Severe and mild-moderate SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated patients show different frequencies of IFNγ-releasing cells: An exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: Despite an apparent effective vaccination, some patients are admitted to the hospital after SARS-CoV-2 infection. The role of adaptive immunity in COVID-19 is growing; nonetheless, differences in the spike-specific immune responses between patients requiring or not hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 infection remains to be evaluated. In this study, we aim to evaluate the spike-specific immune response in patients with mild-moderate or severeSARS-CoV-2 infection, after breakthrough infection following two doses of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. METHODS: We included three cohorts of 15 cases which received the two BNT162b2 vaccine doses in previous 4 to 7 months: 1) patients with severe COVID-19; 2) patients with mild-moderate COVID-19 and 3) vaccinated individuals with a negative SARS-CoV-2 molecular pharyngeal swab (healthy subjects). Anti-S1 and anti-S2 specific SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG titers were measured through a chemiluminescence immunoassay technology. In addition, the frequencies of IFNγ-releasing cells were measured by ELISpot. RESULTS: The spike-specific IFNγ-releasing cells were significantly lower in severe patients (8 [0; 26] s.f.c.×106), as compared to mild-moderate patients (135 [64; 159] s.f.c.×106; p<0.001) and healthy subjects (103 [50; 188] s.f.c.×106; p<0.001). The anti-Spike protein IgG levels were similar among the three cohorts of cases (p = 0.098). All cases had an IgM titer below the analytic sensitivity of the test. The Receiver Operating Curve analysis indicated the rate of spike-specific IFNγ-releasing cells can discriminate correctly severe COVID-19 and mild-moderate patients (AUC: 0.9289; 95%CI: 0.8376-1.000; p< 0.0001), with a diagnostic specificity of 100% for s.f.c. > 81.2 x 106. CONCLUSIONS: 2-doses vaccinated patients requiring hospitalization for severe COVID-19 show a cellular-mediated immune response lower than mild-moderate or healthy subjects, despite similar antibody titers.

Spike-specific T-cell responses in patients with COVID-19 successfully treated with neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVES: Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (moAbs) improves clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 when administered during the initial days of infection. The action of moAbs may impair the generation or maintenance of effective immune memory, similar to that demonstrated in other viral diseases. We aimed to evaluate short-term memory T-cell responses in patients effectively treated with bamlanivimab/etesevimab, casirivimab/imdevimab, or sotrovimab (SOT). METHODS: Spike (S)-specific T-cell responses were analyzed in 23 patients with COVID-19 (vaccinated or unvaccinated) before and after a median of 50 (range: 28-93) days from moAb treatment, compared with 11 vaccinated healthy controls. T-cell responses were measured by interferon-γ-enzyme-linked immunospot and flow cytometric activation-induced marker assay. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in S-specific T-cell responses was observed between patients treated with moAb and vaccinated healthy controls. Bamlanivimab/etesevimab and casirivimab/imdevimab groups showed significant increases in cellular responses in paired baseline/postrecovery series, as well as vaccinated patients receiving SOT. In contrast, unvaccinated patients prescribed SOT presented no statistically significant increases in T-cell-responses, suggesting diverse impacts of different moAbs on the evolution of S-specific T-cell responses in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. CONCLUSION: The moAbs did not hinder short-term memory S-specific T-cell responses in the overall group of patients; however, differences among moAbs must be further investigated both in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.

Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D measurement: Comparative evaluation of three automated immunoassays.

OBJECTIVES: the different analytical methods for measurement of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) are not yet fully harmonized and no consensus exists on a threshold of 25(OH)D defining a deficiency status. In this study, we compared the results from the assays of serum 25(OH)D performed with three different methods to evaluate the presence of potential biases and how much these biases can influence the assignment of patients to specific 25(OH)D deficiency/sufficiency categories. DESIGN AND METHODS: Liaison 25(OH) Vitamin D Total (DiaSorin Liaison XL), Elecsys Vitamin D Total II (Roche Elecsys) and Lumipulse G25(OH) Vitamin D (Fujirebio Lumipulse G1200) were used. Methods comparability was established performing Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analysis to prove whether the differences found were lower than the preliminarily pre-established maximum acceptable bias. RESULTS: all Passing-Bablok regressions exhibited the presence of a proportional and constant systematic error. Bland-Altman analysis revealed biases well above the maximum acceptable bias, so the 25(OH)D concentrations measured were not comparable. To evaluate whether the three methods had the same ability to classify patients into different categories of vitamin D levels, we categorized results obtained by each method in reference classes. Lumipulse categorized most patients into the class with the lowest 25(OH)D concentrations (<20 ng/mL) whereas Elecsys ranked the lowest number. CONCLUSIONS: Liaison XL and Elecsys have shown good accuracy compared to Lumipulse in measuring 25(OH)D levels. Nevertheless, the assays were not interchangeable due to the lack of comparability of results as well as to the disagreement in classification of hormone deficiency or sufficiency.