Neutralizing activity against Omicron BA.5 after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration comparable to those after Omicron BA.1/BA.2 breakthrough infections

Introduction The effect of tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld™;AstraZeneca, UK) should be evaluated in the context of concurrent outbreak situations. Methods For serologic investigation of tixagevimab/cilgavimab during the BA.5 outbreak period, sera of immunocompromised (IC) hosts sampled before and one month after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration and those of healthcare workers (HCWs) sampled one month after a 3rd shot of COVID-19 vaccines, five months after BA.1/BA.2 breakthrough infection (BI), and one month after BA.5 BI were investigated. Semi-quantitative anti-spike protein antibody (Sab) test and plaque reduction neutralizing test (PRNT) against BA.5 were performed. Results A total of 19 IC hosts (five received tixagevimab/cilgavimab 300 mg and 14 received 600 mg) and 41 HCWs (21 experienced BA.1/BA.2 BI and 20 experienced BA.5 BI) were evaluated. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between IC hosts and HCWs except for age and hypertension. Sab significantly increased after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration (median 130.2 BAU/mL before tixagevimab/cilgavimab, 5,665.8 BAU/mL after 300 mg, and 10,217 BAU/mL after 600 mg;both P < 0.001). Sab of one month after the 3rd shot (12,144.2 BAU/mL) or five months after BA.1/BA.2 BI (10,455.8 BAU/mL) were comparable with that of tixagevimab/cilgavimab 600 mg, while Sab of one month after BA.5 BI were significantly higher (22,216.0 BAU/mL;P < 0.001). BA.5 PRNT ND50 significantly increased after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration (median ND50 29.6 before tixagevimab/cilgavimab, 170.8 after 300 mg, and 298.5 after 600 mg;both P < 0.001). The ND50 after tixagevimab/cilgavimab 600 mg was comparable to those of five months after BA.1 BI (ND50 200.9) while ND50 of one month after the 3rd shot was significantly lower (ND50 107.6;P = 0.019). The ND50 of one month after BA.5 BI (ND50 1,272.5) was highest among tested groups, but statistical difference was not noticed with tixagevimab/cilgavimab 600 mg. Conclusion Tixagevimab/cilgavimab provided a comparable neutralizing activity against the BA.5 with a healthy adult population who were vaccinated with a 3rd shot and experienced BA.1/BA.2 BI.

Neutralizing activity against Omicron BA.5 after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration comparable to those after Omicron BA.1/BA.2 breakthrough infections.

Introduction: The effect of tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld™; AstraZeneca, UK) should be evaluated in the context of concurrent outbreak situations. Methods: For serologic investigation of tixagevimab/cilgavimab during the BA.5 outbreak period, sera of immunocompromised (IC) hosts sampled before and one month after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration and those of healthcare workers (HCWs) sampled one month after a 3rd shot of COVID-19 vaccines, five months after BA.1/BA.2 breakthrough infection (BI), and one month after BA.5 BI were investigated. Semi-quantitative anti-spike protein antibody (Sab) test and plaque reduction neutralizing test (PRNT) against BA.5 were performed. Results: A total of 19 IC hosts (five received tixagevimab/cilgavimab 300 mg and 14 received 600 mg) and 41 HCWs (21 experienced BA.1/BA.2 BI and 20 experienced BA.5 BI) were evaluated. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between IC hosts and HCWs except for age and hypertension. Sab significantly increased after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration (median 130.2 BAU/mL before tixagevimab/cilgavimab, 5,665.8 BAU/mL after 300 mg, and 10,217 BAU/mL after 600 mg; both P < 0.001). Sab of one month after the 3rd shot (12,144.2 BAU/mL) or five months after BA.1/BA.2 BI (10,455.8 BAU/mL) were comparable with that of tixagevimab/cilgavimab 600 mg, while Sab of one month after BA.5 BI were significantly higher (22,216.0 BAU/mL; P < 0.001). BA.5 PRNT ND50 significantly increased after tixagevimab/cilgavimab administration (median ND50 29.6 before tixagevimab/cilgavimab, 170.8 after 300 mg, and 298.5 after 600 mg; both P < 0.001). The ND50 after tixagevimab/cilgavimab 600 mg was comparable to those of five months after BA.1 BI (ND50 200.9) while ND50 of one month after the 3rd shot was significantly lower (ND50 107.6; P = 0.019). The ND50 of one month after BA.5 BI (ND50 1,272.5) was highest among tested groups, but statistical difference was not noticed with tixagevimab/cilgavimab 600 mg. Conclusion: Tixagevimab/cilgavimab provided a comparable neutralizing activity against the BA.5 with a healthy adult population who were vaccinated with a 3rd shot and experienced BA.1/BA.2 BI.

Augmented humoral and cellular immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 after breakthrough infection in kidney transplant recipients who received 3 doses of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine.

Diminished immune response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and breakthrough infection (BI) is a major concern for solid organ transplant recipients. Humoral and cellular immune responses of kidney transplant (KT) recipients after a third COVID-19 vaccination were investigated compared to matched health care workers. Anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 spike protein antibody and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 specific interferon-gamma releasing assay (IGRA) were assessed. A total of 38 KT recipients, including 20 BI and 18 noninfection, were evaluated. In the KT BI group, antibody titers were significantly increased (median 5 to 724, binding antibody units/mL (P = 0.002) after the third vaccination, but IGRA responses were negligible. After BI, antibody titers increased (median 11 355 binding antibody unit/mL; P < 0.001) and there was a significant increase of IGRA responses to spike proteins (Spike1-Nil, median 0.05 to 0.41 IU/mL; P = 0.009). Antibody titers and IGRA responses were significantly higher in the BI than in the noninfection group after 6 months. Immune responses were stronger in the health care worker than in the KT cohort, but the gap became narrower after BI. In conclusion, KT recipients who experienced BI after 3 COVID-19 vaccinations acquired augmented humoral and cellular immune responses.

Severity-Adjusted Dexamethasone Dosing and Tocilizumab Combination for Severe COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Real-world experience with tocilizumab in combination with dexamethasone in patients with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) needs to be investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the effect of severity-adjusted dosing of dexamethasone in combination with tocilizumab for severe COVID-19 from August 2020 to August 2021. The primary endpoint was 30-day clinical recovery, which was defined as no oxygen requirement or referral after recovery. RESULTS: A total of 66 patients were evaluated, including 33 patients in the dexamethasone (Dexa) group and 33 patients in the dexamethasone plus tocilizumab (DexaToci) group. The DexaToci group showed a statistically significant benefit in 30-day clinical recovery, compared to the Dexa group (p=0.024). In multivariable analyses, peak FiO2 within 3 days and tocilizumab combination were consistently significant for 30-day recovery (all p<0.05). The DexaToci group showed a significantly steeper decrease in FiO2 (-4.2±2.6) than the Dexa group (-2.7±2.6; p=0.021) by hospital day 15. The duration of oxygen requirement was significantly shorter in the DexaToci group than the Dexa group (median, 10.0 days vs. 17.0 days; p=0.006). Infectious complications and cellular and humoral immune responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the convalescence stage were not different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: A combination of severity-adjusted dexamethasone and tocilizumab for the treatment of severe COVID-19 improved clinical recovery without increasing infectious complications or hindering the immune response against SARS-CoV-2.

Estimating the Neutralizing Effect and Titer Correlation of Semi-Quantitative Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Immunoassays.

For the clinical application of semi-quantitative anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests, the analytical performance and titer correlation of the plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) need to be investigated. We evaluated the analytical performance and PRNT titer-correlation of one surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) kit and three chemiluminescent assays. We measured the total antibodies for the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein, total antibodies for the nucleocapsid protein (NP), and IgG antibodies for the RBD. All three chemiluminescent assays showed high analytical performance for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection, with a sensitivity ≥ 98% and specificity ≥ 99%; those of the sVNT were slightly lower. The representativeness of the neutralizing activity of PRNT ND50 ≥ 20 was comparable among the four immunoassays (Cohen's kappa ≈ 0.80). Quantitative titer correlation for high PRNT titers of ND50 ≥ 50, 200, and 1,000 was investigated with new cut-off values; the anti-RBD IgG antibody kit showed the best performance. It also showed the best linear correlation with PRNT titer in both the acute and convalescent phases (Pearson's R 0.81 and 0.72, respectively). Due to the slowly waning titer of anti-NP antibodies, the correlation with PRNT titer at the convalescent phase was poor. In conclusion, semi-quantitative immunoassay kits targeting the RBD showed neutralizing activity that was correlated by titer; measurement of anti-NP antibodies would be useful for determining past infections.

Effects of Short-Term Corticosteroid Use on Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity of the First Dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine.

The effects of corticosteroid use on the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (ChAd) vaccine were evaluated. Healthcare workers (HCWs) who took low-dose corticosteroid agents around the time of the first dose of ChAd (ChAdPd group) were recruited and the reactogenicity and immunogenicity were compared with those of ChAd (ChAd group) and BNT162b2 vaccination (BNT group) of HCWs without corticosteroid exposure. The immunogenicity was measured three weeks after vaccination using quantitative anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S) antibody electrochemiluminescence immunoassay and interferon gamma (IFN-γ) release assay. A total of 67 HCWs comprising 24 ChAd, 29 BNT, and 14 ChAdPd was included. The median total corticosteroid dose of the ChAdPd group was 30 mg prednisolone equivalents (interquartile range (IQR) 20-71.3 mg). HCWs in the ChAdPd group experienced significantly milder reactogenicity (median total score 7.5, IQR 4.0-18.0) compared to those in the ChAd group (median 23.0, IQR 8.0-43.0, P=0.012) but similar to that in the BNT group (median 5.0, IQR 3.0-9.0, P=0.067). The S antibody concentration of the ChAdPd group (62.4 ± 70.0 U/mL) was higher than that of the ChAd group, though without statistical significance (3.45 ± 57.6 U/mL, P=0.192). The cellular immune response was most robust in the ChAdPd group, with significantly higher IFN-γ concentration (5.363 ± 4.276 IU/mL), compared to the ChAd (0.978 ± 1.181 IU/mL, P=0.002) and BNT (1.656 ± 1.925 IU/mL, P=0.009) groups. This finding suggest that short-term corticosteroid reduces reactogenicity of the first dose of ChAd without hindering immunogenicity.

Neutralizing Antibody Production in Asymptomatic and Mild COVID-19 Patients, in Comparison with Pneumonic COVID-19 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate antibody production in asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Sera from asymptomatic to severe COVID-19 patients were collected. Microneutralization (MN), fluorescence immunoassay (FIA), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) were performed. RESULTS: A total of 70 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients were evaluated, including 15 asymptomatic/anosmia, 49 mild symptomatic, and 6 pneumonia patients. The production of the neutralizing antibody was observed in 100% of pneumonia, 93.9% of mild symptomatic, and 80.0% of asymptomatic/anosmia groups. All the patients in the pneumonia group showed high MN titer (≥1:80), while 36.7% of mild symptomatic and 20.0% of asymptomatic/anosmia groups showed high titer (p < 0.001). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could be more sensitively detected by FIA IgG (98.8%) and ELISA (97.6%) in overall. For the FIA IgG test, all patients in the pneumonia group exhibited a high COI value (≥15.0), while 89.8% of mild symptomatic and 73.3% of asymptomatic/anosmia groups showed a high value (p = 0.049). For the ELISA test, all patients in the pneumonia group showed a high optical density (OD) ratio (≥3.0), while 65.3% of mild symptomatic and 53.3% of asymptomatic/anosmia groups showed a high ratio (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Most asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients produced the neutralizing antibody, although the titers were lower than pneumonia patients. ELISA and FIA sensitively detected anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

A COVID-19 Exposure at a Dental Clinic Where Healthcare Workers Routinely Use Particulate Filtering Respirators.

Asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients produce a considerable amount of virus and transmit severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) through close contact. Preventing in-hospital transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is challenging, since symptom-based screening protocols may miss asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic patients. In particular, dental healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of exposure, as face-to-face contact and exposure to oral secretions is unavoidable. We report exposure of HCWs during dental procedures on a mild symptomatic COVID-19 patient. A 32-year-old male visited a dental clinic at a tertiary care hospital. He experienced mild cough, which started three days before the dental visit, but did not report his symptom during the entrance screening. He underwent several dental procedures and imaging for orthognathic surgery without wearing a mask. Seven HCWs were closely exposed to the patient during dental procedures that could have generated droplets and aerosols. One HCW had close contact with the patient during radiologic exams, and seven HCWs had casual contact. All HCWs wore particulate filtering respirators with 94% filter capacity and gloves, but none wore eye protection or gowns. The next day, the patient experienced dysgeusia and was diagnosed with COVID-19 with high viral load. All HCWs who had close contact with the patient were quarantined for 14 days, and polymerase chain reaction and antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 were negative. This exposure event suggests the protective effect of particulate filtering respirators in dental clinics. The recommendations of different levels of personal protective equipment (PPE) for dental HCWs according to the procedure types should be established according to the planned procedure, the risk of COVID-19 infection of the patient, and the outbreak situation of the community.

Evaluation of six anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody test kits and practical approaches to optimize the diagnostic performance.

In an investigation of six anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody kits with different target antigen and methodology, each kit showed comparable performance. As false-positive reactions occurred independently with different kits, specificity increased to 100% when pairs of kits were used. With three-kit combination, both sensitivity (99.1%) and specificity (100%) increased.

Serologic Evaluation of Healthcare Workers Caring for COVID-19 Patients in the Republic of Korea.

The safety of healthcare workers (HCWs) against severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission is an important aspect of managing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In the South Korea, highly stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines are implemented, and reports of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 transmission among HCWs are limited. However, subclinical infections may have been missed by the current symptom-based screening strategy. To evaluate the risk of undetected SARS-CoV-2 transmissions from COVID-19 patients to HCWs, we conducted a multicenter seroprevalence study after the first surge of the COVID-19 outbreak. A total of 432 HCWs were evaluated, comprising 309 HCWs designated to laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patient care and 123 non-designated HCWs. Designated HCWs wore personal protective equipment including an N95 respirator, eye protection, hooded overalls, shoe covers, and inner and outer gloves. Use of a powered air-purifying respirator was recommended for aerosol-generating procedures or long-duration care activities. A high-sensitivity (99.1%) fluorescence immunoassay immunoglobulin G (IgG) kit was used as the initial screening test, and two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits for total and IgG antibodies were used to confirm the test results. A microneutralization test was additionally performed to evaluate the neutralizing activity of positive specimens. Among the evaluated HCWs, none of the non-designated HCWs had a positive result, while one of the HCWs designated for COVID-19 patient care (1/309, 0.3%) was seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 with confirmed neutralizing activity (1:40). This finding suggests that subclinical seroconversion may occur among HCWs caring for COVID-19 patients, although the risk is low under strict IPC guidance.

Neutralizing Antibody Production in Asymptomatic and Mild COVID-19 Patients, in Comparison with Pneumonic COVID-19 Patients

Objectives: To investigate antibody production in asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients. Methods: Sera from asymptomatic to severe COVID-19 patients were collected. Microneutralization (MN), fluorescence immunoassay (FIA), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) were performed. Results: A total of 70 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients were evaluated, including 15 asymptomatic/anosmia, 49 mild symptomatic, and 6 pneumonia patients. The production of the neutralizing antibody was observed in 100% of pneumonia, 93.9% of mild symptomatic, and 80.0% of asymptomatic/anosmia groups. All the patients in the pneumonia group showed high MN titer (≥1:80), while 36.7% of mild symptomatic and 20.0% of asymptomatic/anosmia groups showed high titer (p <0.001). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could be more sensitively detected by FIA IgG (98.8%) and ELISA (97.6%) in overall. For the FIA IgG test, all patients in the pneumonia group exhibited a high COI value (≥15.0), while 89.8% of mild symptomatic and 73.3% of asymptomatic/anosmia groups showed a high value (p = 0.049). For the ELISA test, all patients in the pneumonia group showed a high optical density (OD) ratio (≥3.0), while 65.3% of mild symptomatic and 53.3% of asymptomatic/anosmia groups showed a high ratio (p = 0.006). Conclusions: Most asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 patients produced the neutralizing antibody, although the titers were lower than pneumonia patients. ELISA and FIA sensitively detected anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.