Comparative Magnitude and Persistence of Humoral SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Responses in the Adult Population in Germany

Detection of pre-existing neutralizing antibodies against Ad26 in HIV-1-infected individuals not responding to the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine

PURPOSE

The Ad26.COV2.S vaccine is a replication-incompetent human adenovirus type 26 vector encoding the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. In a phase 1-2a trial, a single dose of Ad26.COV2.S induced SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibodies in ≥ 96% of healthy adults. To investigate vaccine immunogenicity in HIV-1-infection, we measured SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibodies in Ad26.COV2.S vaccinated HIV-1-infected patients and analyzed the presence of pre-existing Ad26 neutralizing antibodies.

METHODS

We included all Ad26.COV2.S vaccinated HIV-1-infected patients of Erlangen HIV cohort fulfilling all inclusion criteria. The study cohort consisted of 15 HIV-1-infected patients and three HIV-1-uninfected subjects who received the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine between April and November 2021. Pre-vaccination sera were collected between October 2014 and June 2021, post-vaccination sera between June and December 2021. Neutralizing antibodies towards Ad26 were determined by a FACS-based inhibition assay measuring the expression of SARS-CoV-2 spike and adenoviral proteins in HEK293T cells after in-vitro transduction with Ad26.COV2.S or the control ChAdOx1-S.

RESULTS

Six out of 15 HIV-1-infected patients failed to develop SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and four patients developed weak antibody responses after vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S. Pre-vaccination sera of four of the six vaccine non-responders showed neutralizing activity towards Ad26.COV2.S but not toward the ChAdOx1-S vaccine at 1:50 dilution. After Ad26.COV2.S vaccination, 17 of the 18 subjects developed strong Ad26-neutralizing activity and only one of the 18 subjects showed neutralizing activity towards the ChAdOx1-S vaccine.

CONCLUSION

Ad26.COV2.S vaccination showed a high failure rate in HIV-1-infected patients. Pre-existing immunity against Ad26 could be an important contributor to poor vaccine efficacy in a subgroup of patients.

Vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibody response: the comparability of S1-specific binding assays depends on epitope and isotype discrimination

Background

Quantification of the SARS-CoV-2-specific immune response by serological immunoassays is critical for the management of the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, neutralizing antibody titers to the viral spike (S) protein have been proposed as a correlate of protection (CoP). The WHO established the First International Standard (WHO IS) for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (Ig) (NIBSC 20/136) to harmonize binding assays with the same antigen specificity by assigning the same unitage in binding antibody units (BAU)/ml.

Method

In this study, we analyzed the S1-specific antibody response in a cohort of healthcare workers in Germany (n = 76) during a three-dose vaccination course over 8.5 months. Subjects received either heterologous or homologous prime-boost vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or three doses of BNT162b2. Antibodies were quantified using three anti-S1 binding assays (ELISA, ECLIA, and PETIA) harmonized to the WHO IS. Serum levels of neutralizing antibodies were determined using a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT). Binding assays were compared using Spearman's rank correlation and Passing-Bablok regression.

Findings

All assays showed good correlation and similar antibody kinetics correlating with neutralizing potential. However, the assays show large proportional differences in BAU/ml. ECLIA and PETIA, which detect total antibodies against the receptor- binding domain (RBD) within the S1 subunit, interact similarly with the convalescent plasma-derived WHO IS but differently with vaccine serum, indicating a high sensitivity to the IgG/IgM/IgA ratio.

Conclusion

All three binding assays allow monitoring of the antibody response in COVID-19-vaccinated individuals. However, the assay-specific differences hinder the definition of a common protective threshold in BAU/ml. Our results highlight the need for the thoughtful use of conversion factors and consideration of method-specific differences. To improve the management of future pandemics and harmonize total antibody assays, we should strive for reference material with a well-characterized Ig isotype composition.

Humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 and endemic coronaviruses in urban and indigenous children in Colombia

BACKGROUND

Although anti-SARS-CoV-2 humoral immune responses and epidemiology have been extensively studied, data gaps remain for certain populations such as indigenous people or children especially in low- and middle-income countries. To address this gap, we evaluated SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and humoral immunity towards the parental B.1 strain, local SARS-CoV-2 variants, and endemic coronaviruses in children from Colombia from March to April 2021.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional seroprevalence study with 80 children from Bogotá and expanded our analysis by comparing results with an independent observational study of 82 children from the Wiwa community living in the north-eastern Colombian territories. Antibody IgG titers towards SARS-CoV-2 and the endemic coronaviruses as well as ACE2 binding inhibition as a proxy for neutralization towards several SARS-CoV-2 variants were analyzed using two multiplex-based immunoassays.

RESULTS

While we find seroprevalence estimates of 21.3% in children from Bogotá, seroprevalence is higher with 34.1% in Wiwa children. We observe a robust induction of antibodies towards the surface-exposed spike protein, its S1-, S2- and receptor-binding-subdomains in all SARS-CoV-2 seropositive children. Only nucleocapsid-specific IgG is significantly lower in the indigenous participants. ACE2 binding inhibition is low for all SARS-CoV-2 variants examined. We observe a dominance of NL63 S1 IgG levels in urban and indigenous children which suggests an early exposure to this respiratory virus independent of living conditions and geographic location. SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity does not correlate with antibody levels towards any of the four endemic coronaviruses indicating the absence of cross-protective immunity.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, antibody titers, but in particular ACE2 binding inhibition are low within Colombian samples, requiring further investigation to determine any potential clinical significance.

Long-Term Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA-Based Vaccine on B Cell Compartment: Efficient Recall of SARS-CoV-2-Specific Memory B Cells

At present, there is a lack of clinical evidence about the impact and long-term durability of the immune response induced by the third dose of mRNA vaccines. In this study, we followed up the B cell compartment behavior in a cohort of immunocompetent individuals three and six months after the third dose of vaccine. During this period, some subjects contracted the virus. In uninfected vaccinated subjects, we did not report any changes in serum spike-specific IgG levels, with a significant reduction in IgA. Instead, subjects recovered from natural infection showed a significant increase in both specific IgG and IgA. Moreover, we showed a time-related decrease in IgG neutralizing potential to all SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) in uninfected compared to recovered subjects, who displayed an increased neutralizing ability, particularly against the omicron variant. Finally, we underlined the presence of a pool of SARS-CoV-2-specific B cells in both groups that are prone to respond to restimulation, as demonstrated by their ability to differentiate into plasma cells and to produce anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulins. These data lead us to assert the long-term effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine in contrasting the severe form of the pathology and prevent COVID-19-associated hospitalization.

Diminished neutralization responses towards SARS-CoV-2 Omicron VoC after mRNA or vector-based COVID-19 vaccinations

SARS-CoV-2 variants accumulating immune escape mutations provide a significant risk to vaccine-induced protection against infection. The novel variant of concern (VoC) Omicron BA.1 and its sub-lineages have the largest number of amino acid alterations in its Spike protein to date. Thus, they may efficiently escape recognition by neutralizing antibodies, allowing breakthrough infections in convalescent and vaccinated individuals in particular in those who have only received a primary immunization scheme. We analyzed neutralization activity of sera from individuals after vaccination with all mRNA-, vector- or heterologous immunization schemes currently available in Europe by in vitro neutralization assay at peak response towards SARS-CoV-2 B.1, Omicron sub-lineages BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.3, BA.4/5, Beta and Delta pseudotypes and also provide longitudinal follow-up data from BNT162b2 vaccinees. All vaccines apart from Ad26.CoV2.S showed high levels of responder rates (96-100%) towards the SARS-CoV-2 B.1 isolate, and minor to moderate reductions in neutralizing Beta and Delta VoC pseudotypes. The novel Omicron variant and its sub-lineages had the biggest impact, both in terms of response rates and neutralization titers. Only mRNA-1273 showed a 100% response rate to Omicron BA.1 and induced the highest level of neutralizing antibody titers, followed by heterologous prime-boost approaches. Homologous BNT162b2 vaccination, vector-based AZD1222 and Ad26.CoV2.S performed less well with peak responder rates of 48%, 56% and 9%, respectively. However, Omicron responder rates in BNT162b2 recipients were maintained in our six month longitudinal follow-up indicating that individuals with cross-protection against Omicron maintain it over time. Overall, our data strongly argue for booster doses in individuals who were previously vaccinated with BNT162b2, or a vector-based primary immunization scheme.

Longitudinal cellular and humoral immune responses after triple BNT162b2 and fourth full-dose mRNA-1273 vaccination in haemodialysis patients

Haemodialysis patients respond poorly to vaccination and continue to be at-risk for severe COVID-19. Therefore, dialysis patients were among the first for which a fourth COVID-19 vaccination was recommended. However, targeted information on how to best maintain immune protection after SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations in at-risk groups for severe COVID-19 remains limited. We provide, to the best of our knowledge, for the first time longitudinal vaccination response data in dialysis patients and controls after a triple BNT162b2 vaccination and in the latter after a subsequent fourth full-dose of mRNA-1273. We analysed systemic and mucosal humoral IgG responses against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) and ACE2-binding inhibition towards variants of concern including Omicron and Delta with multiplex-based immunoassays. In addition, we assessed Spike S1-specific T-cell responses by interferon γ release assay. After triple BNT162b2 vaccination, anti-RBD B.1 IgG and ACE2 binding inhibition reached peak levels in dialysis patients, but remained inferior compared to controls. Whilst we detected B.1-specific ACE2 binding inhibition in 84% of dialysis patients after three BNT162b2 doses, binding inhibition towards the Omicron variant was only detectable in 38% of samples and declining to 16% before the fourth vaccination. By using mRNA-1273 as fourth dose, humoral immunity against all SARS-CoV-2 variants tested was strongly augmented with 80% of dialysis patients having Omicron-specific ACE2 binding inhibition. Modest declines in T-cell responses in dialysis patients and controls after the second vaccination were restored by the third BNT162b2 dose and significantly increased by the fourth vaccination. Our data support current advice for a four-dose COVID-19 immunisation scheme for at-risk individuals such as haemodialysis patients. We conclude that administration of a fourth full-dose of mRNA-1273 as part of a mixed mRNA vaccination scheme to boost immunity and to prevent severe COVID-19 could also be beneficial in other immune impaired individuals. Additionally, strategic application of such mixed vaccine regimens may be an immediate response against SARS-CoV-2 variants with increased immune evasion potential.

Duration of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness against Severe Disease

Waning immunity following administration of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines remains a concern for many health systems. We undertook a study to determine if recent reports of waning for severe disease could have been attributed to design-related bias by conducting a study only among those detected with a first SARS-CoV-2 infection. We used a matched case-control study design with the study base being all individuals with first infection with SARS-CoV-2 reported in the State of Qatar between 1 January 2021 and 20 February 2022. Cases were those detected with first SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring intensive care (hard outcome), while controls were those detected with first SARS-CoV-2 infection who recovered without the need for intensive care. Cases and controls were matched in a 1:30 ratio for the calendar month of infection and the comorbidity category. Duration and magnitude of conditional vaccine effectiveness against requiring intensive care and the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one more case of COVID-19 requiring intensive care was estimated for the mRNA (BNT162b2/mRNA-1273) vaccines. Conditional vaccine effectiveness against requiring intensive care was 59% (95% confidence interval (CI), 50 to 76) between the first and second dose, and strengthened to 89% (95% CI, 85 to 92) between the second dose and 4 months post the second dose in persons who received a primary course of the vaccine. There was no waning of vaccine effectiveness in the period from 4 to 6, 6 to 9, and 9 to 12 months after the second dose. This study demonstrates that, contrary to mainstream reports using hierarchical measures of effectiveness, conditional vaccine effectiveness against requiring intensive care remains robust till at least 12 months after the second dose of mRNA-based vaccines.