Serum neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages BA.1 and BA.2 in patients receiving monoclonal antibodies.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Omicron BA.1 sublineage has been supplanted in many countries by the BA.2 sublineage. BA.2 differs from BA.1 by about 21 mutations in its spike. In this study, we first compared the sensitivity of BA.1 and BA.2 to neutralization by nine therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). In contrast to BA.1, BA.2 was sensitive to cilgavimab, partly inhibited by imdevimab and resistant to adintrevimab and sotrovimab. We then analyzed sera from 29 immunocompromised individuals up to 1 month after administration of Ronapreve (casirivimab and imdevimab) and/or Evusheld (cilgavimab and tixagevimab) antibody cocktails. All treated individuals displayed elevated antibody levels in their sera, which efficiently neutralized the Delta variant. Sera from Ronapreve recipients did not neutralize BA.1 and weakly inhibited BA.2. Neutralization of BA.1 and BA.2 was detected in 19 and 29 out of 29 Evusheld recipients, respectively. As compared to the Delta variant, neutralizing titers were more markedly decreased against BA.1 (344-fold) than BA.2 (nine-fold). We further report four breakthrough Omicron infections among the 29 individuals, indicating that antibody treatment did not fully prevent infection. Collectively, BA.1 and BA.2 exhibit noticeable differences in their sensitivity to therapeutic mAbs. Anti-Omicron neutralizing activity of Ronapreve and, to a lesser extent, that of Evusheld is reduced in patients' sera.

Immunogenicity of BNT162b2 vaccine against the Alpha and Delta variants in immunocompromised patients with systemic inflammatory diseases.

OBJECTIVES: The emergence of strains of SARS-CoV-2 exhibiting increase viral fitness and immune escape potential, such as the Delta variant (B.1.617.2), raises concerns in immunocompromised patients. We aimed to evaluate seroconversion, cross-neutralisation and T-cell responses induced by BNT162b2 in immunocompromised patients with systemic inflammatory diseases. METHODS: Prospective monocentric study including patients with systemic inflammatory diseases and healthcare immunocompetent workers as controls. Primary endpoints were anti-spike antibodies levels and cross-neutralisation of Alpha and Delta variants after BNT162b2 vaccine. Secondary endpoints were T-cell responses, breakthrough infections and safety. RESULTS: Sixty-four cases and 21 controls not previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 were analysed. Kinetics of anti-spike IgG after BNT162b2 vaccine showed lower and delayed induction in cases, more pronounced with rituximab. Administration of two doses of BNT162b2 generated a neutralising response against Alpha and Delta in 100% of controls, while sera from only one of rituximab-treated patients neutralised Alpha (5%) and none Delta. Other therapeutic regimens induced a partial neutralising activity against Alpha, even lower against Delta. All controls and cases except those treated with methotrexate mounted a SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cell response. Methotrexate abrogated T-cell responses after one dose and dramatically impaired T-cell responses after two doses of BNT162b2. Third dose of vaccine improved immunogenicity in patients with low responses. CONCLUSION: Rituximab and methotrexate differentially impact the immunogenicity of BNT162b2, by impairing B-cell and T-cell responses, respectively. Delta fully escapes the humoral response of individuals treated with rituximab. These findings support efforts to improve BNT162b2 immunogenicity in immunocompromised individuals (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04870411).