Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 2476, 2022 05 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1890177

ABSTRACT

Two COVID-19 mRNA (of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273) and two adenovirus vector vaccines (ChAdOx1 and Janssen) are licensed in Europe, but optimization of regime and dosing is still ongoing. Here we show in health care workers (n = 328) that two doses of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or a combination of ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector and mRNA vaccines administrated with a long 12-week dose interval induce equally high levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies and neutralizing antibodies against D614 and Delta variant. By contrast, two doses of BNT162b2 with a short 3-week interval induce 2-3-fold lower titers of neutralizing antibodies than those from the 12-week interval, yet a third BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster dose increases the antibody levels 4-fold compared to the levels after the second dose, as well as induces neutralizing antibody against Omicron BA.1 variant. Our data thus indicates that a third COVID-19 mRNA vaccine may induce cross-protective neutralizing antibodies against multiple variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccines, Synthetic , mRNA Vaccines
2.
BMJ Glob Health ; 7(5)2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1846372

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate scent dogs' diagnostic accuracy in identification of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 in comparison with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). We conducted a randomised triple-blinded validation trial, and a real-life study at the Helsinki-Vantaa International Airport, Finland. METHODS: Four dogs were trained to detect COVID-19 using skin swabs from individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Our controlled triple-blinded validation study comprised four identical sets of 420 parallel samples (from 114 individuals tested positive and 306 negative by RT-PCR), randomly presented to each dog over seven trial sessions. In a real-life setting the dogs screened skin swabs from 303 incoming passengers all concomitantly examined by nasal swab SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. Our main outcomes were variables of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value) for scent dog identification in comparison with RT-PCR. RESULTS: Our validation experiments had an overall accuracy of 92% (95% CI 90% to 93%), a sensitivity of 92% (95% CI 89% to 94%) and a specificity of 91% (95% CI 89% to 93%) compared with RT-PCR. For our dogs, trained using the wild-type virus, performance was less accurate for the alpha variant (89% for confirmed wild-type vs 36% for alpha variant, OR 14.0, 95% CI 4.5 to 43.4). In the real-life setting, scent detection and RT-PCR matched 98.7% of the negative swabs. Scant airport prevalence (0.47%) did not allow sensitivity testing; our only SARS-CoV-2 positive swab was not identified (alpha variant). However, ad hoc analysis including predefined positive spike samples showed a total accuracy of 98% (95% CI 97% to 99%). CONCLUSIONS: This large randomised controlled triple-blinded validation study with a precalculated sample size conducted at an international airport showed that trained scent dogs screen airport passenger samples with high accuracy. One of our findings highlights the importance of continuous retraining as new variants emerge. Using scent dogs may present a valuable approach for high-throughput, rapid screening of large numbers of people.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Airports , Animals , COVID-19/diagnosis , Dogs , Humans , Odorants
3.
PLoS Pathog ; 17(7): e1009721, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1298084

ABSTRACT

Severe COVID-19 is characterized by extensive pulmonary complications, to which host immune responses are believed to play a role. As the major arm of innate immunity, neutrophils are one of the first cells recruited to the site of infection where their excessive activation can contribute to lung pathology. Low-density granulocytes (LDGs) are circulating neutrophils, whose numbers increase in some autoimmune diseases and cancer, but are poorly characterized in acute viral infections. Using flow cytometry, we detected a significant increase of LDGs in the blood of acute COVID-19 patients, compared to healthy controls. Based on their surface marker expression, COVID-19-related LDGs exhibit four different populations, which display distinctive stages of granulocytic development and most likely reflect emergency myelopoiesis. Moreover, COVID-19 LDGs show a link with an elevated recruitment and activation of neutrophils. Functional assays demonstrated the immunosuppressive capacities of these cells, which might contribute to impaired lymphocyte responses during acute disease. Taken together, our data confirms a significant granulocyte activation during COVID-19 and suggests that granulocytes of lower density play a role in disease progression.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Granulocytes/classification , Acute Disease , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/blood , Case-Control Studies , Cohort Studies , Convalescence , Disease Progression , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Granulocytes/cytology , Humans , Immune Tolerance/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Scavenger Receptors, Class E/analysis , Severity of Illness Index
4.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 3991, 2021 06 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1286457

ABSTRACT

As SARS-CoV-2 has been circulating for over a year, dozens of vaccine candidates are under development or in clinical use. The BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine induces spike protein-specific neutralizing antibodies associated with protective immunity. The emergence of the B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants has raised concerns of reduced vaccine efficacy and increased re-infection rates. Here we show, that after the second dose, the sera of BNT162b2-vaccinated health care workers (n = 180) effectively neutralize the SARS-CoV-2 variant with the D614G substitution and the B.1.1.7 variant, whereas the neutralization of the B.1.351 variant is five-fold reduced. Despite the reduction, 92% of the seronegative vaccinees have a neutralization titre of >20 for the B.1.351 variant indicating some protection. The vaccinees' neutralization titres exceeded those of recovered non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Our work provides evidence that the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine induces cross-neutralization of at least some of the circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants.


Subject(s)
Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies/blood , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , BNT162 Vaccine , Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies/immunology , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Cross Protection/immunology , Female , Finland/epidemiology , Humans , Immunization, Secondary/methods , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data , Male , Mass Vaccination/methods , Mass Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Neutralization Tests/statistics & numerical data , Reinfection/immunology , Reinfection/prevention & control , Reinfection/virology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Young Adult
5.
Viruses ; 13(6)2021 05 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1244152

ABSTRACT

Increasing evidence suggests that some newly emerged SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoCs) resist neutralization by antibodies elicited by the early-pandemic wild-type virus. We applied neutralization tests to paired recoveree sera (n = 38) using clinical isolates representing the first wave (D614G), VoC1, and VoC2 lineages (B.1.1.7 and B 1.351). Neutralizing antibodies inhibited contemporary and VoC1 lineages, whereas inhibition of VoC2 was reduced 8-fold, with 50% of sera failing to show neutralization. These results provide evidence for the increased potential of VoC2 to reinfect previously SARS-CoV-infected individuals. The kinetics of NAbs in different patients showed similar decline against all variants, with generally low initial anti-B.1.351 responses becoming undetectable, but with anti-B.1.1.7 NAbs remaining detectable (>20) for months after acute infection.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Animals , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/virology , Chlorocebus aethiops , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Kinetics , Neutralization Tests , Phosphoproteins/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Vero Cells
6.
Viruses ; 13(2)2021 Jan 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1067779

ABSTRACT

Accurate and rapid diagnostic tools are needed for management of the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Antibody tests enable detection of individuals past the initial phase of infection and help examine vaccine responses. The major targets of human antibody response in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are the spike glycoprotein (SP) and nucleocapsid protein (NP). We have developed a rapid homogenous approach for antibody detection termed LFRET (protein L-based time-resolved Förster resonance energy transfer immunoassay). In LFRET, fluorophore-labeled protein L and antigen are brought to close proximity by antigen-specific patient immunoglobulins of any isotype, resulting in TR-FRET signal. We set up LFRET assays for antibodies against SP and NP and evaluated their diagnostic performance using a panel of 77 serum/plasma samples from 44 individuals with COVID-19 and 52 negative controls. Moreover, using a previously described SP and a novel NP construct, we set up enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 SP and NP. We then compared the LFRET assays with these ELISAs and with a SARS-CoV-2 microneutralization test (MNT). We found the LFRET assays to parallel ELISAs in sensitivity (90-95% vs. 90-100%) and specificity (100% vs. 94-100%). In identifying individuals with or without a detectable neutralizing antibody response, LFRET outperformed ELISA in specificity (91-96% vs. 82-87%), while demonstrating an equal sensitivity (98%). In conclusion, this study demonstrates the applicability of LFRET, a 10-min "mix and read" assay, to detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoassay/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/blood , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , Humans , Phosphoproteins/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
7.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 39: 101949, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-970990

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Exposure, risks and immunity of healthcare workers (HCWs), a vital resource during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, warrant special attention. METHODS: HCWs at Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, filled in questionnaires and provided serum samples for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody screening by Euroimmun IgG assay in March-April 2020. Positive/equivocal findings were confirmed by Abbott and microneutralization tests. Positivity by two of the three assays or RT-PCR indicated a Covid-19 case (CoV+). RESULTS: The rate of CoV(+) was 3.3% (36/1095) and seropositivity 3.0% (33/1095). CoV(+) was associated with contact with a known Covid-19 case, and working on a Covid-19-dedicated ward or one with cases among staff. The rate in the Covid-19-dedicated ICU was negligible. Smoking and age <55 years were associated with decreased risk. CoV(+) was strongly associated with ageusia, anosmia, myalgia, fatigue, fever, and chest pressure. Seropositivity was recorded for 89.3% of those with prior documented RT-PCR-positivity and 2.4% of those RT-PCR-negative. The rate of previously unidentified cases was 0.7% (8/1067) and asymptomatic ones 0% (0/36). CONCLUSION: Undiagnosed and asymptomatic cases among HCWs proved rare. An increased risk was associated with Covid-19-dedicated wards. Particularly high rates were seen for wards with liberal HCW-HCW contacts, highlighting the importance of social distancing also among HCWs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Finland/epidemiology , Hospitals, University , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Seroepidemiologic Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL