Considerations in Understanding Vaccine Effectiveness.

Although vaccine effectiveness reports are essential to assessing policies on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, several factors can affect our interpretation of the results. These include the waning of antibodies, the prevailing viral variants at the time of the study, and COVID-19 disease prevalence in the population. Disease prevalence significantly impacts absolute risk reduction and could skew expected efficacy when increased disease prevalence inflates the absolute risk reduction in the face of a constant relative risk reduction. These factors must be considered in the interpretation of vaccine effectiveness to better understand how vaccines can improve disease prevention among the population. We highlight the impact of various factors on vaccine effectiveness.

Neutralizing and Total/IgG Spike Antibody Responses Following Homologous CoronaVac vs. BNT162b2 Vaccination Up to 90 Days Post-Booster.

INTRODUCTION: We documented the total spike antibody (S-Ab), IgG S-Ab and neutralizing antibody (N-Ab) responses of BNT162b2/CoronaVac vaccinees up to 90 days post-booster dose. METHODS: We included 32 homologous regimen CoronaVac vaccinees and 136 BNT162b2 mRNA vaccinees. We tested their total S-Ab (Roche), IgG (Abbott) and N-Ab (Snibe) levels at set time points from January 2021 to April 2022. All subjects were deemed to be COVID-19-naïve either via clinical history (CoronaVac vaccinees) or nucleocapsid antibody testing (BNT162b2 vaccinees). RESULTS: All antibodies peaked 20-30 days post-inoculation. In BNT162b2 vaccinees, all post-booster antibodies were significantly higher than second-dose peaks. In CoronaVac vaccinees, IgG showed no significant differences between peak third-/second-dose titers (difference of 56.0 BAU/mL, 95% CI of -17.1 to 129, p = 0.0894). The post-vaccination titers of all antibodies in BNT162b2 vaccinees were significantly higher than those in CoronaVac vaccinees at all time points. Post-booster, all antibodies declined in 90 days; the final total/IgG/N-Ab titers were 7536 BAU/mL, 1276 BAU/mL and 12.5 µg/mL in BNT162b2 vaccinees and 646 BAU/mL, 62.4 BAU/mL and 0.44 µg/mL in CoronaVac vaccinees. CONCLUSION: The mRNA vaccine generated more robust total S-Ab, IgG and N-Ab responses after the second and third vaccinations.

210-Day Kinetics of Total, IgG, and Neutralizing Spike Antibodies across a Course of 3 Doses of BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine.

INTRODUCTION: We tested the total spike antibody (S-Ab), IgG/IgM S-Ab, and neutralizing antibody (N-Ab) responses of COVID-19-naïve subjects from before their first BNT162b2 vaccination up to 210 days after boosting. METHODS: We studied 136 COVID-19-naïve subjects who received three doses of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine (39 males, 97 females, mean age 43.8 ± 13.5 years) from January 2021 to May 2022. Serum was assessed for total S-Ab (Roche), IgG/M (Abbott), and N-Ab (Snibe). RESULTS: Peak antibody levels were measured 20-30 days after each dose, with booster dosing eliciting significantly higher peak antibodies than the second dose: total S-Ab 2219 vs. 19,551 BAU/mL (difference 16,667 BAU/mL, p < 0.0001); IgG 2270 vs. 2932 BAU/mL (difference 660 BAU/mL, p = 0.04); and N-Ab 3.52 vs. 26.4 µg/mL (difference 21.4 µg/mL, p < 0.0001). Only IgM showed a lower peak post-booster antibody titer (COI 2.11 vs. 0.23, difference 1.63, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.38, p < 0.0001). By 180-210 days after the second or third vaccination, total S-Ab/IgG/N-Ab had decreased by 68.7/93.8/73.6% vs. 82.8/86.3/79.5%. The half-lives of IgG and N-Ab antibodies were longer after the third vaccination (IgG: 65 vs. 34 days, N-Ab: 99 vs. 78 days). CONCLUSION: Total S-Ab/IgG/N-Ab showed a greater increase post-booster, with IgG/N-Ab having a longer half-life.

Kinetics of the Neutralizing and Spike SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies following the Sinovac Inactivated Virus Vaccine Compared to the Pfizer mRNA Vaccine in Singapore.

INTRODUCTION: We compared the early total spike antibody (S-Ab) and neutralizing antibody (N-Ab) responses to two vaccines. METHODS: We studied 96 Pfizer and 34 Sinovac vaccinees over a 14-month period from January 2021 to February 2022. All vaccinees received three doses of one type of vaccine. Antibody levels (Roche Elecsys total S-Ab and the Snibe N-Ab) were tested 10 days after the first dose, 20 days after the second dose, and 20 days after the booster dose. RESULTS: At all time points, the mRNA vaccine generated higher S-Ab and N-Ab responses than the inactivated virus vaccine (S-Ab: first dose 2.48 vs. 0.4 BAU/mL, second dose 2174 vs. 98 BAU/mL, third dose 15,004 vs. 525 BAU/mL; N-Ab: first dose 0.05 vs. 0.02 µg/mL, second dose 3.48 vs. 0.38 µg/mL, third dose 19.8 vs. 0.89 µg/mL). mRNA vaccine recipients had a 6.2/22.2/28.6-fold higher S-Ab and 2.5/9.2/22.2-fold higher N-Ab response than inactivated virus vaccine recipients after the first/second/third inoculations, respectively. Mann-Whitney U analysis confirmed the significant difference in S-Ab and N-Ab titers between vaccination groups at each time point. CONCLUSIONS: The mRNA vaccines generated a more robust S-Ab and N-Ab response than the inactivated virus vaccine at all time points after the first, second, and third vaccinations.

SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Testing Intervals: Twice or Thrice a Week?

Antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 has become an increasingly prominent screening tool in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and can be performed multiple times a week. However, the optimal weekly frequency of antigen testing is unclear; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends 1-3 times a week, while some experts support testing 2-3 times a week. In our own laboratory, all staff (n = 161) underwent twice- and thrice-weekly antigen tests during different periods from August 2021 to the present as part of routine COVID-19 surveillance of healthcare workers. No cases of COVID-19 were detected with either regimen. While more frequent SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing may allow antigen testing to be an important surrogate for RT-PCR testing, performing SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests twice or thrice a week shows no inferiority to each other in screening for COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 Spike and Neutralizing Antibody Kinetics 90 Days after Three Doses of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the post-booster (BNT162b2) antibody responses in Singapore. METHODS: Participants (n = 43) were tested pre-booster and 20/30/60/90 days post-booster. Participants were boosted 120-240 days (mean 214 days) after their second dose and had no history or serologic evidence of prior COVID-19 infection; all participants had undetectable SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibodies throughout the study. Total nucleocapsid and spike antibodies (S-Ab) were assessed on the Roche Elecsys e802 and neutralizing antibody (N-Ab) on the Snibe quantitative N-Ab assay. RESULTS: Pre-booster median S-Ab/N-Ab titers were 829 BAU/mL/0.83 µg/mL; 2 participants were below manufacturer's N-Ab cut-offs of 0.3 µg/mL (0.192 and 0.229). Both S-Ab and N-Ab titers peaked at 30 days post-booster (median S-Ab 25,220 BAU/mL and N-Ab 30.3 µg/mL) at 30-37× pre-booster median levels. These peak post-booster S-Ab/N-Ab titers were 11× (25,220 vs. 2235 BAU/mL) and 9× (30.3 vs. 3.52 µg/mL) higher than the previously reported peak post-second dose levels. Antibody titers declined to 12,315 BAU/mL (51% decrease) and 14.3 µg/mL (53% decrease) 90 days post-booster. Non-linear regression estimates for S-Ab/N-Ab half-lives were 44/58 days. At 180 days post-booster, S-Ab/N-Ab are estimated to be 2671 BAU/mL/4.83 µg/mL. CONCLUSIONS: Both S-Ab and N-Ab show a good response following post-booster vaccination, with half-lives that may provide a prolonged antibody response.

Evaluation and Validation of the Roche Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Electro-Chemiluminescent Immunoassay in a Southeast Asian Region.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests can complement and substitute for RT-PCR tests. Centralized laboratory automated SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests that can be scaled to process a large number COVID-19 cases simultaneously are now available. We have evaluated the new Roche Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 antigen electro-chemiluminescent immunoassay. METHODS: The Roche SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay is a double-antibody sandwich electro-chemiluminescent immunoassay, which reports a cut-off index (COI) (COI ≥ 1.0 considered positive). We assessed assay precision and linearity, and confirmed the reactivity limit. We determined the assay sensitivity and specificity with a verification group (289 controls and 61 RT-PCR positive COVID-19 cases). Assay performance was also validated against the consecutive samples we received (7657 controls and 17 cases) for SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing from June to October 2021. RESULT: The assay had a within-run precision CV of 3.0% at COI 0.68, and a CV of 1.5% at COI 3.49. Between-run precision was 3.0% at COI 0.68 and 1.8% at COI 3.49. The assay was linear from COI 0.65 to 7.84. All 35 C50 ± 20% test results performed over 7 days were positive/negative, respectively. In the verification group, overall sensitivity was 42.6% (26/61 positive, 95% CI 30.0-55.9), and specificity was 99.7% (1/289 positive, 95% CI 98.1-100). The agreement between the SARS-CoV-2 antigen and the RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) count was good (r = 0.90). In cases with Ct counts ≤ 30, the antigen assay sensitivity improved to 94.7% (18/19 positive, 95% CI 74.0-99.9). In our validation group, antigen sensitivity was 62.5% (5/8 antigen positive, 95% CI 24.5-91.5) within the first week of disease onset, but no cases were reactive after the first week of disease onset. CONCLUSION: The Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay has good performance within manufacturer specifications. The sensitivity of the Roche antigen assay was greatest when used in patients with lower RT-PCR Ct values (≤30) and within the first week of disease onset.

Disease Prevalence Matters: Challenge for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.

While sensitivity and specificity are important characteristics for any diagnostic test, the influence of prevalence is equally, if not more, important when such tests are used in community screening. We review the concepts of positive/negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) and how disease prevalence affects false positive/negative rates. In low-prevalence situations, the PPV decreases drastically. We demonstrate how using two tests in an orthogonal fashion can be especially beneficial in low-prevalence settings and greatly improve the PPV of the diagnostic test results.

Robust SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Responses in Asian COVID-Naïve Subjects 180 Days after Two Doses of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Subjects with previous COVID-19 have augmented post-vaccination responses. However, the antibody response in COVID-naïve subjects from Southeast Asia is not well known. METHODS: 77 COVID-naïve vaccinees were tested with a full antibody panel [spike antibodies (total (T-Ab), IgG, IgM) and neutralizing antibodies (N-Ab)] pre-vaccination, 10 days after dose 1, and 20/40/60/90/120/150/180 days after dose 2. RESULTS: 10 days after dose 1, 67.6% (48/71)/69.0% (49/71) were T-Ab/IgG positive; only 15.5% (11/71)/14.1% (10/71) were N-Ab/IgM positive. While all (100%) subjects had brisk T-Ab, IgG and N-Ab antibody responses 20 days after complete vaccination, only 79.1% (53/67) were IgM positive. At 180 days (n = 8), T-Ab/IgG/N-Ab were still reactive (lowest T-Ab 186 U/mL, IgG 617 AU/mL, N-Ab 0.39 µg/mL), but IgM was negative in all samples. Spike antibody thresholds of T-Ab 74.1 U/mL (r = 0.95) and IgG 916 AU/mL (r = 0.95) corresponded to N-Ab reactivity (>0.3 µg/mL). Non-linear regression analysis showed that N-Ab would decrease to 0.3 µg/mL by 241 days, whereas T-Ab/IgG would need 470/163 days to reach titers of T-Ab/IgG associated with a N-Ab 0.3 µg/mL (76.4 U/mL and 916 AU/mL respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The antibody responses of T-Ab, IgG and N-Ab remain high and durable even at 180 days. N-Ab titers are expected to remain reactive up to 241 days post-vaccination.

Laboratory practice in the face of Covid-19

In December 2019, the COVID-19 outbreak began in Wuhan and quickly spread over the world. Hospitals have had to make drastic changes to normal workflows and practices to handle the current pandemic. Laboratories face unique challenges in the management of the investigation of COVID-19. Not only must we consider the safe collection and delivery of samples, but we must also observe the latest guidelines in testing for the virus. We have introduced several new measures in our laboratory to accommodate the collection and testing of samples for COVID-19 from both within the hospital and external screening sites. These changes encompass the pre-analytical (sample collection, packaging, and delivery), analytical (evaluation, handling and preparation of samples) and post-analytical (result reporting within the hospital and to external bodies) aspects of both routine (biochemistry, haematology, transfusion and urine, stool and body fluid testing) and COVID-19 testing, to ensure the safe and efficient testing of any patient samples. In addition, more practical matters, such as laboratory staffing and continuing staff education, have also been changed to ensure the safety and well-being of laboratory staff. With the implementation of new rules and regulations, we seek to safeguard the health of all healthcare workers while streamlining the workflow for the large amount of testing required during this period. As the pandemic continues, new tests (e.g. COVID-19 serology and IL6 testing for prognosis or monitoring) are being requested, requiring even more changes and assay evaluation before implementation. All laboratories must be ready to adapt to these new challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic.