T-Cell Assay after COVID-19 Vaccination Could Be a Useful Tool? A Pilot Study on Interferon-Gamma Release Assay in Healthcare Workers.

Background: SARS-CoV-2 T-cells are crucial for long-term protection against reinfection. The aim was to demonstrate the Interferon-gamma Release Assay (IGRA) test could be useful for vaccination monitoring. Methods: In a prospective cohort of 98 vaccinated healthcare workers for SARS-CoV-2, we selected 23 people in low-antibodies (Group 1, N = 8), high-antibodies (Group 2, N = 9), and negative control groups (Group 3, N = 6). SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and cellular responses were analyzed at 8 months after two doses of Pfizer BioNTech, evaluating anti-RBD (Receptor Binding Domain) and RBD-ACE2 (Angiotensin Converting Enzyme-2) blocking antibodies in sera through a Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CLIA) and T-cells through the IGRA test in heparinized plasma. Moreover, lymphocyte subtyping was executed by a flow cytometer. Statistical analysis was performed. Results: The data confirmed that RBD and RBD-ACE2 blocking ACE2 antibody levels of Group 1 were significantly lower than Group 2; p < 0.001. However, T-cells showed no significant difference between Group 1 and Group 2. Conclusions: This work suggests the need for new strategies for booster doses administration.

Evaluation of Natural and Vaccine-Induced Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunity: A Comparative Study between Different Groups of Volunteers.

(1) Background: The production of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies should help minimize the severity of COVID-19 disease. Our focus was to investigate and compare different vaccination schedules, monitoring circulating S-RBD Ab (antibodies anti-Spike protein-Receptor Binding Domain) levels after administering two doses in naïve patients. Likewise, vaccine-stimulated immunity in naïve and previously infected patients was compared. (2) Methods: We included 392 patients. Sera were evaluated by Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S. Statistical analyses were conducted by MedCalc and JASP. (3) Results: In COVID-19 patients, the median value of Ab levels was 154 BAU/mL, stable up to 9 months after the infection. From the data observed in vaccinated patients, higher median values were recorded in COVID-19/Pfizer BioNTech (18913 BAU/mL) than in other groups (Pfizer BioNTech: 1841; ChadOx1 961; heterologous vaccination: 2687) BAU/mL. (4) Conclusions: In conclusion, a single booster dose given to previously infected patients raised an antibody response much higher than two doses given to naïve individuals and heterologous vaccination generated a robust persistent antibody response at high levels, steady up to three months after administration.

Evaluation of serological anti-SARS-CoV-2 chemiluminescent immunoassays correlated to live virus neutralization test, for the detection of anti-RBD antibodies as a relevant alternative in COVID-19 large-scale neutralizing activity monitoring.

The Spike-Receptor Binding Domain (S-RBD) is considered the most antigenic protein in SARS-CoV-2 and probably the key player in SARS-CoV-2 immune response. Quantitative immunoassays may help establish an anti-RBD Abs threshold as an indication of protective immunity. Since different immunoassays are commercial, the standard reference method for the neutralizing activity is the live Virus Neutralization Test (VNT). In this study, anti-RBD IgG levels were detected with two chemiluminescent immunoassays in paucisymptomatic, symptomatic and vaccinated subjects, and their neutralizing activity was correlated to VNT titer, using SARS-CoV-2 original and British variant strains. Both immunoassays confirmed higher anti-RBD Abs levels in vaccinated subjects. Furthermore, despite different anti-RBD Abs median concentrations between the immunoassays, a strong positive correlation with VNT was observed. In conclusion, although the SARS-CoV-2 immune response heterogeneity, the use of immunoassays can help in large-scale monitoring of COVID-19 samples, becoming a valid alternative to VNT test for diagnostic routine laboratories.

Evaluation of ECLIA antigen detection tests as screening methods for COVID-19 in comparison with molecular analysis.

BACKGROUND: Data from literature shows that antigen tests are rapid and helpful tools for diagnosis of COVID-19. AIM: This work aimed to evaluate the performances of the Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 Antigen test, in comparison to RT-qPCR, the gold standard. METHODS: A total of 110 swabs were tested; according to rRT-PCR, 76 were positive, and 34 were negative. The swabs were processed by Elecsys SARS CoV 2 Antigen assay (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Germany), an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA). RESULTS: In a first evaluation, the overall sensitivity and specificity were 85% and 100%, respectively. It was noted that most of the discordant cases had cycle threshold (Ct) values > 28. Therefore, it was assumed a new measure to evaluate sensitivity and specificity, then samples with Ct values < 28 were selected. In this way, it was achieved a Ct < 28 sensitivity of 94%. The level of agreement between the two tests was 89. 1% with κ value of 0.77 for total data and 95.9% with κ value of 0.95 for samples with < 28 Ct. The antigen test performs well in the presence of high viral loads, whereas lower levels are missed. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison data obtained in this study support that this method seems a proper approach for rapid screening of patients with high SARS-CoV-2 viral load; however, the rate of sensitivity is highly Ct-dependent.

Serological anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies association to live virus neutralizing test titers in COVID-19 paucisymptomatic/symptomatic patients and vaccinated subjects.

A large number of immunoassays have been developed to detect specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies; however, not always they are functional to neutralize the virus. The reference test for the anti-spike neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) ability to counteract the viral infection is the virus neutralization test (VNT). Great interest is developing on reliable serological assays allowing antibodies concentration and antibody protective titer correlation. The aim of our study was to detect nAbs serum levels in paucisymptomatic, symptomatic and vaccinated subjects, to find a cut-off value able to protect from virus infection. nAbs serum levels were detected by a competitive automated immunoassay, in association to VNT with the SARS-CoV-2 original and British variant strains. The median nAbs concentrations were: 281.3 BAU/ml for paucisymptomatics; 769.4 BAU/ml for symptomatics; 351.65 BAU/ml for the vaccinated cohort; 983 BAU/ml considering only the second dose vaccinated individuals. The original strain VNT analysis showed 1:80 median neutralization titers in paucisymptomatic and vaccinated subjects; 1:160 in symptomatic patients; 1:160 in the second dose groups. The British variant VNT analysis showed lower neutralization titers in paucisymptomatic and vaccinated groups (1:40); the same titer in symptomatic patients (1:160); the second dose group confirmed the original strain titer (1:160). In conclusion, our data showed optimal correlations with a proportional increase between neutralizing activity and antibody concentration, making nAbs detection a good alternative to virus neutralization assays, difficult to carry out in routine laboratories. Finally, ROC curve analysis established a cut-off of 408.6 BAU/ml to identify subjects with a low risk of infection.

The WHO International Standard for COVID-19 serological tests: towards harmonization of anti-spike assays.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays are relevant in managing the COVID-19 pandemic, providing valuable data on the immunization status of the population. However, current serology tests are highly variable, due to their different characteristics and to the lack of reference materials. The aim of the World Health Organization (WHO) first International Standard (IS) for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin is to harmonize humoral immune response assessment after natural infection or vaccination, and recommend reporting the results for binding activity in Binding Antibody Units (BAU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study analyzed six commercial quantitative anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-protein assays in a head-to-head comparison, using the manufacturers' conversion factors for the WHO IS to obtain BAU/mL values. RESULTS: Our data showed good alignment up to 1000 BAU/mL, then began to disperse, exhibiting some discrepancies. Moreover, correlations among methods varied with Cohen's Kappa ranging from 0.580 to 1.00, with the lowest agreement values for kits using different target antigens or different antibody isotypes, making it clear that the laboratory report should include this information. Values expressed as BAU/ml showed a reduced between-assays variability compared to AU/ml (median coefficients of variation 0.38 and 0.68, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: On the basis of these data at present anti-SARS CoV-2 serological assays' results are not interchangeable, and, more importantly, individual immune monitoring should be performed with the same method.

Evaluation of S-RBD and high specificity ACE-2-binding antibodies on SARS-CoV-2 patients after six months from infection.

The antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 has not yet fully defined, but the availability of sensitive and specific serological assays is crucial to observe the presence of specific antibodies against the human receptor binding domain (S-RBD) and high specificity ACE-2-binding antibodies or neutralizing antibodies (NT) in response to vaccines. Indeed, these peculiar antibodies should prevent viral interaction between RBD and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, located on surface of host cells. In this study, 72 samples from 37 hospitalized COVID-19 patients and 35 not-hospitalized patients were analyzed longitudinally. The detection of S-RBD and NT antibodies was carried out using CLIA tests. Hospitalized patients showed elevated serum levels of S-RBD (97.22%) and NT (77.78%) antibodies, differently, not-hospitalized, who were paucisymptomatic or asymptomatic patients, showed lower serum levels of S-RBD (65.71%) and NT (38.14%) antibodies. The results suggest that the NT serum level is strongly related to disease severity (p < 0.001) and to the serum level of S-RBD antibodies (p < 0.0001).

SARS-CoV-2 infection serology validation of different methods: Usefulness of IgA in the early phase of infection.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was isolated from the respiratory samples of patients with pneumonia as showed by the sequence analysis of the virus genomes obtained in Wuhan, China. The antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 is not well understood yet, but the availability of sensitive and specific serological assays will be crucial for the early diagnosis of infection, for epidemiological studies and for defining the presence of neutralizing antibodies in response to a possible vaccine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We tested and compared the performances of one chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA), two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA). RESULTS: The ECLIA serological assay performed best and may be a valid screening method for SARS-COV-2 infection. The IgA detected by the ELISA assay might be a more reliable and stable early serological marker than IgM. Instead, IgGs, as expected, showed stable level after 10 days from symptoms onset. CONCLUSION: The ECLIA method could be used as screening test, considering both the excellent performance and the cost per single test; while ELISA assay for IgG and IgA, which are present at a higher level than IgM and last longer, might be used as confirmatory test.