The humoral and cellular response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is influenced by HLA polymorphisms.

Host genetic variability contributes to susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 evolution and the role of HLA system has not clearly emerged, suggesting the involvement of other factors. Studying response to vaccination with Spyke protein mRNA represents an ideal model to highlight whether the humoral or cellular responses are influenced by HLA. Four hundred and sixteen workers, vaccinated with Comirnaty beginning 2021, were selected within the Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria "Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino." The humoral response was determined with the LIAISON® kit, while the analysis of the cellular response was performed with the Quantiferon SARS-CoV-2 assay, for the S1 (receptor-binding domain; Ag1) and S1 and S2 (Ag2) subunits of the Spyke protein. Six HLA loci were typed by next-generation sequencing. Associations between HLA and vaccine response were performed with univariate and multivariate analyses. An association was found between A*03:01, B*40:02 and DPB1*06:01 and high antibody concentration and between A*24:02, B*08:01 and C*07:01 and low humoral responses. The haplotype HLA-A*01:01 ~ B1*08:01 ~ C*07:01 ~ DRB1*03:01 ~ DQB1*02:01 conferred an increased risk of low humoral response. Considering cellular responses, 50% of the vaccinated subjects responded against Ag1 and 59% against Ag2. Carriers of DRB1*15:01 displayed a higher cellular response both to Ag1 and Ag2 compared to the rest of the cohort. Similarly, DRB1*13:02 predisposed to a robust cellular response to Ag1 and Ag2, while DRB1*11:04 showed an opposite trend. Cellular and humoral responses to Comirnaty are influenced by HLA. Humoral response is mainly associated to class I alleles, with A*03:01, previously associated to protection against severe COVID-19, and response to vaccination, standing out. Cellular response predominantly involves class II alleles, with DRB1*15:01 and DPB1*13:01 prevailing. Affinity analysis for Spyke peptides is generally in line with the association results.

Convalescent or standard plasma versus standard of care in the treatment of COVID-19 patients with respiratory impairment: short and long-term effects. A three-arm randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of early treatment with convalescent plasma in patients with COVID-19 is debated. Nothing is known about the potential effect of other plasma components other than anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. METHODS: To determine whether convalescent or standard plasma would improve outcomes for adults in early phase of Covid19 respiratory impairment we designed this randomized, three-arms, clinical trial (PLACO COVID) blinded on interventional arms that was conducted from June 2020 to August 2021. It was a multicentric trial at 19 Italian hospitals. We enrolled 180 hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia within 5 days from the onset of respiratory distress. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard of care (n = 60) or standard of care + three units of standard plasma (n = 60) or standard of care + three units of high-titre convalescent plasma (n = 60) administered on days 1, 3, 5 after randomization. Primary outcome was 30-days mortality. Secondary outcomes were: incidence of mechanical ventilation or death at day 30, 6-month mortality, proportion of days with mechanical ventilation on total length of hospital stay, IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion, viral clearance from plasma and respiratory tract samples, and variations in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. The trial was analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: 180 patients (133/180 [73.9%] males, mean age 66.6 years [IQR 57-73]) were enrolled a median of 8 days from onset of symptoms. At enrollment, 88.9% of patients showed moderate/severe respiratory failure. 30-days mortality was 20% in Control arm, 23% in Convalescent (risk ratio [RR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-2.13, P = 0.694) and 25% in Standard plasma (RR 1.23; 95%CI, 0.63-2.37, P = 0.544). Time to viral clearance from respiratory tract was 21 days for Convalescent, 28 for Standard plasma and 23 in Control arm but differences were not statistically significant. No differences for other secondary endpoints were seen in the three arms. Serious adverse events were reported in 1.7%, 3.3% and 5% of patients in Control, Standard and Convalescent plasma arms respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Neither high-titer Convalescent nor Standard plasma improve outcomes of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04428021. First posted: 11/06/2020.

Cellular Immune Response to BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in a Large Cohort of Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Care University Hospital.

We describe the results of a T-cell immunity evaluation performed after a median elapsed time of 7 months from second-dose BNT162b2 vaccine administration, in a representative sample of 419 subjects from a large cohort of hospital workers. Overall, the Quantiferon SARS-CoV-2 assay detected a responsive pattern in 49.9%, 59.2% and 68.3% of subjects to three different antigenic stimuli from SARS-CoV-2, respectively, with 72.3% of positivity to at least one antigenic stimulus. Potential predictors of cellular response were explored by multivariable analyses; factors associated with positivity to cellular response (to Ag1 antigenic stimulus) were a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR = 4.24, 95% CI 2.34-7.67, p < 0.001), increasing age (per year: OR = 1.03 95% CI 1.01-1.06, p = 0.019 and currently smoking (compared to never smoking) (OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.11-3.36, p = 0.010). Increasing time interval between vaccine administration and T-cell test was associated with decreasing cellular response (per week of time: OR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.98, p = 0.003). A blood group A/AB/B (compared to group O) was associated with higher levels of cellular immunity, especially when measured as Ag2 antigenic stimulus. Levels of cellular immunity tended to be lower among subjects that self-reported an autoimmune disorder or an immunodeficiency and among males. Further studies to assess the protective significance of different serological and cellular responses to the vaccine toward the risk of reinfection and the severity of COVID-19 are needed to better understand these findings.

Factors Influencing Level and Persistence of Anti SARS-CoV-2 IgG after BNT162b2 Vaccine: Evidence from a Large Cohort of Healthcare Workers.

We aimed at evaluating quantitative IgG response to BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine among health care workers (HCW), and exploring the role of demographic, clinical, and occupational factors as predictors of IgG levels. On May 2021, among 6687 HCW at the largest tertiary care University-Hospital of Northwestern Italy, at a median of 15 weeks (Interquartile range-IQR 13.6-16.0) after second-dose, serological response was present in 99.8%. Seropositivity was >97% in all the subgroups, except those self-reporting immunodeficiency (94.9%). Overall, the median serological IgG value was 990 BAU/mL (IQR 551-1870), with most of subjects with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or with shorter time lapse (2-8 weeks) between vaccination and serology with values in the highest quintile (>2080). At multivariable analysis, significant predictors of lower values were increasing age, male, current smoking, immunodeficiency, recent occupational contacts, and increasing time lapse from vaccination; conversely, previous infection and recent household contacts were significantly associated with higher IgG levels. Subjects with previous infection kept a very high level (around 2000 BAU/mL) up to 120 days. These results, besides supporting a high serological response up to 4-5 months, suggest predictive factors of faster decay of IgG levels that could be useful in tailoring vaccination strategies.

Prevalence, Persistence, and Factors Associated with SARS-CoV-2 IgG Seropositivity in a Large Cohort of Healthcare Workers in a Tertiary Care University Hospital in Northern Italy.

This observational study evaluated SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence and related clinical, demographic, and occupational factors among workers at the largest tertiary care University-Hospital of Northwestern Italy and the University of Turin after the first pandemic wave of March-April 2020. Overall, about 10,000 individuals were tested; seropositive subjects were retested after 5 months to evaluate antibodies waning. Among 8769 hospital workers, seroprevalence was 7.6%, without significant differences related to job profile; among 1185 University workers, 3.3%. Self-reporting of COVID-19 suspected symptoms was significantly associated with positivity (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.07, 95%CI: 1.76-2.44), although 27% of seropositive subjects reported no previous symptom. At multivariable analysis, contacts at work resulted in an increased risk of 69%, or 24% for working in a COVID ward; contacts in the household evidenced the highest risk, up to more than five-fold (OR 5.31, 95%CI: 4.12-6.85). Compared to never smokers, being active smokers was inversely associated with seroprevalence (OR 0.60, 95%CI: 0.48-0.76). After 5 months, 85% of previously positive subjects still tested positive. The frequency of SARS-COV-2 infection among Health Care Workers was comparable with that observed in surveys performed in Northern Italy and Europe after the first pandemic wave. This study confirms that infection frequently occurred as asymptomatic and underlines the importance of household exposure, seroprevalence (OR 0.60, 95%CI: 0.48-0.76).

[Covid-19 and clinical-epidemiological research in Italy: proposal of a research agenda on priority topics by the Italian association of epidemiology]. / Covid-19 e ricerca clinico-epidemiologica in Italia: proposta di un'agenda di ricerca su temi prioritari da parte dell'Associazione italiana di epidemiologia.

BACKGROUND: the Covid-19 pandemic has provoked a huge of clinical and epidemiological research initiatives, especially in the most involved countries. However, this very large effort was characterized by several methodological weaknesses, both in the field of discovering effective treatments (with too many small and uncontrolled trials) and in the field of identifying preventable risks and prognostic factors (with too few large, representative and well-designed cohorts or case-control studies). OBJECTIVES: in response to the fragmented and uncoordinated research production on Covid-19, the   italian Association of Epidemiology (AIE) stimulated the formation of a working group (WG) with the aims of identifying the most important gaps in knowledge and to propose a structured research agenda of clinical and epidemiological studies considered at high priority on Covid-19, including recommendations on the preferable methodology. METHODS: the WG was composed by 25 subjects, mainly epidemiologists, statisticians, and other experts in specific fields, who have voluntarily agreed to the proposal. The agreement on a list of main research questions and on the structure of the specific documents to be produced were defined through few meetings and cycles of document exchanges. RESULTS: twelve main research questions on Covid-19 were identified, covering aetiology, prognosis, interventions, follow-up and impact on general and specific populations (children, pregnant women). For each of them, a two-page form was developed, structured in: background, main topics, methods (with recommendations on preferred study design and warnings for bias prevention) and an essential bibliography. CONCLUSIONS: this research agenda represents an initial contribution to direct clinical and epidemiological research efforts on high priority topics with a focus on methodological aspects. Further development and refinements of this agenda by Public Health Authorities are encouraged.