Age- and sex-specific differences in immune responses to BNT162b2 COVID-19 and live-attenuated influenza vaccines in UK adolescents (preprint)

Key to understanding COVID-19 correlates of protection is assessing vaccine-induced immunity in different demographic groups. Sex- and age-specific immune differences have a wide impact on outcomes from infections and immunisations. Typically, adult females make stronger immune responses and have better disease outcomes but suffer more adverse events following vaccination and are more prone to autoimmune disease. To understand better the mechanisms underlying these differences in vaccine responses, we studied immune responses to two doses of BNT162b2 Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in an adolescent cohort (n=34, ages 12-16), an age group previously shown to make significantly greater immune responses to the same vaccine compared to young adults. At the same time, we were able to evaluate immune responses to the co-administered live attenuated influenza vaccine, which has been shown to induce stronger immune responses in adult females. Blood samples from 34 adolescents taken pre- and post-vaccination with COVID-19 and influenza vaccines were assayed for SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and neutralising antibodies, and cellular immunity specific for SARS-CoV-2 and endemic betacoronaviruses. IgG targeting influenza lineages contained in the influenza vaccine was also assessed. As previously demonstrated, total IgG responses to SARS-CoV-2 Spike antigens were significantly higher among vaccinated adolescents compared to adults (aged 32-52) who received the BNT162b2 vaccine (comparing infection-naive, 49,696 vs 33,339; p=0.03; comparing SARS-CoV-2 previously-infected, 743,691 vs 269,985; p<0.0001) by MSD v-plex assay. However, unexpectedly, antibody responses to BNT162b2 and the live-attenuated influenza vaccine were not higher among female adolescents compared to males; among infection-naive adolescents, antibody responses to BNT162b2 were higher in males than females (62,270 vs 36,951 p=0.008). No sex difference was identified in vaccinated adults. These unexpected findings may result from the introduction of novel mRNA vaccination platforms, generating patterns of immunity divergent from established trends, and providing new insights into what might be protective following COVID-19 vaccination.

Efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 lineages circulating in Brazil; an exploratory analysis of a randomised controlled trial (preprint)

Background Emerging evidence shows the substantial real-world impact of authorised vaccines against COVID-19 and provides insight into the potential role of vaccines in curbing the pandemic. However, there remains uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines against different variants of the virus. Here we assessed efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) against lineages of SARS-CoV-2 circulating in Brazil from June 2020 until early 2021. Methods Participants aged 18 and above were enrolled into a randomised phase 3 trial of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or control (1st dose: Men ACWY vaccine, 2nd dose: normal saline). Nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabbing was performed if participants developed symptoms of COVID-19 (cough, shortness of breath, fever >37.8°C, ageusia, anosmia). Swabs were tested by nucleic acid amplification (NAAT) for SARS-CoV-2, sequenced, and viral load determined. For those samples where a genotype could not be ascertained from sequencing, allele specific PCR was performed. The efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a NAAT positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were unblinded after the vaccine was authorised for use, and the control participants offered vaccination. Infections occurring after unblinding were excluded from analysis. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 100% x (1 – relative risk (RR)), where RR was estimated from a robust Poisson model. The trial is registered at ISRCTN89951424. Findings 9433 participants were eligible for inclusion in the pre-specified primary efficacy population, having reached more than 14 days after a second dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, of whom 307 were NAAT+, in this post-hoc analysis. From June 2020 to February 2021, the two most frequently identified lineages were P.2 (N=153) and B.1.1.28 (N=49). P.1 emerged during the study (N=18) but became dominant only after study unblinding. Viral loads were highest amongst those with P.1 infection. Vaccine efficacy (VE) for B.1.1.33 (88.2%, 95%CI 5, 99), B.1.1.28 (73%, 95% CI, 46, 86), P.2 (69% 95% CI, 55, 78) and P.1 (64%, 95% CI, -2, 87) was estimated. In participants who had received two doses of vaccine, one COVID-19 hospitalisation occurred in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 18 in the control group, with VE against hospitalisation 95% (95% CI 61, 99). There were 2 COVID-19 deaths in the control group and none in the vaccine group. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 provides high efficacy against hospitalisation, severe disease and death from COVID-19 in Brazil and there is strong evidence of protection being maintained against P.2, despite the presence of the spike protein mutation E484K. Real world effectiveness studies are ongoing in Brazil to further establish protection against P.1 and other emerging variants.

Fatal COVID-19 outcomes are associated with an antibody response targeting epitopes shared with endemic coronaviruses (preprint)

It is unclear whether prior endemic coronavirus infections affect COVID-19 severity. Here, we show that in cases of fatal COVID-19, antibody responses to the SARS-COV-2 spike are directed against epitopes shared with endemic beta-coronaviruses in the S2 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. This immune response is associated with the compromised production of a de novo SARS-CoV-2 spike response among individuals with fatal COVID-19 outcomes.

Virological and serological characterization of critically ill patient with COVID-19 in the UK: a special focus on variant detection (preprint)

Background. Treatment of COVID-19 patients with convalescent plasma containing neutralising antibody to SARS-CoV-2 is under investigation as a means of reducing viral loads, ameliorating disease outcomes, and reducing mortality. However, its efficacy might be reduced in those infected with the emerging B.1.1.7 SARS-CoV-2 variant. Here, we report the diverse virological characteristics of UK patients enrolled in the Immunoglobulin Domain of the REMAP-CAP randomised controlled trial. Methods. SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA was detected and quantified by real-time PCR in nasopharyngeal swabs obtained from study subjects within 48 hours of admission to intensive care unit. Antibody status was determined by spike-protein ELISA. B.1.1.7 strain was differentiated from other SARS-CoV-2 strains by two novel typing methods detecting the B.1.1.7-associated D1118H mutation with allele-specific probes and by restriction site polymorphism (SfcI). Findings. Of 1260 subjects, 90% were PCR-positive with viral loads in nasopharyngeal swabs ranging from 72 international units [IUs]/ml to 1.7x10^11 IU/ml. Median viral loads were 45-fold higher in those who were seronegative for IgG antibodies (n=314; 28%) compared to seropositives (n=804; 72%), reflecting in part the latter group's possible later disease stage on enrolment. Frequencies of B.1.1.7 infection increased from early November (<1%) to December 2020 (>60%). Anti-SARS-CoV-2 seronegative individuals infected with wild-type SARS-CoV-2 had significantly higher viral loads than seropositives (medians of 1.2x10^6 and 3.4 x10^4 IU/ml respectively; p=2x10^-9). However, viral load distributions were elevated in both seropositive and seronegative subjects infected with B.1.1.7 (13.4x10^6 and 7.6x10^6 IU/ml; p=0.18). Interpretation. High viral loads in seropositive B.1.1.7-infected subjects are consistent with increased replication capacity and/or less effective clearance by innate or adaptive immune response of B.1.1.7 strain than wild-type. As viral genotype was associated with diverse virological and immunological phenotypes, metrics of viral load, antibody status and infecting strain should be used to define subgroups for analysis of treatment efficacy.

Evaluation of Different PCR Assay Formats for Sensitive and Specific Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA (preprint)

Accurate identification of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 is crucial for efforts to control the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based assays are the gold standard for detecting viral RNA in patient samples and are used extensively in clinical settings. Most currently used quantitative PCR (RT-qPCRs) rely upon real-time detection of PCR product using specialized laboratory equipment. To enable the application of PCR in resource-poor or non-specialist laboratories, we have developed and evaluated a nested PCR method for SARS-CoV-2 RNA using simple agarose gel electrophoresis for product detection. Using clinical samples tested by conventional qPCR methods and RNA transcripts of defined RNA copy number, the nested PCR based on the RdRP gene demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in clinical samples, but showed variable and transcript length-dependent sensitivity for RNA transcripts. Samples and transcripts were further evaluated in an additional N protein real-time quantitative PCR assay. As determined by 50% endpoint detection, the sensitivities of three RT-qPCRs and nested PCR methods varied substantially depending on the transcript target with no method approaching single copy detection. Overall, these findings highlight the need for assay validation and optimization and demonstrate the inability to precisely compare viral quantification from different PCR methodologies without calibration.

Broad and strong memory CD4+ and CD8+ T cells induced by SARS-CoV-2 in UK convalescent COVID-19 patients. (preprint)

COVID-19 is an ongoing global crisis in which the development of effective vaccines and therapeutics will depend critically on understanding the natural immunity to the virus, including the role of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells. We have conducted a study of 42 patients following recovery from COVID-19, including 28 mild and 14 severe cases, comparing their T cell responses to those of 16 control donors. We assessed the immune memory of T cell responses using IFN{gamma} based assays with overlapping peptides spanning SARS-CoV-2 apart from ORF1. We found the breadth, magnitude and frequency of memory T cell responses from COVID-19 were significantly higher in severe compared to mild COVID-19 cases, and this effect was most marked in response to spike, membrane, and ORF3a proteins. Total and spike-specific T cell responses correlated with the anti-Spike, anti-Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) as well as anti-Nucleoprotein (NP) endpoint antibody titre (p<0.001, <0.001 and =0.002). We identified 39 separate peptides containing CD4+ and/or CD8+ epitopes, which strikingly included six immunodominant epitope clusters targeted by T cells in many donors, including 3 clusters in spike (recognised by 29%, 24%, 18% donors), two in the membrane protein (M, 32%, 47%) and one in the nucleoprotein (Np, 35%). CD8+ responses were further defined for their HLA restriction, including B*4001-restricted T cells showing central memory and effector memory phenotype. In mild cases, higher frequencies of multi-cytokine producing M- and NP-specific CD8+ T cells than spike-specific CD8+ T cells were observed. They furthermore showed a higher ratio of SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ to CD4+ T cell responses. Immunodominant epitope clusters and peptides containing T cell epitopes identified in this study will provide critical tools to study the role of virus-specific T cells in control and resolution of SARS-CoV-2 infections. The identification of T cell specificity and functionality associated with milder disease, highlights the potential importance of including non-spike proteins within future COVID-19 vaccine design.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected in blood samples from patients with COVID-19 is not associated with infectious virus (preprint)

Background: Laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (the cause of COVID-19) uses PCR to detect viral RNA (vRNA) in respiratory samples. SARS-CoV-2 RNA has also been detected in other sample types, but there is limited understanding of the clinical or laboratory significance of its detection in blood. Methods: We undertook a systematic literature review to assimilate the evidence for the frequency of vRNA in blood, and to identify associated clinical characteristics. We performed RT-PCR in serum samples from a UK clinical cohort of acute and convalescent COVID-19 cases (n=212), together with convalescent plasma samples collected by NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) (n=111 additional samples). To determine whether PCR-positive blood samples could pose an infection risk, we attempted virus isolation from a subset of RNA-positive samples. Results: We identified 28 relevant studies, reporting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 0-76% of blood samples; pooled estimate 10% (95%CI 5-18%). Among serum samples from our clinical cohort, 27/212 (12.7%) had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected by RT-PCR. RNA detection occurred in samples up to day 20 post symptom onset, and was associated with more severe disease (multivariable odds ratio 7.5). Across all samples collected [≥]28 days post symptom onset, 0/143 (0%, 95%CI 0.0-2.5%) had vRNA detected. Among our PCR-positive samples, cycle threshold (ct) values were high (range 33.5-44.8), suggesting low vRNA copy numbers. PCR-positive sera inoculated into cell culture did not produce any cytopathic effect or yield an increase in detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Conclusions: vRNA was detectable at low viral loads in a minority of serum samples collected in acute infection, but was not associated with infectious SARS-CoV-2 (within the limitations of the assays used). This work helps to inform biosafety precautions for handling blood products from patients with current or previous COVID-19.

Neutralising antibodies to SARS coronavirus 2 in Scottish blood donors - a pilot study of the value of serology to determine population exposure (preprint)

BackgroundThe progression and geographical distribution of SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the UK and elsewhere is unknown because typically only symptomatic individuals are diagnosed. We performed a serological study of blood donors in Scotland between the 17th of March and the 18th of May to detect neutralising antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 as a marker of past infection and epidemic progression. AimTo determine if sera from blood bank donors can be used to track the emergence and progression of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. MethodsA pseudotyped SARS-CoV-2 virus microneutralisation assay was used to detect neutralising antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. The study group comprised samples from 3,500 blood donors collected in Scotland between the 17th of March and 19th of May, 2020. Controls were collected from 100 donors in Scotland during 2019. ResultsAll samples collected on the 17th March, 2020 (n=500) were negative in the pseudotyped SARS-CoV-2 virus microneutralisation assay. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 6/500 donors from the 23th-26th of March. The number of samples containing neutralising antibodies did not significantly rise after the 5th-6th April until the end of the study on the 18th of May. We find that infections are concentrated in certain postcodes indicating that outbreaks of infection are extremely localised. In contrast, other areas remain comparatively untouched by the epidemic. ConclusionThese data indicate that sero-surveys of blood banks can serve as a useful tool for tracking the emergence and progression of an epidemic like the current SARS-CoV-2 outbreak.