ABSTRACT
The onset of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection is characterized by the presence of afucosylated IgG1 responses against the viral spike (S) protein, which can trigger exacerbated inflammatory responses. Here, we studied IgG glycosylation after BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination to explore whether vaccine-induced S protein expression on host cells also generates afucosylated IgG1 responses. SARS-CoV-2 naive individuals initially showed a transient afucosylated anti-S IgG1 response after the first dose, albeit to a lower extent than severely ill COVID-19 patients. In contrast, previously infected, antigen-experienced individuals had low afucosylation levels, which slightly increased after immunization. Afucosylation levels after the first dose correlated with low fucosyltransferase 8 (FUT8) expression levels in a defined plasma cell subset. Remarkably, IgG afucosylation levels after primary vaccination correlated significantly with IgG levels after the second dose. Further studies are needed to assess efficacy, inflammatory potential, and protective capacity of afucosylated IgG responses.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Oculocerebrorenal SyndromeABSTRACT
Large-scale vaccination campaigns have prevented countless SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalizations and deaths. However, the emergence of variants that escape from immunity challenges the effectiveness of current vaccines. Given this continuing evolution, an important question is when and how to update SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to antigenically match circulating variants, similar to seasonal influenza viruses where antigenic drift necessitates periodic vaccine updates. Here, we studied SARS-CoV-2 antigenic drift by assessing neutralizing activity against variants-of-concern (VOCs) of a unique set of sera from patients infected with a range of VOCs. Infections with ancestral or Alpha strains induced the broadest immunity, while individuals infected with other VOCs had more strain-specific responses. Omicron was substantially resistant to neutralization by sera elicited by all other variants. Antigenic cartography revealed that all VOCs preceding Omicron belong to one antigenic cluster, while Omicron forms a new antigenic cluster associated with immune escape and likely requiring vaccine updates to ensure vaccine effectiveness.
Subject(s)
Severe Acute Respiratory SyndromeABSTRACT
BackgroundEmerging and future SARS-CoV-2 variants may jeopardize the effectiveness of vaccination campaigns. Therefore, it is important to know how the different vaccines perform against diverse SARS-CoV-2 variants. MethodsIn a prospective cohort of 165 SARS-CoV-2 naive health care workers, vaccinated with either one of four vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222 or Ad26.COV2.S), we performed a head-to-head comparison of the ability of sera to recognize and neutralize SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs; Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Omicron). Repeated serum sampling was performed 5 times during a year (from January 2021 till January 2022), including before and after booster vaccination with BNT162b2. FindingsFour weeks after completing the initial vaccination series, SARS-CoV-2 wild-type neutralizing antibody titers were highest in recipients of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 (geometric mean titers (GMT) of 197 [95% CI 149-260] and 313 [95% CI 218-448], respectively), and substantially lower in those vaccinated with the adenovirus vector-based vaccines AZD1222 and Ad26.COV2.S (GMT of 26 [95% CI 18-37] and 14 [95% CI 8-25] IU/ml, respectively). These findings were robust for adjustment to age and sex. VOCs neutralization was reduced in all vaccine groups, with the largest (9- to 80-fold) reduction in neutralization observed against the Omicron variant. The booster BNT162b2 vaccination increased neutralizing antibody titers for all groups with substantial improvement against the VOCs including the Omicron variant. Study limitations include the lack of cellular immunity data. ConclusionsOverall, this study shows that the mRNA vaccines appear superior to adenovirus vector-based vaccines in inducing neutralizing antibodies against VOCs four weeks after initial vaccination and after booster vaccination.
ABSTRACT
Emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants pose a threat to human immunity induced by natural infection and vaccination. We assessed the recognition of three variants of concern (B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P.1) in cohorts of COVID-19 patients ranging in disease severity (n = 69) and recipients of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine (n = 50). Spike binding and neutralization against all three VOC was substantially reduced in the majority of samples, with the largest 4-7-fold reduction in neutralization being observed against B.1.351. While hospitalized COVID-19 patients and vaccinees maintained sufficient neutralizing titers against all three VOC, 39% of non-hospitalized patients did not neutralize B.1.351. Moreover, monoclonal neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) show sharp reductions in their binding kinetics and neutralizing potential to B.1.351 and P.1, but not to B.1.1.7. These data have implications for the degree to which pre-existing immunity can protect against subsequent infection with VOC and informs policy makers of susceptibility to globally circulating SARS-CoV-2 VOC.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background The urgent need for, but limited availability of, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines worldwide has led to widespread consideration of dose sparing strategies, particularly single vaccine dosing of individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods We evaluated SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody responses following a single-dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA vaccine in 155 previously SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals participating in a population-based prospective cohort study of COVID-19 patients. Participants varied widely in age, comorbidities, COVID-19 severity and time since infection, ranging from 1 to 15 months. Serum antibody titers were determined at time of vaccination and one week after vaccination. Responses were compared to those in SARS-CoV-2-naive health care workers after two BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine doses. Results Within one week of vaccination, IgG antibody levels to virus spike and RBD proteins increased 27 to 29-fold and neutralizing antibody titers increased 12-fold, exceeding titers of fully vaccinated SARS-CoV-2-naive controls (95% credible interval (CrI): 0.56 to 0.67 v. control 95% CrI: -0.16 to -0.02). Pre-vaccination neutralizing antibody titers had the largest positive mean effect size on titers following vaccination (95% CrI (0.16 to 0.45)). COVID-19 severity, the presence of comorbidities and the time interval between infection and vaccination had no discernible impact on vaccine response. Conclusion A single dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine up to 15 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection provides neutralizing titers exceeding two vaccine doses in previously uninfected individuals. These findings support wide implementation of a single-dose mRNA vaccine strategy after prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Severe Acute Respiratory SyndromeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND It is unclear how, when and where health care workers (HCW) working in hospitals are infected with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS Prospective cohort study comprising 4-weekly measurement of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies and questionnaires from March to June 2020. We compared SARS-CoV-2 incidence between HCW working in Covid-19 patient care, HCW working in non-Covid-19 patient care and HCW not in patient care. Phylogenetic analyses of SARS-CoV-2 samples from patients and HCW were performed to identify potential transmission clusters. RESULTS We included 801 HCW: 439 in the Covid-19 patient care group, 164 in the non-Covid-19 patient care group and 198 in the no patient care group. SARS-CoV-2 incidence was highest in HCW working in Covid-19 patient care (13.2%), as compared with HCW in non-Covid-19 patient care (6.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2 to 4.3) and in HCW not working in patient care (3.6%, HR 3.9, 95% CI 1.8 to 8.6). Within the group of HCW caring for Covid-19 patients, SARS-CoV-2 cumulative incidence was highest in HCW working on Covid-19 wards (25.7%), as compared with HCW working on intensive care units (7.1%, HR 3.6, 95% CI 1.9 to 6.9), and HCW working in the emergency room (8.0%, HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5 to 7.1). Phylogenetic analyses on Covid-19 wards identified multiple potential HCW-to-HCW transmission clusters while no patient-to-HCW transmission clusters were identified. CONCLUSIONS HCW working on Covid-19 wards are at increased risk for nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an important role for HCW-to-HCW transmission.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross InfectionABSTRACT
ObjectiveTo compare survival of subjects with COVID-19 treated in hospitals that either did or did not routinely treat patients with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine. MethodsWe analysed data of COVID-19 patients treated in 9 hospitals in the Netherlands. Inclusion dates ranged from February 27th 2020, to May 15th, when the Dutch national guidelines no longer supported the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine. Seven hospitals routinely treated subjects with (hydroxy)chloroquine, two hospitals did not. Primary outcome was 21-day all-cause mortality. We performed a survival analysis using log-rank test and Cox-regression with adjustment for age, sex and covariates based on premorbid health, disease severity, and the use of steroids for adult respiratory distress syndrome, including dexamethasone. ResultsAmong 1893 included subjects, 21-day mortality was 23.4% in 1552 subjects treated in hospitals that routinely prescribed (hydroxy)chloroquine, and 17.0% in 341 subjects that were treated in hospitals that did not. In the adjusted Cox-regression models this difference disappeared, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.17 (95%CI 0.88-1.55). When stratified by actually received treatment in individual subjects, the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine was associated with an increased 21-day mortality (HR 1.58; 95%CI 1.25-2.01) in the full model. ConclusionsAfter adjustment for confounders, mortality was not significantly different in hospitals that routinely treated patients with (hydroxy)chloroquine, compared with hospitals that did not. We compared outcomes of hospital strategies rather than outcomes of individual patients to reduce the chance of indication bias. This study adds evidence against the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine in patients with COVID-19.