ABSTRACT
Several population-level studies have described individual clinical risk factors associated with suboptimal antibody responses following COVID-19 vaccination, but none have examined multimorbidity. Others have shown that suboptimal post-vaccination responses offer reduced protection to subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, the level of protection from COVID-19 hospitalisation/death remains unconfirmed. We use national Scottish datasets to investigate the association between multimorbidity and testing antibody-negative, examining the correlation between antibody levels and subsequent COVID-19 hospitalisation/death among double-vaccinated individuals. We found that individuals with multimorbidity (≥five conditions) were more likely to test antibody-negative post-vaccination and 13.37 [6.05 - 29.53] times more likely to be hospitalised/die from COVID-19 than individuals without conditions. We also show a dose-dependent association between post-vaccination antibody levels and COVID-19 hospitalisation or death, with those with undetectable antibody levels at a significantly higher risk (HR 9.21 [95% CI 4.63 - 18.29]) of these serious outcomes compared to those with high antibody levels.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , DeathABSTRACT
There is substantial interest regarding the perceived risk that immunomodulator and biologic therapy could have on COVID-19 disease severity among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and clinicians. In this study, we show that infliximab/thiopurine combination therapy is associated with significantly lower IgA, a range of lower IgG responses as well as impaired neutralising antibody responses, compared to responses observed in healthy individuals. We also demonstrate that whilst IgG responses were significantly reduced in individuals with IBD treated with infliximab or vedolizumab monotherapy compared to healthy controls, there was no significant reduction in IgA and neutralising antibody responses. As neutralising antibody responses correlate with protection, this observation may provide the mechanistic explanation for the observation reported by the SECURE-IBD study that individuals on infliximab/thiopurine combination therapy were at greater risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes than patients on monotherapy.
Subject(s)
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background Serological assays are being deployed to monitor antibody responses in SARS-CoV-2 convalescents and vaccine recipients. There is a need to determine whether such assays can predict immunity, as antibody levels wane and viral variants emerge. Methods We measured antibodies in a cohort of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients using several high-throughput serological tests and functional neutralization assays. The effects of time and spike protein sequence variation on the performance and predictive value of the various assays was assessed. Findings Neutralizing antibody titers decreased over the first few months post-infection but stabilized thereafter, at about 30% of the level observed shortly after infection. Serological assays commonly used to measure antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 displayed a range of sensitivities that declined to varying extents over time. Quantitative measurements generated by serological assays based on the spike protein were better at predicting neutralizing antibody titers than assays based on nucleocapsid, but performance was variable and manufacturer positivity thresholds were not able to predict the presence or absence of detectable neutralizing activity. Even though there was some deterioration in correlation between serological measurements and functional neutralization activity, some assays maintained an ability to predict neutralizing titers, even against variants of concern. Interpretation The ability of high throughput serological assays to predict neutralizing antibody titers is likely crucial for evaluation of immunity at the population scale. These data will facilitate the selection of the most suitable assays as surrogates of functional neutralizing activity and suggest that such measurements may have utility in clinical practice.
Subject(s)
Severe Acute Respiratory SyndromeABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Background: Sero-surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 is crucial to monitoring levels of population exposure and informing public health responses, but may be influenced by variability in performance between available assays. Methods: Five commercial immunoassays and a neutralising activity assay were used to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in routine primary care and paediatric samples collected during the first wave of the pandemic in NHS Lothian, Scotland as part of ongoing surveillance efforts. For each assay, sensitivity and specificity was calculated relative to consensus results and neutralising activity. Quantitative correlation was performed between serological and neutralising titres. Results: Seroprevalence ranged from 3.4-7.3 % in primary care patients and 3-5.9 % in paediatric patients according to different immunoassays. Neutralising activity was detectable in 2.8 % and 1.3 % respectively. Relative assay performance changed depending on comparison to immunoassay consensus versus neutralising activity and qualititative versus quantitative agreement. Cross-reactivity with endemic seasonal coronaviruses was confirmed by neutralising assay in false positives for one immunoassay. Presence of false positives for another assay was found specifically in paediatric but not adult samples. Conclusions: Five serological assays show variable accuracy when applied to the general population, impacting seroprevalence estimates. Assay performance may also vary in detection of protective neutralising antibody levels. These aspects should be considered in assay selection and interpretation in epidemiological studies.
ABSTRACT
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.