Evaluation of the systemic and mucosal immune response induced by COVID-19 and the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine for SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: The currently used SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines have proven to induce a strong and protective immune response. However, functional relevance of vaccine-generated antibodies and their temporal progression are still poorly understood. Thus, the central aim of this study is to gain a better understanding of systemic and mucosal humoral immune response after mRNA vaccination with BNT162b2. METHODS: We compared antibody production against the S1 subunit and the RBD of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in sera of BNT162b2 vaccinees, heterologous ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2 vaccinees and COVID-19 patients. We monitored the neutralizing humoral response against SARS-CoV-2 wildtype strain and three VOCs over a period of up to eight months after second and after a subsequent third vaccination. RESULTS: In comparison to COVID-19 patients, vaccinees showed higher or similar amounts of S1- and RBD-binding antibodies but similar or lower virus neutralizing titers. Antibodies peaked two weeks after the second dose, followed by a decrease three and eight months later. Neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) poorly correlated with S1-IgG levels but strongly with RBD-IgGAM titers. After second vaccination we observed a reduced vaccine-induced neutralizing capacity against VOCs, especially against the Omicron variant. Compared to the nAb levels after the second vaccination, the neutralizing capacity against wildtype strain and VOCs was significantly enhanced after third vaccination. In saliva samples, relevant levels of RBD antibodies were detected in convalescent samples but not in vaccinees. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that BNT162b2 vaccinated individuals generate relevant nAbs titers, which begin to decrease within three months after immunization and show lower neutralizing potential against VOCs as compared to the wildtype strain. Large proportion of vaccine-induced S1-IgG might be non-neutralizing whereas RBD-IgGAM appears to be a good surrogate marker to estimate nAb levels. A third vaccination increases the nAb response. Furthermore, the systemic vaccine does not seem to elicit readily detectable mucosal immunity.

Evaluation of Simple Lateral Flow Immunoassays for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibodies.

Immunization for the generation of protective antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged to be highly effective in preventing hospital admission, need for intensive care treatment and high mortality in the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Lateral flow immune assays (LFIAs) offer a simple and competitive option to monitor antibody production after vaccination. Here, we compared the diagnostic performance of three different lateral flow assays in detecting nucleocapsid protein (NP), S1 subunit (S1) and receptor binding domain (pseudo)-neutralizing antibodies (nRBD) in sera of 107 health care workers prior (V1), two weeks (V2) after first vaccination with BNT162b2 as well as three weeks (V3) and eight months later (V4). In sera at V1, overall specificity was >99%. At V3, LFIAs showed sensitivities between 98.1 and 100%. The comparison of S1 and nRBD LFIA with S1 ELISA and a focus reduction neutralization assay (FRNT) revealed high concordance at V3. Thus, the use of lateral flow immunoassays appears to have reasonable application in the short-term follow-up after vaccination for SARS-CoV-2.

Bacterial contamination of the smartphones of healthcare workers in a German tertiary-care hospital before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Assuming that hygiene measures have improved significantly due to COVID-19, we aimed to investigate bacterial colonization on smartphones (SPs) owned by healthcare workers (HCWs) before and during the pandemic. METHODS: Employing a before-and-after study design, randomly selected HCWs were included. Devices underwent sampling under real-life conditions, without prior manipulation. Swabs were collected in 2012 (pre-pandemic) and 2021 to determine microbial colonization. Isolates were identified by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and underwent microbiological susceptibility testing. RESULTS: The final analysis included 295 HCWs (67% female, mean age 34 years) from 26 wards. Bacterial contamination was present on 293 of 295 SP screens (99.3%). The proportion of clinically relevant bacterial pathogens (eg Staphylococcus aureus, enterococci, Enterobacterales, non-fermenting bacteria) ranged from 21.2% in 2012 to 39.8% in 2021. Resistance profiles revealed a proportion of multidrug-resistant bacteria such as MRSA and VRE of less than 2%. The comparison of before-and-after sampling showed a significant increase in smartphone use during work from 2012 to 2021 with a simultaneous increase in cleaning intensity, probably as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial contamination of SPs within the hospital is of concern and can serve as a source of cross-contamination. Hence, in addition to excellent hand hygiene, SPs must be carefully disinfected after handling in healthcare. Behavioral changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic could have a significant impact if implemented sustainably in everyday clinical practice.

Comprehensive investigation of an in-hospital transmission cluster of a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2-positive physician among patients and healthcare workers in Germany.

We investigated potential transmissions of a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2-positive physician in a tertiary-care hospital who worked for 15 cumulative hours without wearing a face mask. No in-hospital transmissions occurred, despite 254 contacts among patients and healthcare workers. In conclusion, exposed hospital staff continued work, accompanied by close clinical and virologic monitoring.

Point-of-care bulk testing for SARS-CoV-2 by combining hybridization capture with improved colorimetric LAMP.

Efforts to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 have spurred the need for reliable, rapid, and cost-effective diagnostic methods which can be applied to large numbers of people. However, current standard protocols for the detection of viral nucleic acids while sensitive, require a high level of automation and sophisticated laboratory equipment to achieve throughputs that allow whole communities to be tested on a regular basis. Here we present Cap-iLAMP (capture and improved loop-mediated isothermal amplification) which combines a hybridization capture-based RNA extraction of gargle lavage samples with an improved colorimetric RT-LAMP assay and smartphone-based color scoring. Cap-iLAMP is compatible with point-of-care testing and enables the detection of SARS-CoV-2 positive samples in less than one hour. In contrast to direct addition of the sample to improved LAMP (iLAMP), Cap-iLAMP prevents false positives and allows single positive samples to be detected in pools of 25 negative samples, reducing the reagent cost per test to ~1 Euro per individual.

Comparison of pre-analytical characteristics for molecular and serological diagnostics of COVID-19.

Background: The diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection relies on RT-PCR from nasopharyngeal swabs. The pre-analytical value of different methods of material harvesting for SARS-CoV-2 are unknown. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive investigation of the pre-analytical performance for different pharyngeal sampling procedures in hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition to swabs taken simultaneously from different locations, saliva and pharyngeal lavages were also analyzed using RT-PCR. Results: In 10 COVID-19 patients, standard nasopharyngeal swabs detected 8 out of 10 positive patients, whereas swabs taken from the palatoglossal arch resulted in 9 correct-positive results. Brushing the posterior pharynx wall with swabs resulted in detection of 9 out of 10 positive patients with no difference using either dry swabs or liquid Amies medium. A strong correlation between Ct values of both swab materials was observed. Pharyngeal lavages yielded 6 out of 10 positive results in concordance with 85% of nasopharyngeal swabs in late-stage COVID-19 patients. Investigating 23 patients with early SARS-CoV-2 infection, pharyngeal lavages showed a concordance rate of 100% compared to nasopharyngeal swabs. Conclusions: The diagnostic performance of swabs taken from the palatoglossal arch in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection is similar to that of specimens taken from the nasopharyngeal region. However, the former sampling method is associated with less discomfort and much easier to perform. Pharyngeal lavages may replace swabs for mass screening in early stages of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The predictive values are comparable, and the procedure is performed without exposing healthcare workers to transmission risks.

A direct RT-qPCR approach to test large numbers of individuals for SARS-CoV-2.

SARS-CoV-2 causes substantial morbidity and mortality in elderly and immunocompromised individuals, particularly in retirement homes, where transmission from asymptomatic staff and visitors may introduce the infection. Here we present a cheap and fast screening method based on direct RT-qPCR to detect SARS-CoV-2 in single or pooled gargle lavages ("mouthwashes"). This method detects individuals with large viral loads (Ct≤29) and we use it to test all staff at a nursing home daily over a period of three weeks in order to reduce the risk that the infection penetrates the facility. This or similar approaches can be implemented to protect hospitals, nursing homes and other institutions in this and future viral epidemics.

Differences of SARS-CoV-2 serological test performance between hospitalized and outpatient COVID-19 cases.

BACKGROUND: Serological severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody assays differ in the target antigen specificity, e.g. of antibodies directed against the viral spike or the nucleocapsid protein, and in the spectrum of detected immunoglobulins. The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of two different routinely used immunoassays in hospitalized and outpatient COVID-19 cases. METHODS: The test characteristics of commercially available spike1 protein-based serological assays (Euroimmun, EI-assays), determining IgA or IgG and nucleocapsid-based assays (Virotech, VT-assays) determining IgA, IgM or IgG were compared in 139 controls and 116 hospitalized and outpatient COVID-19 cases. RESULTS: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients (n = 51; 115 samples) showed significantly higher concentrations of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and differed from outpatient cases (n = 65) by higher age, higher disease severity scores and earlier follow up blood sampling. Sensitivity of the two IgG assays was comparable in hospitalized patients tested ≥ 14 days (EI-assay: 88%, CI95% 67.6-99.9; VT-assay: 96%, CI95% 77.7-99.8). In outpatient COVID-19 cases sensitivity was significantly lower in the VT-assay (86.2%, CI95% 74.8-93.1) compared with the EI-assay (98.5%, CI95% 90.6-99.9). Assays for IgA and IgM demonstrated a lack of specificity or sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that SARS-CoV-2 serological assays may need to be optimized to produce reliable results in outpatient COVID-19 cases who are low or even asymptomatic. Assays for IgA and IgM have limited diagnostic performance and do not prove an additional value for population-based screening approaches.