Early antiviral CD4 and CD8 T cell responses are associated with upper respiratory tract clearance of SARS-CoV-2 (preprint)

T cells are involved in protective immunity against numerous viral infections. Limited data have been available regarding roles of human T cell responses controlling SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance in primary COVID-19. Here, we examined longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 upper respiratory tract viral RNA levels and early adaptive immune responses from 95 unvaccinated individuals with acute COVID-19. Acute SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4 and CD8 T cell responses were evaluated in addition to antibody responses. Most individuals with acute COVID-19 developed rapid SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses during infection, and both early CD4 T cell and CD8 T cell responses correlated with reduced upper respiratory tract SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA, independent of neutralizing antibody titers. Overall, our findings indicate a distinct protective role for SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells during acute COVID-19.

Efficacy and Safety of NVX-CoV2373 in Adults in the United States and Mexico (preprint)

BACKGROUND Vaccination using severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike (S) protein antigen has been effective in the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). NVX-CoV2373 is an adjuvanted, recombinant S protein nanoparticle vaccine that demonstrated clinical efficacy for prevention of Covid-19 in phase 2b/3 trials in the United Kingdom and South Africa. METHODS This phase 3, randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of NVX-CoV2373 in adults [≥]18 years of age in the United States and Mexico during the first quarter of 2021. Participants were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive two doses of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo 21 days apart. The primary end point was vaccine efficacy (VE) against reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed Covid-19 in SARS-CoV-2-naive participants [≥]7 days after the second dose administration. RESULTS Of the 29,949 participants randomized between December 27, 2020, and February 18, 2021, 29,582 (median age: 47 years, 12.6% [≥]65 years) received [≥]1 dose: 19,714 received vaccine and 9868 placebo. In the per-protocol population, there were 77 Covid-19 cases; 14 among vaccine and 63 among placebo recipients (VE: 90.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 82.9 to 94.6, P<0.001). All moderate-to-severe cases occurred in placebo recipients, yielding VE of 100% (95% CI 87.0 to 100). Most sequenced viral genomes (48/61, 78.7%) were variants of concern (VOC) or interest (VOI), mainly represented by variant alpha/B.1.1.7 (31/35, 88.6% VOC identified). VE against any VOC/VOI was 92.6% (95% CI 83.6 to 96.7). Reactogenicity was mostly mild-to-moderate and transient, but more frequent in NVX-CoV2373 recipients and after the second dose. Serious adverse events were rare and evenly distributed between treatments. CONCLUSIONS NVX-CoV2373 was well tolerated and demonstrated a high overall VE (>90%) for prevention of Covid-19, with most cases due to variant strains. (Funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health; PREVENT-19 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04611802.)

Quantitative measurement of infectious virus in SARS-CoV-2 Alpha, Delta and Epsilon variants reveals higher infectivity (viral titer:RNA ratio) in clinical samples containing the Delta and Epsilon variants. (preprint)

BackgroundNovel SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern (VoC) pose a challenge to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies indicate that clinical samples collected from individuals infected with the Delta variant may contain higher levels of RNA than previous variants, but the relationship between viral RNA and infectious virus for individual variants is unknown. MethodsWe measured infectious viral titer (using a micro-focus forming assay) as well as total and subgenomic viral RNA levels (using RT-PCR) in a set of 165 clinical samples containing SARS-CoV-2 Alpha, Delta and Epsilon variants that were processed within two days of collection from the patient. ResultsWe observed a high degree of variation in the relationship between viral titers and RNA levels. Despite the variability we observed for individual samples the overall infectivity differed among the three variants. Both Delta and Epsilon had significantly higher infectivity than Alpha, as measured by the number of infectious units per quantity of viral E gene RNA (6 and 4 times as much, p=0.0002 and 0.009 respectively) or subgenomic E RNA (11 and 7 times as much, p<0.0001 and 0.006 respectively). ConclusionIn addition to higher viral RNA levels reported for the Delta variant, the infectivity (amount of replication competent virus per viral genome copy) may also be increased compared to Alpha. Measuring the relationship between live virus and viral RNA is an important step in assessing the infectivity of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants. An increase in the infectivity of the Delta variant may further explain increased spread and suggests a need for increased measures to prevent viral transmission. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTCurrent and future SARS-CoV-2 variants threaten our ability to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Variants with increased transmission, higher viral loads, or greater immune evasion are of particular concern. Viral loads are currently measured by the amount of viral RNA in a clinical sample rather than the amount of infectious virus. We measured both RNA and infectious virus levels directly in a set of 165 clinical specimens from Alpha, Epsilon or Delta variants. Our data shows that Delta is more infectious compared to Alpha, with [~] six times as much infectious virus for the same amount of RNA. This increase in infectivity suggests increased measures (vaccination, masking, distancing, ventilation) are needed to control Delta compared to Alpha.

T-cell receptor sequencing identifies prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and correlates with neutralizing antibody titers and disease severity (preprint)

Measuring the adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 can enable the assessment of past infection as well as protective immunity and the risk of reinfection. While neutralizing antibody (nAb) titers are one measure of protection, such assays are challenging to perform at a large scale and the longevity of the SARS-CoV-2 nAb response is not fully understood. Here, we apply a T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing assay that can be performed on a small volume standard blood sample to assess the adaptive T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Samples were collected from a cohort of 302 individuals recovered from COVID-19 up to 6 months after infection. Previously published findings in this cohort showed that two commercially available SARS-CoV-2 serologic assays correlate well with nAb testing. We demonstrate that the magnitude of the SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell response strongly correlates with nAb titer, as well as clinical indicators of disease severity including hospitalization, fever, or difficulty breathing. While the depth and breadth of the T-cell response declines during convalescence, the T-cell signal remains well above background with high sensitivity up to at least 6 months following initial infection. Compared to serology tests detecting binding antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleoprotein, the overall sensitivity of the TCR-based assay across the entire cohort and all timepoints was approximately 5% greater for identifying prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Notably, the improved performance of T-cell testing compared to serology was most apparent in recovered individuals who were not hospitalized and were sampled beyond 150 days of their initial illness, suggesting that antibody testing may have reduced sensitivity in individuals who experienced less severe COVID-19 illness and at later timepoints. Finally, T-cell testing was able to identify SARS-CoV-2 infection in 68% (55/81) of convalescent samples having nAb titers below the lower limit of detection, as well as 37% (13/35) of samples testing negative by all three antibody assays. These results demonstrate the utility of a TCR-based assay as a scalable, reliable measure of past SARS-CoV-2 infection across a spectrum of disease severity. Additionally, the TCR repertoire may be useful as a surrogate for protective immunity with additive clinical value beyond serologic or nAb testing methods.

Clinical, laboratory, and temporal predictors of neutralizing antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 after COVID-19 (preprint)

Background: SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies may protect from reinfection and disease, providing the rationale for administration of plasma containing SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (nAb) as a treatment for COVID-19. The clinical factors and laboratory assays to streamline plasma donor selection, and the durability of nAb responses, are incompletely understood. Methods: Adults with virologically-documented SARS-CoV-2 infection in a convalescent plasma donor screening program were tested for serum IgG to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 domain, nucleoprotein (NP), and for nAb. Results: Amongst 250 consecutive persons studied a median of 67 days since symptom onset, 243/250 (97%) were seropositive on one or more assays. Sixty percent of donors had nAb titers [≥]1:80. Correlates of higher nAb titer included older age (adjusted OR [AOR] 1.03/year of age, 95% CI 1.00-1.06), male sex (AOR 2.08, 95% CI 1.13-3.82), fever during acute illness (AOR 2.73, 95% CI 1.25-5.97), and disease severity represented by hospitalization (AOR 6.59, 95% CI 1.32-32.96). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses of anti-S1 and anti-NP antibody results yielded cutoffs that corresponded well with nAb titers, with the anti-S1 assay being slightly more predictive. NAb titers declined in 37 of 41 paired specimens collected a median of 98 days (range, 77-120) apart (P<0.001). Seven individuals (2.8%) were persistently seronegative and lacked T cell responses. Conclusions: Nab titers correlated with COVID-19 severity, age, and sex. Standard commercially available SARS-CoV-2 IgG results can serve as useful surrogates for nAb testing. Functional nAb levels were found to decline and a small proportion of COVID-19 survivors lack adaptive immune responses.

Occurrence and Timing of Subsequent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Positivity Among Initially Negative Patients (preprint)

Background: SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing remains the cornerstone of laboratory-based identification of patients with COVID-19. As the availability and speed of SARS-CoV-2 testing platforms improve, results are increasingly relied upon to inform critical decisions related to therapy, use of personal protective equipment, and workforce readiness. However, early reports of RT-PCR test performance have left clinicians and the public with concerns regarding the reliability of this predominant testing modality and the interpretation of negative results. In this work, two independent research teams report the frequency of discordant SARS-CoV-2 test results among initially negative, repeatedly tested patients in regions of the United States with early community transmission and access to testing. Methods: All patients at the University of Washington (UW) and Stanford Health Care undergoing initial testing by nasopharyngeal (NP) swab between March 2nd and April 7th, 2020 were included. SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR was performed targeting the N, RdRp, S, and E genes and ORF1ab, using a combination of Emergency Use Authorization laboratory-developed tests and commercial assays. Results through April 14th were extracted to allow for a complete 7-day observation period and an additional day for reporting. Results: A total of 23,126 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests (10,583 UW, 12,543 Stanford) were performed in 20,912 eligible patients (8,977 UW, 11,935 Stanford) undergoing initial testing by NP swab; 626 initially test-negative patients were re-tested within 7 days. Among this group, repeat testing within 7 days yielded a positive result in 3.5% (4.3% UW, 2.8% Stanford) of cases, suggesting an initial false negative RT-PCR result; the majority (96.5%) of patients with an initial negative result who warranted reevaluation for any reason remained negative on all subsequent tests performed within this window. Conclusions: Two independent research teams report the similar finding that, among initially negative patients subjected to repeat SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing, the occurrence of a newly positive result within 7 days is uncommon. These observations suggest that false negative results at the time of initial presentation do occur, but potentially at a lower frequency than is currently believed. Although it is not possible to infer the clinical sensitivity of NP SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing using these data, they may be used in combination with other reports to guide the use and interpretation of this common testing modality.