Exploring the vaccine-induced immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in healthcare workers.

We aimed to analyze the kinetics of T-cell-mediated and B-cell-mediated humoral immune responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) before and after booster vaccination, as well as the impacts of the in vitro test results the type of vaccination on the prediction of SARS-CoV-2 infection. A total of 240 healthcare workers vaccinated twice were serially tested using an interferon gamma release assay (IGRA) and a neutralizing antibody (nAb). At the end of the study, we investigated the history of SARS-CoV-2 infection of all the enrolled participants to analyze the effects of the test results and the type of vaccination on SARS-CoV-2 infection. Overall, the positive rates were 52.3% and 80.0% for IGRA and 84.6% and 100% for the nAb test before and after booster vaccination, respectively. However, the positive rates were 52.8% for IGRA and 100% for nAb 3 months after booster vaccination. The in vitro test results and the type of vaccination were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The antibody response caused by the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination lasted more than 6 months, although the response of the T-cells disappeared rapidly after 3 months. However, these in vitro results and the type of vaccination cannot be used for predicting the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Performance evaluation of newly developed surrogate virus neutralization tests for detecting neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.

We evaluated newly developed surrogate virus neutralization tests (sVNT) for detecting neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against the receptor binding domain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). VERI-Q SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody Detection ELISA Kit (MiCo BioMed, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea, hereafter, "eCoV-CN") is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-based sVNT, and VERI-Q SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody Rapid Test Kit (MiCo BioMed, hereafter, "rCoV-RN") is a point-of-care lateral-flow immunochromatography test with auto-scanner. A total of 411 serum samples were evaluated. Both evaluations used a 50% plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT50) as the gold standard. Compared with PRNT50, the eCoV-CN showed 98.7% positive percent agreement (PPA), 96.8% negative percent agreement (NPA), 97.4% total percent agreement (TPA), with kappa values of 0.942. The rCoV-RN showed 98.7% PPA, 97.4% NPA, 97.8% TPA, and kappa values of 0.951, comparing to PRNT50. Neither assay indicated cross-reactivity for other pathogens, and the signal indexes were statistically significantly correlated to the PRNT50 titer. The two evaluated sVNTs show comparable performances to the PRNT50 with the advantages of technical simplicity, speed, and do not require cell culture facilities.

Evaluation of ichroma™ COVID-19 interferon gamma release assay for detection of vaccine-induced immunity in healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the performance of a new interferon gamma release assay (IGRA) format assay, the ichroma™ COVID-19 IGRA (IGRA-SARS), with that of the widely used QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kit (QFN-SARS) in vaccinated healthcare workers (HCWs). Additionally, we analyzed the long-term changes in IGRA results after the final vaccine dose. METHODS: A total of 383 specimens from 281 HCWs were enrolled in this study, and the results of SARS-IGRA and QFN-SARS assays were compared. In addition, we performed the receive operator curve analysis to estimate the optimal cut-off value for IGRA-SARS. RESULTS: For all specimens, IGRA-SARS and QFN-SARS showed 75.7% and 64.2% of the positive results, respectively. The absolute agreement between IGRA-SARS and QFN-SARS was 80.0%, and the Fleiss' κ value was 0.525, indicating moderate agreement. ROC curve analysis of the IGRA-SARS results showed a cut-off value of >0.254 IU/mL, which was consistent with the manufacturer's specifications. The positive rates of both IGRA assays decreased significantly after a postvaccination period of 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: IGRA-SARS showed acceptable performance in the detection of vaccine-induced immunity against COVID-19; however, harmonization of IGRA assays has not yet been achieved. Additionally, the significant decline of positive rates of IGRA after the last vaccination would support the necessity of booster vaccination after a postvaccination period of 6 months.

Evaluation of rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests, AFIAS COVID-19 Ag and ichroma COVID-19 Ag, with serial nasopharyngeal specimens from COVID-19 patients.

We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of two newly developed, point-of-care, rapid antigen tests (RATs) for detecting SARS-CoV-2, the AFIAS COVID-19 Ag and the ichromaTM COVID-19 Ag, and investigated antigen kinetics. A total of 200 serially collected nasopharyngeal (NP) specimens from 38 COVID-19 patients and 122 specimens from negative controls were analyzed. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were assessed in comparison to molecular test results and subdivided according to targeted genes (E, RdRP, and N) and days post-symptom onset (PSO). For the kinetics evaluation, cut-off-indices from serial NP specimens were used according to the number of days PSO. Both RATs showed sensitivity of 91.3‒100% for specimens with cycle threshold (Ct) < 25. The specificity of AFIAS was 98.7‒98.9% and that of ichromaTM was 100.0%. The kappa values of AFIAS and ichromaTM for the molecular testing of specimens with Ct < 25 (RdRP) were 0.97 and 1.00, respectively. The sensitivity of AFIAS and ichromaTM for all genes was lower for specimens collected at 8‒14 PSO than for those collected before 7-days PSO. The kinetics profiles showed that antigen levels gradually decreased from ≤ 7-days PSO to > 22-days PSO. Both RATs showed excellent specificity and acceptable sensitivity for NP specimens with higher viral loads and for specimens collected within 7-days PSO. Hence, they have the potential to become useful tools for the early detection of SARS-CoV-2. However, because of concerns about false negativity, RATs should be used in conjunction with molecular tests.