ABSTRACT
Pronounced immune escape by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has resulted in large numbers of individuals with hybrid immunity, generated through a combination of vaccination and infection. Based primarily on circulating neutralizing antibody (NAb) data, concerns have been raised that omicron breakthrough infections in triple-vaccinated individuals result in poor induction of omicron-specific immunity, and that a history of prior SARS-CoV-2 in particular is associated with profound immune dampening. Taking a broader and comprehensive approach, we characterized mucosal and blood immunity to both spike and non-spike antigens following BA.1/BA.2 infections in triple mRNA-vaccinated individuals, with and without a history of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. We find that the majority of individuals increase BA.1/BA.2/BA.5-specific NAb following infection, but confirm that the magnitude of increase and post-omicron titres are indeed higher in those who were infection-naive. In contrast, significant increases in nasal antibody responses are seen regardless of prior infection history, including neutralizing activity against BA.5 spike. Spike-specific T cells increase only in infection-naive vaccinees; however, post-omicron T cell responses are still significantly higher in previously-infected individuals, who appear to have maximally induced responses with a CD8+ phenotype of high cytotoxic potential after their 3rd mRNA vaccine dose. Antibody and T cell responses to non-spike antigens also increase significantly regardless of prior infection status, with a boost seen in previously-infected individuals to immunity primed by their first infection. These findings suggest that hybrid immunity induced by omicron breakthrough infections is highly dynamic, complex, and compartmentalised, with significant immune enhancement that can help protect against COVID-19 caused by future omicron variants.
Subject(s)
Breakthrough Pain , COVID-19 , Status EpilepticusABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HallucinationsABSTRACT
BackgroundWe aimed to measure SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in a cohort of healthcare workers (HCWs) during the first UK wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, explore risk factors associated with infection, and investigate the impact of antibody titres on assay sensitivity. MethodsHCWs at Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (STH) were prospectively enrolled and sampled at two time points. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were tested using an in-house assay for IgG and IgA reactivity against Spike and Nucleoprotein (sensitivity 99{middle dot}47%, specificity 99{middle dot}56%). Data were analysed using three statistical models: a seroprevalence model, an antibody kinetics model, and a heterogeneous sensitivity model. FindingsAs of 12th June 2020, 24{middle dot}4% (n=311/1275) HCWs were seropositive. Of these, 39{middle dot}2% (n=122/311) were asymptomatic. The highest adjusted seroprevalence was measured in HCWs on the Acute Medical Unit (41{middle dot}1%, 95% CrI 30{middle dot}0-52{middle dot}9) and in Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists (39{middle dot}2%, 95% CrI 24{middle dot}4-56{middle dot}5). Older age groups showed overall higher median antibody titres. Further modelling suggests that, for a serological assay with an overall sensitivity of 80%, antibody titres may be markedly affected by differences in age, with sensitivity estimates of 89% in those over 60 years but 61% in those [≤]30 years. InterpretationHCWs in acute medical units working closely with COVID-19 patients were at highest risk of infection, though whether these are infections acquired from patients or other staff is unknown. Current serological assays may underestimate seroprevalence in younger age groups if validated using sera from older and/or more symptomatic individuals. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed for studies published up to March 6th 2021, using the terms "COVID", "SARS-CoV-2", "seroprevalence", and "healthcare workers", and in addition for articles of antibody titres in different age groups against coronaviruses using "coronavirus", "SARS-CoV-2, "antibody", "antibody tires", "COVID" and "age". We included studies that used serology to estimate prevalence in healthcare workers. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence has been shown to be greater in healthcare workers working on acute medical units or within domestic services. Antibody levels against seasonal coronaviruses, SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 were found to be higher in older adults, and patients who were hospitalised. Added value of this studyIn this healthcare worker seroprevalence modelling study at a large NHS foundation trust, we confirm that those working on acute medical units, COVID-19 "Red Zones" and within domestic services are most likely to be seropositive. Furthermore, we show that physiotherapists and occupational therapists have an increased risk of COVID-19 infection. We also confirm that antibody titres are greater in older individuals, even in the context of non-hospitalised cases. Importantly, we demonstrate that this can result in age-specific sensitivity in serological assays, where lower antibody titres in younger individuals results in lower assay sensitivity. Implications of all the available evidenceThere are distinct occupational roles and locations in hospitals where the risk of COVID-19 infection to healthcare workers is greatest, and this knowledge should be used to prioritise infection prevention control and other measures to protect healthcare workers. Serological assays may have different sensitivity profiles across different age groups, especially if assay validation was undertaken using samples from older and/or hospitalised patients, who tend to have higher antibody titres. Future seroprevalence studies should consider adjusting for age-specific assay sensitivities to estimate true seroprevalence rates. Author Contributions O_TBL View this table: org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@77acb4org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@eb9b35org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1af298org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@12cf3e1org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@3f6476_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_TBL C_TBL
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
The SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein acquired a D614G mutation early in the COVID-19 pandemic that appears to confer on the virus greater infectivity and is now the globally dominant form of the virus. Certain of the current vaccines entering phase 3 trials are based on the original D614 form of Spike with the goal of eliciting protective neutralizing antibodies. To determine whether D614G mediates neutralization-escape that could compromise vaccine efficacy, sera from Spike-immunized mice, nonhuman primates and humans were evaluated for neutralization of pseudoviruses bearing either D614 or G614 Spike on their surface. In all cases, the G614 pseudovirus was moderately more susceptible to neutralization. The G614 pseudovirus also was more susceptible to neutralization by monoclonal antibodies against the receptor binding domain and by convalescent sera from people known to be infected with either the D614 or G614 form of the virus. These results indicate that a gain in infectivity provided by D614G came at the cost of making the virus more vulnerable to neutralizing antibodies, and that the mutation is not expected to be an obstacle for current vaccine development.