells, viral dose, incubation period post-inoculation, and normalization methods. Virus titration at 96 hours was determined optimal to account for different growth kinetics of clinical isolates. Nucleocapsid protein levels directly correlated with virus inoculum, with the strongest correlation at 24 hours post-inoculation. Variance was minimized by infecting a cell monolayer, rather than a cell suspension. Neutralization titers modestly decreased with increasing numbers of Vero E6 cells and virus amount. Application of two different normalization models effectively reduced the intermediate precision coefficient of variance to <16.5%. The SARS-CoV-2 microneutralization assay described and evaluated here is based on the influenza virus microneutralization assay described by WHO, and are proposed as a standard assay for comparing neutralization investigations.

Neutralisation Hierarchy of SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern Using Standardised, Quantitative Neutralisation Assays Reveals a Correlation With Disease Severity; Towards Deciphering Protective Antibody Thresholds

The rise of SARS-CoV-2 variants has made the pursuit to define correlates of protection more troublesome, despite the availability of the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Standard for anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin sera, a key reagent used to standardise laboratory findings into an international unitage. Using pseudotyped virus, we examine the capacity of convalescent sera, from a well-defined cohort of healthcare workers (HCW) and Patients infected during the first wave from a national critical care centre in the UK to neutralise B.1.1.298, variants of interest (VOI) B.1.617.1 (Kappa), and four VOCs, B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta), P.1 (Gamma) and B.1.617.2 (Delta), including the B.1.617.2 K417N, informally known as Delta Plus. We utilised the WHO International Standard for anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin to report neutralisation antibody levels in International Units per mL. Our data demonstrate a significant reduction in the ability of first wave convalescent sera to neutralise the VOCs. Patients and HCWs with more severe COVID-19 were found to have higher antibody titres and to neutralise the VOCs more effectively than individuals with milder symptoms. Using an estimated threshold for 50% protection, 54 IU/mL, we found most asymptomatic and mild cases did not produce titres above this threshold.

Potency of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV-2 variants of concern: A systematic review of in vitro studies

BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 are two types of mRNA-based vaccine platforms that have received emergency use authorization. The emergence of novel severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) variants has raised concerns of reduced sensitivity to neutralization by their elicited antibodies. We aimed to systematically review the most recent in vitro studies evaluating the effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 induced neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science in addition to bioRxiv and medRxiv with terms including 'SARS-CoV-2', 'BNT162b2', 'mRNA-1273', and 'neutralizing antibody' up to June 29, 2021. A modified version of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist was used for assessing included study quality. A total 36 in vitro studies meeting the eligibility criteria were included in this systematic review. B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta), P.1 (Gamma), and B.1.617.2 (Delta) are four SARS-CoV-2 variants that have recently been identified as variants of concern. Included studies implemented different methods regarding pseudovirus or live virus neutralization assays for measuring neutralization titres against utilized viruses. After two dose vaccination by BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, the B.1.351 variant had the least sensitivity to neutralizing antibodies, while B.1.1.7 variant had the most sensitivity; that is, it was better neutralized relative to the comparator strain. P.1 and B.1.617.2 variants had an intermediate level of impaired naturalization activity of antibodies elicited by prior vaccination. Our review suggests that immune sera derived from vaccinated individuals might show reduced protection of individuals immunized with mRNA vaccines against more recent SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.

Highlight of potential impact of new viral genotypes of SARS-CoV-2 on vaccines and anti-viral therapeutics

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causal agent of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, has infected millions of people globally. Genetic variation and selective pressures lead to the accumulation of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) within the viral genome that may affect virulence, transmission rate, viral recognition and the efficacy of prophylactic and interventional measures. To address these concerns at the genomic level, we assessed the phylogeny and SNPs of the SARS-CoV-2 mutant population collected to date in Iran in relation to globally reported variants. Phylogenetic analysis of mutant strains revealed the occurrence of the variants known as B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.525 (Eta), and B.1.617 (Delta) that appear to have delineated independently in Iran. SNP analysis of the Iranian sequences revealed that the mutations were predominantly positioned within the S protein-coding region, with most SNPs localizing to the S1 subunit. Seventeen S1-localizing SNPs occurred in the RNA binding domain that interacts with ACE2 of the host cell. Importantly, many of these SNPs are predicted to influence the binding of antibodies and anti-viral therapeutics, indicating that the adaptive host response appears to be imposing a selective pressure that is driving the evolution of the virus in this closed population through enhancing virulence. The SNPs detected within these mutant cohorts are addressed with respect to current prophylactic measures and therapeutic interventions.

Predicting the protective humoral response to a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine

OBJECTIVES

Simple and standardized methods to establish correlates to vaccine-elicited SARS-CoV-2 protection are needed.

METHODS

An observational study on antibody response to a mRNA vaccine (Comirnaty) was performed on health care workers (V, n=120). Recovered COVID-19 patients (N, n=94) were used for comparison. Antibody response was evaluated by a quantitative anti-receptor binding domain IgG (anti-RBD) commercial assay and by virus microneutralization test (MNT), in order to establish a threshold of anti-RBD binding antibody units (BAU) able to predict a robust (≥1:80) MNT titer.

RESULTS

Significant correlation between BAU and MNT titers was found in both V and N, being stronger in V (rs=0.91 and 0.57 respectively, p<0.001); a higher incremental trend starting from MNT titer 1:80 was observed in the V group. The 99% probability of high MNT titer (≥1:80) was reached at 1,814 and 3,564 BAU/mL, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.99 (CI: 0.99-1.00) and 0.78 (CI: 0.67-0.86) in V and N, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A threshold of 2,000 BAU/mL is highly predictive of strong MNT response in vaccinated individuals and may represent a good surrogate marker of protective response. It remains to be established whether the present results can be extended to BAU titers obtained with other assays.

Production, Titration, Neutralisation, Storage and Lyophilisation of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Lentiviral Pseudotypes

This protocol details a rapid and reliable method for the production and titration of high-titre viral pseudotype particles with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (and D614G or other variants of concern, VOC) on a lentiviral vector core, and use for neutralisation assays in target cells expressing angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2). It additionally provides detailed instructions on substituting in new spike variants via gene cloning, lyophilisation and storage/shipping considerations for wide deployment potential. Results obtained with this protocol show that SARS-CoV-2 pseudotypes can be produced at equivalent titres to SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) pseudotypes, neutralised by human convalescent plasma and monoclonal antibodies, and stored at a range of laboratory temperatures and lyophilised for distribution and subsequent application.

Diagnosis of COVID-19, vitality of emerging technologies and preventive measures

Coronavirus diseases-2019 (COVID-19) is becoming increasing serious and major threat to public health concerns. As a matter of fact, timely testing enhances the life-saving judgments on treatment and isolation of COVID-19 infected individuals at possible earliest stage which ultimately suppresses spread of infectious diseases. Many government and private research institutes and manufacturing companies are striving to develop reliable tests for prompt quantification of SARS-CoV-2. In this review, we summarize existing diagnostic methods as manual laboratory-based nucleic acid assays for COVID-19 and their limitations. Moreover, vitality of rapid and point of care serological tests together with emerging biosensing technologies has been discussed in details. Point of care tests with characteristics of rapidity, accurateness, portability, low cost and requiring non-specific devices possess great suitability in COVID-19 diagnosis and detection. Besides, this review also sheds light on several preventive measures to track and manage disease spread in current and future outbreaks of diseases.

Antibody Affinity Governs the Inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 Spike/ACE2 Binding in Patient Serum

The humoral immune response plays a key role in suppressing the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2. The molecular determinants underlying the neutralization of the virus remain, however, incompletely understood. Here, we show that the ability of antibodies to disrupt the binding of the viral spike protein to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor on the cell, the key molecular event initiating SARS-CoV-2 entry into host cells, is controlled by the affinity of these antibodies to the viral antigen. By using microfluidic antibody-affinity profiling, we were able to quantify the serum-antibody mediated inhibition of ACE2-spike binding in two SARS-CoV-2 seropositive individuals. Measurements to determine the affinity, concentration, and neutralization potential of antibodies were performed directly in human serum. Using this approach, we demonstrate that the level of inhibition in both samples can be quantitatively described using the dissociation constants (KD) of the binary interactions between the ACE2 receptor and the spike protein as well as the spike protein and the neutralizing antibody. These experiments represent a new type of in-solution receptor binding competition assay, which has further potential applications, ranging from decisions on donor selection for convalescent plasma therapy, to identification of lead candidates in therapeutic antibody development, and vaccine development.

Clinical predictors of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody titers in COVID-19 convalescents: Implications for convalescent plasma donor recruitment

While COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) efficacy is still under investigation in randomized controlled trials (RCT), CCP collections continue worldwide with largely variable criteria. Since it is well known that only a minority of patients develop high-titer neutralizing antibodies (nAb), as assessed by the viral neutralization tests (VNT), strategies to maximize cost-effectiveness of CCP collection are urgently needed. A growing amount of the population is having exposure to the virus and is hence becoming a candidate CCP donor. Laboratory screening with high-throughput serology has good correlations with the VNT titer, but upstream screening using clinical surrogates would be advisable. We review here the existing literature on clinical predictors of high-titer nAb. Older age, male sex, and hospitalization are the main proxies of high VNT and should drive CCP donor recruitment.

SARS-CoV-2 Variants: A Synopsis of In Vitro Efficacy Data of Convalescent Plasma, Currently Marketed Vaccines, and Monoclonal Antibodies

We summarize here in vitro evidences of efficacy for convalescent plasma, currently approved vaccines and monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC: B.1.1.7, B.1.351, P.1, and B.1.617.2), variants of interest (VOI: B.1.427/B.1.429, P.2, B.1.525, P.3, B.1.526, and B.1.671.1), and other strains (B.1.1.298 and B.1.258delta). While waiting from real world clinical efficacy, these data provide guidance for the treating physician.

Passive Immunity Should and Will Work for COVID-19 for Some Patients

In the absence of effective antiviral chemotherapy and still in the context of emerging vaccines for severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV-2 infections, passive immunotherapy remains a key treatment and possible prevention strategy. What might initially be conceived as a simplified donor-recipient process, the intricacies of donor plasma, IV immunoglobulins, and monoclonal antibody modality applications are becoming more apparent. Key targets of such treatment have largely focused on virus neutralization and the specific viral components of the attachment Spike protein and its constituents (e.g., receptor binding domain, N-terminal domain). The cumulative laboratory and clinical experience suggests that beneficial protective and treatment outcomes are possible. Both a dose- and a time-dependency emerge. Lesser understood are the concepts of bioavailability and distribution. Apart from direct antigen binding from protective immunoglobulins, antibody effector functions have potential roles in outcome. In attempting to mimic the natural but variable response to infection or vaccination, a strong functional polyclonal approach attracts the potential benefits of attacking antigen diversity, high antibody avidity, antibody persistence, and protection against escape viral mutation. The availability and ease of administration for any passive immunotherapy product must be considered in the current climate of need. There is never a perfect product, but yet there is considerable room for improving patient outcomes. Given the variability of human genetics, immunity, and disease, and given the nuances of the virus and its potential for change, passive immunotherapy can be developed that will be effective for some but not all patients. An understanding of such patient variability and limitations is just as important as the understanding of the direct interactions between immunotherapy and virus.

The Three Pillars of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Therapy

The new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has spread rapidly around the world in the last year causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which still is a severe threat for public health. The therapeutic management of COVID-19 is challenging as, up until now, no specific and efficient pharmacological therapy has been validated. Translating the experience from previous viral epidemics, passive immunotherapy by means of plasma from individuals recovered from COVID-19 has been intensively investigated since the beginning of the pandemic. In this narrative review, we critically analyze the three factors, named “pillars”, that play a key role in determining the clinical effectiveness of this biologic therapy: the convalescent plasma, the disease (COVID-19), and the patients.

SARS-CoV-2 Serum Neutralization Assay: A Traditional Tool for a Brand-New Virus

SARS-CoV-2 serum neutralization assay represents the gold standard for assessing antibody-mediated protection in naturally infected and vaccinated individuals. In the present study, 662 serum samples collected from February 2020 to January 2021 from acute and convalescent COVID-19 patients were tested to determine neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers using a microneutralization test (MNT) for live SARS-CoV-2. Moreover, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG, IgA, and IgM directed against different viral antigens were measured by high-throughput automated platforms. We observed higher levels of NAbs in elderly (>60 years old) individuals and in patients presenting acute respiratory distress syndrome. SARS-CoV-2 NAbs develop as soon as five days from symptom onset and, despite a decline after the second month, persist for over 11 months, showing variable dynamics. Through correlation and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, we set up a testing algorithm, suitable for the laboratory workload, by establishing an optimal cutoff value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG for convalescent plasma donors to exclude from MNT samples foreseen to have low/negative NAb titers and ineligible for plasma donation. Overall, MNT, although cumbersome and not suitable for routine testing of large sample sizes, remains the reference tool for the assessment of antibody-mediated immunity after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Smart testing algorithms may optimize the laboratory workflow to monitor antibody-mediated protection in COVID-19 patients, plasma donors, and vaccinated individuals.

The art of the possible in approaching efficacy trials for COVID19 convalescent plasma

COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is widely used as a treatment. While safety data are enough, high-level evidences of efficacy are still missing. We summarize here the results from randomized controlled trials (RCT) published to date and analyze their flaws and biases. We then provide suggestions for next round of CCP RCTs, discussing specification of CCP, therapeutic dose, timing, control arm, disease stage, and outcome measures.

Recent Developments in SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody Detection Methods

The ongoing Coronavirus disease 19 pandemic has likely changed the world in ways not seen in the past. Neutralizing antibody (NAb) assays play an important role in the management of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak. Using these tools, we can assess the presence and duration of antibody-mediated protection in naturally infected individuals, screen convalescent plasma preparations for donation, test the efficacy of immunotherapy, and analyze NAb titers and persistence after vaccination to predict vaccine-induced protective effects. This review briefly summarizes the various methods used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 NAbs and compares their advantages and disadvantages to facilitate their development and clinical application.

Evaluation of Two Chemiluminescent and Three ELISA Immunoassays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibodies: Implications for Disease Diagnosis and Patients' Management

The estimation of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies is possibly the best approach to accurately establish the number of infected individuals and the seroprevalence of COVID-19 within a population. Thus, several commercial immunoassays have recently been developed. The purpose of our study was to assess the performance of five commonly used immunoassays in Greece (3 ELISA, namely Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2, GA GENERIC SARS-CoV-2 and Vircell COVID-19; and 2 chemiluminescent, namely ABBOTT SARS-CoV-2 and ROCHE Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 test) for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Sera specimens derived from 168 individuals were utilized to assess the specificity and sensitivity score of each assay. Among them, we included 99 COVID-19 patients (29 asymptomatic, 36 with symptom onset 4 to 14 days before serum sampling, and 34 with symptom initiation ≥ 15 days ago), and 69 volunteers with sera specimens collected prior to the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak and maintained at −80°C. We demonstrated that chemiluminescent immunoassays exhibit a significantly higher specificity score but a lower sensitivity, compared to ELISA immunoassays. Moreover, immunoassays detecting IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 N protein instead of S protein alone are more reliable, considering both specificity and sensitivity scores. Interestingly, all asymptomatic patients displayed anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, confirmed by at least two immunoassays. We suggest that chemiluminescent assays could be used as screening methods for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies to evaluate the possible prevalence of disease in the general population, while ELISA assays would be more reliable to evaluate, and follow-up confirmed COVID-19 patients.

Kinetics of Nucleo- and Spike Protein-Specific Immunoglobulin G and of Virus-Neutralizing Antibodies after SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Kinetics of neutralizing antibodies and immunoglobulin G (IgG) against the nucleo (N) or spike (S) proteins of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type2 (SARS-CoV-2) were studied in patients up to 165 days after PCR diagnosis of infection. Two immunoassays were selected out of eight IgG or total antibody tests by comparing their specificities and sensitivities. Sensitivities were calculated with convalescent sera from 26 PCR-confirmed cases, of which 76.9% had neutralizing antibodies (>1:10). Stored sera collected during the summer 2018 (N = 50) and winter seasons 2018/2019 (N = 50) were included to demonstrate the test specificities. IgG kinetics, avidities, and virus-neutralizing capacities were recorded over up to 165 days in eleven patients and five individuals from routine diagnostics. Sensitivities, specificities, and diagnostic accuracies ranged between 80.8-96.3%, 96.0-100%, and 93.7-99.2%, respectively. Nearly all results were confirmed with two different SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoblots. Six (54.4%) patients exhibited stable N-specific IgG indices over 120 days and longer; three of them developed IgG of high avidity. The S-specific IgG response was stable in ten (91.0%) patients, and eight (72.7%) had neutralizing antibodies. However, the titers were relatively low, suggesting that sustained humoral immunity is uncertain, especially after outpatient SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing monoclonal antibodies: clinical pipeline

Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy has been previously exploited for viral infections, such as respiratory syncytial virus pneumonia and Ebolavirus disease. In the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, early signals of efficacy from convalescent plasma therapy have encouraged research and development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs. While many candidates are in preclinical development, we focus here on anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing mAbs (or mAb cocktails) that represent the late-stage clinical pipeline, i.e., those currently in Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trials. We describe the structure, mechanism of action, and ongoing trials for VIR-7831, LY-CoV555, LY-CoV016, BGB-DXP593, REGN-COV2, and CT-P59. We speculate also on the next generation of these mAbs.