Evaluation of QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ release assay following SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination (preprint)

Background: T cells are important in preventing severe disease from SARS-CoV-2, but scalable and field-adaptable alternatives to expert T cell assays are needed. The interferon-gamma release assay QuantiFERON platform was developed to detect T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 from whole blood with relatively basic equipment and flexibility of processing timelines. Methods: 48 participants with different infection and vaccination backgrounds were recruited. Whole blood samples were analysed using the QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 assay in parallel with the well-established Protective Immunity from T Cells in Healthcare workers (PITCH) ELISpot, which can evaluate spike-specific T cell responses. Aims: The primary aims of this cross-sectional observational cohort study were to establish if the QuantiFERON SARS-Co-V-2 assay could discern differences between specified groups and to assess the sensitivity of the assay compared to the PITCH ELISpot. Findings: The QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 distinguished acutely infected individuals (12-21 days post positive PCR) from naive individuals (p< 0.0001) with 100% sensitivity and specificity for SARS-CoV-2 T cells, whilst the PITCH ELISpot had reduced sensitivity (62.5%) for the acute infection group. Sensitivity with QuantiFERON for previous infection was 12.5% (172-444 days post positive test) and was inferior to the PITCH ELISpot (75%). Although the QuantiFERON assay could discern differences between unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals (55-166 days since second vaccination), the latter also had reduced sensitivity (55.5%) compared to the PITCH ELISpot (66.6%). Conclusion: The QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 assay showed potential as a T cell evaluation tool soon after SARS-CoV-2 infection but has lower sensitivity for use in reliable evaluation of vaccination or more distant infection.

Evolution of long-term hybrid immunity in healthcare workers after different COVID-19 vaccination regimens: a longitudinal observational cohort study (preprint)

Both infection and vaccination, alone or in combination, generate antibody and T cell responses against SARS-CoV-2. However, the maintenance of such responses - and hence protection from disease - requires careful characterisation. In a large prospective study of UK healthcare workers (PITCH, within the larger SIREN study) we previously observed that prior infection impacted strongly on subsequent cellular and humoral immunity induced after long and short dosing intervals of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccination. Here, we report longer follow up of 684 HCWs in this cohort over 6-9 months following two doses of BNT162b2 or AZ1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccination and following a subsequent BNT162b2 booster vaccination. We make three important observations: Firstly, the dynamics of humoral and cellular responses differ; binding and neutralising antibodies declined whereas T and B cell responses were better maintained after the second vaccine dose. Secondly, vaccine boosting restored IgG levels to post second dose levels and broadened neutralising activity against variants of concern including omicron BA.1, alongside further boosting of T cell responses. Thirdly, prior infection maintained its impact driving larger T cell responses compared to never infected people, including after the third dose. In conclusion, the maintenance of T cell responses in time and against variants of concern may account for continued protection against severe disease.

Comparison of two T cell assays to evaluate T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following vaccination in naive and convalescent healthcare workers (preprint)

Background: T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following infection and vaccination are less characterised than antibody responses, due to a more complex experimental pathway. Methods: We measured T cell responses in 108 healthcare workers (HCWs) in an observational cohort study, using the commercialised Oxford Immunotec T-SPOT Discovery SARS-CoV-2 assay (OI T-SPOT) and the PITCH ELISpot protocol established for academic research settings. Results: Both assays detected T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike, membrane and nucleocapsid proteins. Responses were significantly lower when reported by OI T-SPOT than by PITCH ELISpot. Four weeks after two doses of either Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 AZD1222 vaccine, the responder rate was 63% for OI T-SPOT Panels1+2 (peptides representing SARS-CoV-2 spike protein excluding regions present in seasonal coronaviruses), 69% for OI T-SPOT Panel 14 (peptides representing the entire SARS-CoV-2 spike), and 94% for the PITCH ELISpot assay. The two OI T-SPOT panels correlated strongly with each other showing that either readout quantifies spike-specific T cell responses, although the correlation between the OI T-SPOT panels and the PITCH ELISpot was moderate. Conclusion: The standardisation, relative scalability and longer interval between blood acquisition and processing are advantages of the commercial OI T-SPOT assay. However, the OI T-SPOT assay measures T cell responses at a significantly lower magnitude compared to the PITCH ELISpot assay, detecting T cell responses in a lower proportion of vaccinees. This has implications for the reporting of low-level T cell responses that may be observed in patient populations and for the assessment of T cell durability after vaccination.

Divergent trajectories of antiviral memory after SARS-Cov-2 infection (preprint)

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is normally controlled by effective host immunity including innate, humoral and cellular responses. However, the trajectories and correlates of acquired immunity, and the capacity of memory responses months after infection to neutralise variants of concern - which has important public health implications - is not fully understood. To address this, we studied a cohort of 78 UK healthcare workers who presented in April to June 2020 with symptomatic PCR-confirmed infection or who tested positive during an asymptomatic screening programme and tracked virus-specific B and T cell responses longitudinally at 5-6 time points each over 6 months, prior to vaccination. We observed a highly variable range of responses, some of which - T cell interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) ELISpot, N-specific antibody waned over time across the cohort, while others (spike-specific antibody, B cell memory ELISpot) were stable. In such cohorts, antiviral antibody has been linked to protection against re-infection. We used integrative analysis and a machine-learning approach (SIMON - Sequential Iterative Modeling Over Night) to explore this heterogeneity and to identify predictors of sustained immune responses. Hierarchical clustering defined a group of high and low antibody responders, which showed stability over time regardless of clinical presentation. These antibody responses correlated with IFN-γ ELISpot measures of T cell immunity and represent a subgroup of patients with a robust trajectory for longer term immunity. Importantly, this immune-phenotype associates with higher levels of neutralising antibodies not only against the infecting (Victoria) strain but also against variants B.1.1.7 (alpha) and B.1.351 (beta). Overall memory responses to SARS-CoV-2 show distinct trajectories following early priming, that may define subsequent protection against infection and severe disease from novel variants.

A blood atlas of COVID-19 defines hallmarks of disease severity and specificity (preprint)

Treatment of severe COVID-19 is currently limited by clinical heterogeneity and incomplete understanding of potentially druggable immune mediators of disease. To advance this, we present a comprehensive multi-omic blood atlas in patients with varying COVID-19 severity and compare with influenza, sepsis and healthy volunteers. We identify immune signatures and correlates of host response. Hallmarks of disease severity revealed cells, their inflammatory mediators and networks as potential therapeutic targets, including progenitor cells and specific myeloid and lymphocyte subsets, features of the immune repertoire, acute phase response, metabolism and coagulation. Persisting immune activation involving AP-1/p38MAPK was a specific feature of COVID-19. The plasma proteome enabled sub-phenotyping into patient clusters, predictive of severity and outcome. Tensor and matrix decomposition of the overall dataset revealed feature groupings linked with disease severity and specificity. Our systems-based integrative approach and blood atlas will inform future drug development, clinical trial design and personalised medicine approaches for COVID-19.

An observational cohort study on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and B.1.1.7 variant infection in healthcare workers by antibody and vaccination status (preprint)

Background Natural and vaccine-induced immunity will play a key role in controlling the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 variants have the potential to evade natural and vaccine-induced immunity. Methods In a longitudinal cohort study of healthcare workers (HCWs) in Oxfordshire, UK, we investigated the protection from symptomatic and asymptomatic PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conferred by vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2, Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCOV-19) and prior infection (determined using anti-spike antibody status), using Poisson regression adjusted for age, sex, temporal changes in incidence and role. We estimated protection conferred after one versus two vaccinations and from infections with the B.1.1.7 variant identified using whole genome sequencing. Results 13,109 HCWs participated; 8285 received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (1407 two doses) and 2738 the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (49 two doses). Compared to unvaccinated seronegative HCWs, natural immunity and two vaccination doses provided similar protection against symptomatic infection: no HCW vaccinated twice had symptomatic infection, and incidence was 98% lower in seropositive HCWs (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.02 [95%CI <0.01-0.18]). Two vaccine doses or seropositivity reduced the incidence of any PCR-positive result with or without symptoms by 90% (0.10 [0.02-0.38]) and 85% (0.15 [0.08-0.26]) respectively. Single-dose vaccination reduced the incidence of symptomatic infection by 67% (0.33 [0.21-0.52]) and any PCR-positive result by 64% (0.36 [0.26-0.50]). There was no evidence of differences in immunity induced by natural infection and vaccination for infections with S-gene target failure and B.1.1.7. Conclusion Natural infection resulting in detectable anti-spike antibodies and two vaccine doses both provide robust protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, including against the B.1.1.7 variant.

Vaccine-induced immunity provides more robust heterotypic immunity than natural infection to emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. (preprint)

Both natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 and immunization with a number of vaccines induce protective immunity. However, the ability of such immune responses to recognize and therefore protect against emerging variants is a matter of increasing importance. Such variants of concern (VOC) include isolates of lineage B1.1.7, first identified in the UK, and B1.351, first identified in South Africa. Our data confirm that VOC, particularly those with substitutions at residues 484 and 417 escape neutralization by antibodies directed to the ACE2-binding Class 1 and the adjacent Class 2 epitopes but are susceptible to neutralization by the generally less potent antibodies directed to Class 3 and 4 epitopes on the flanks RBD. To address this potential threat, we sampled a SARS-CoV-2 uninfected UK cohort recently vaccinated with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech, two doses delivered 18-28 days apart), alongside a cohort naturally infected in the first wave of the epidemic in Spring 2020. We tested antibody and T cell responses against a reference isolate (VIC001) representing the original circulating lineage B and the impact of sequence variation in these two VOCs. We identified a reduction in antibody neutralization against the VOCs which was most evident in the B1.351 variant. However, the majority of the T cell response was directed against epitopes conserved across all three strains. The reduction in antibody neutralization was less marked in post-boost vaccine-induced than in naturally-induced immune responses and could be largely explained by the potency of the homotypic antibody response. However, after a single vaccination, which induced only modestly neutralizing homotypic antibody titres, neutralization against the VOCs was completely abrogated in the majority of vaccinees. These data indicate that VOCs may evade protective neutralising responses induced by prior infection, and to a lesser extent by immunization, particularly after a single vaccine, but the impact of the VOCs on T cell responses appears less marked. The results emphasize the need to generate high potency immune responses through vaccination in order to provide protection against these and other emergent variants. We observed that two doses of vaccine also induced a significant increase in binding antibodies to spike of both SARS-CoV-1 & MERS, in addition to the four common coronaviruses currently circulating in the UK. The impact of antigenic imprinting on the potency of humoral and cellular heterotypic protection generated by the next generation of variant-directed vaccines remains to be determined.

Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are associated with protection against reinfection (preprint)

BackgroundIt is critical to understand whether infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) protects from subsequent reinfection. MethodsWe investigated the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive results in seropositive and seronegative healthcare workers (HCWs) attending asymptomatic and symptomatic staff testing at Oxford University Hospitals, UK. Baseline antibody status was determined using anti-spike and/or anti-nucleocapsid IgG assays and staff followed for up to 30 weeks. We used Poisson regression to estimate the relative incidence of PCR-positive results and new symptomatic infection by antibody status, accounting for age, gender and changes in incidence over time. ResultsA total of 12219 HCWs participated and had anti-spike IgG measured, 11052 were followed up after negative and 1246 after positive antibody results including 79 who seroconverted during follow up. 89 PCR-confirmed symptomatic infections occurred in seronegative individuals (0.46 cases per 10,000 days at risk) and no symptomatic infections in those with anti-spike antibodies. Additionally, 76 (0.40/10,000 days at risk) anti-spike IgG seronegative individuals had PCR-positive tests in asymptomatic screening, compared to 3 (0.21/10,000 days at risk) seropositive individuals. Overall, positive baseline anti-spike antibodies were associated with lower rates of PCR-positivity (with or without symptoms) (adjusted rate ratio 0.24 [95%CI 0.08-0.76, p=0.015]). Rate ratios were similar using anti-nucleocapsid IgG alone or combined with anti-spike IgG to determine baseline status. ConclusionsPrior SARS-CoV-2 infection that generated antibody responses offered protection from reinfection for most people in the six months following infection. Further work is required to determine the long-term duration and correlates of post-infection immunity.

The duration, dynamics and determinants of SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses in individual healthcare workers (preprint)

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody measurements can be used to estimate the proportion of a population exposed or infected and may be informative about the risk of future infection. Previous estimates of the duration of antibody responses vary. MethodsWe present 6 months of data from a longitudinal seroprevalence study of 3217 UK healthcare workers (HCWs). Serial measurements of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid were obtained. Bayesian mixed linear models were used to investigate antibody waning and associations with age, gender, ethnicity, previous symptoms and PCR results. ResultsIn this cohort of working age HCWs, antibody levels rose to a peak at 24 (95% credibility interval, CrI 19-31) days post-first positive PCR test, before beginning to fall. Considering 452 IgG seropositive HCWs over a median of 121 days (maximum 171 days) from their maximum positive IgG titre, the mean estimated antibody half-life was 85 (95%CrI, 81-90) days. The estimated mean time to loss of a positive antibody result was 137 (95%CrI 127-148) days. We observed variation between individuals; higher maximum observed IgG titres were associated with longer estimated antibody half-lives. Increasing age, Asian ethnicity and prior self-reported symptoms were independently associated with higher maximum antibody levels, and increasing age and a positive PCR test undertaken for symptoms with longer antibody half-lives. ConclusionIgG antibody levels to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid wane within months, and faster in younger adults and those without symptoms. Ongoing longitudinal studies are required to track the long-term duration of antibody levels and their association with immunity to SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. SummarySerially measured SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid IgG titres from 452 seropositive healthcare workers demonstrate levels fall by half in 85 days. From a peak result, detectable antibodies last a mean 137 days. Levels fall faster in younger adults and following asymptomatic infection.

T cell assays differentiate clinical and subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infections from cross-reactive antiviral responses (preprint)

A major issue in identification of protective T cell responses against SARS-CoV-2 lies in distinguishing people infected with SARS-CoV-2 from those with cross-reactive immunity generated by exposure to other coronaviruses. We characterised SARS-CoV-2 T cell immune responses in 168 PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infected subjects and 118 seronegative subjects without known SARS-CoV-2 exposure using a range of T cell assays that differentially capture immune cell function. Strong ex vivo ELISpot and proliferation responses to multiple antigens (including M, NP and ORF3) were found in those who had been infected by SARS-CoV-2 but were rare in pre-pandemic and unexposed seronegative subjects. However, seronegative doctors with high occupational exposure and recent COVID-19 compatible illness showed patterns of T cell responses characteristic of infection, indicating that these readouts are highly sensitive. By contrast, over 90% of convalescent or unexposed people showed proliferation and cellular lactate responses to spike subunits S1/S2, indicating pre-existing cross-reactive T cell populations. The detection of T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 is therefore critically dependent on the choice of assay and antigen. Memory responses to specific non-spike proteins provides a method to distinguish recent infection from pre-existing immunity in exposed populations.

Stringent thresholds for SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays result in under-detection of cases reporting loss of taste/smell (preprint)

Thresholds for SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays have typically been determined using samples from symptomatic, often hospitalised, patients. Assay performance following mild/asymptomatic infection is unclear. We assessed IgG responses in asymptomatic healthcare workers with a high pre-test probability of Covid-19, e.g. 807/9292(8.9%) reported loss of smell/taste. The proportion reporting anosmia/ageusia increased at antibody titres below diagnostic thresholds for both an in-house ELISA and the Abbott Architect chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA): 424/903(47%) reported anosmia/ageusia with a positive ELISA, 59/387(13.2%) with high-negative titres, and 324/7943(4.1%) with low-negative results. Adjusting for the proportion of staff reporting anosmia/ageusia suggests the sensitivity of both assays is lower than previously reported: Oxford ELISA 90.8% (95%CI 86.1-92.1%) and Abbott CMIA 80.9% (77.5-84.3%). However, the sensitivity may be lower if some anosmia/ageusia in those with low-negative titres is Covid-19-associated. Samples from individuals with mild/asymptomatic infection should be included in SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay evaluations. Reporting equivocal SARS-CoV-2 antibody results should be considered.

Differential occupational risks to healthcare workers from SARS-CoV-2: A prospective observational study (preprint)

Background Personal protective equipment (PPE) and social distancing are key measures designed to mitigate the risk of occupational SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitals. Why healthcare workers nevertheless remain at increased risk is uncertain. Methods We conducted voluntary Covid-19 testing programmes for symptomatic and asymptomatic staff at a large UK teaching hospital using nasopharyngeal PCR testing and immunoassays for IgG antibodies. A positive result by either modality was used as a composite outcome. Risk factors for Covid-19 were investigated using multivariable logistic regression. Results 1083/9809(11.0%) staff had evidence of Covid-19 at some time and provided data on potential risk-factors. Staff with a confirmed household contact were at greatest risk (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.63 [95%CI 3.30-6.50]). Higher rates of Covid-19 were seen in staff working in Covid-19-facing areas (21.2% vs. 8.2% elsewhere) (aOR 2.49 [2.00-3.12]). Controlling for Covid-19-facing status, risks were heterogenous across the hospital, with higher rates in acute medicine (1.50 [1.05-2.15]) and sporadic outbreaks in areas with few or no Covid-19 patients. Covid-19 intensive care unit (ICU) staff were relatively protected (0.46 [0.29-0.72]). Positive results were more likely in Black (1.61 [1.20-2.16]) and Asian (1.58 [1.34-1.86]) staff, independent of role or working location, and in porters and cleaners (1.93 [1.25-2.97]). Contact tracing around asymptomatic staff did not lead to enhanced case identification. 24% of staff/patients remained PCR-positive at [≥]6 weeks post-diagnosis. Conclusions Increased Covid-19 risk was seen in acute medicine, among Black and Asian staff, and porters and cleaners. A bundle of PPE-related interventions protected staff in high-risk ICU areas.