Serial cross-sectional estimation of vaccine-and infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The evolving proportion of the population considered immunologically naive versus primed for more efficient immune memory response to SARS-CoV-2 has implications for risk assessment. We sought to chronicle vaccine- and infection-induced seroprevalence across the first 7 waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: During 8 cross-sectional serosurveys conducted between March 2020 and August 2022, we obtained anonymized residual sera from children and adults who attended an outpatient laboratory network in the Lower Mainland (Greater Vancouver and Fraser Valley). We used at least 3 immunoassays per serosurvey to detect SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid antibodies. We assessed any seroprevalence (vaccineor infection-induced, or both), defined by positivity on any 2 assays, and infection-induced seroprevalence, also defined by dual-assay positivity but requiring both antinucleocapsid and antispike detection. We used estimates of infection-induced seroprevalence to explore underascertainment of infections by surveillance case reports. RESULTS: By January 2021, we estimated that any seroprevalence remained less than 5%, increasing with vaccine rollout to 56% by May-June 2021, 83% by September-October 2021 and 95% by March 2022. Infection-induced seroprevalence remained less than 15% through September-October 2021, increasing across Omicron waves to 42% by March 2022 and 61% by July-August 2022. By August 2022, 70%-80% of children younger than 20 years and 60%-70% of adults aged 20-59 years had been infected, but fewer than half of adults aged 60 years and older had been infected. Compared with estimates of infection-induced seroprevalence, surveillance case reports underestimated infections 12-fold between September 2021 and March 2022 and 92-fold between March 2022 and August 2022. INTERPRETATION: By August 2022, most children and adults younger than 60 years had evidence of both SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and infection. As previous evidence suggests that a history of both exposures may induce stronger, more durable hybrid immunity than either exposure alone, older adults - who have the lowest infection rates but highest risk of severe outcomes - continue to warrant prioritized vaccination.

Correlation of SARS-CoV-2 Viral Neutralizing Antibody Titers with Anti-Spike Antibodies and ACE-2 Inhibition among Vaccinated Individuals.

SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody concentrations and angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (ACE-2) inhibition have been used as surrogates to live viral neutralizing antibody titers; however, validity among vaccinated individuals is unclear. We tested the correlation of these measures among vaccinated participants, and examined subgroups based on duration since vaccination and vaccine dosing intervals. We analyzed 120 samples from two-dose mRNA vaccinees without previous COVID-19. We calculated Spearman correlation coefficients between wild-type viral neutralizing antibody titers and: anti-spike (total and IgG), anti-receptor-binding-domain (RBD), and anti-N-terminal-domain (NTD) antibodies; and ACE-2 binding by RBD. We performed three secondary analyses, dichotomizing samples by the first vaccination-to-blood collection interval, second vaccination-to-blood collection interval, and by the vaccine dosing interval (all groups divided by the median), and compared correlation coefficients (Fisher's Z test). Of 120 participants, 63 (53%) were women, 91 (76%) and 29 (24%) received BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, respectively. Overall, live viral neutralization was correlated with anti-spike total antibody (correlation coefficient = 0.80), anti-spike IgG (0.63), anti-RBD IgG (0.62), anti-NTD IgG (0.64), and RBD ACE2 binding (0.65). Samples with long (>158 days) first vaccination-to-blood collection and long (>71 days) second vaccination-to-blood collection intervals demonstrated higher correlation coefficients, compared with short groups. When comparing cases divided by short (≤39 days) versus long vaccine dosing intervals, only correlation with RBD-ACE-2 binding inhibition was higher in the long group. Among COVID-negative mRNA vaccinees, anti-spike antibody and ACE-2 inhibition concentrations are correlated with live viral neutralizing antibody titers. Correlation was stronger among samples collected at later durations from vaccination. IMPORTANCE Live viral neutralizing antibody titers are an accepted measure of immunity; however, testing procedures are labor-intensive. COVID-19 antibody and angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (ACE-2) levels have been used as surrogates to live viral neutralizing antibody titers; however, validity among vaccinated individuals is unclear. Using samples from 120 two-dose mRNA vaccinees without previous COVID-19, we found that live viral neutralization was correlated with COVID-19 antibody and ACE2 binding levels. When grouping samples by the time interval between vaccination and sample blood collection, samples collected over 158 days after the first vaccine and over 71 days from the second vaccine demonstrated stronger correlation between live viral neutralization titers and both antibody and ACE2 levels, in comparison to those collected earlier.

Performance comparison of micro-neutralization assays based on surrogate SARS-CoV-2 and WT SARS-CoV-2 in assessing virus-neutralizing capacity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

We compared neutralization assays using either the wild-type severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus or surrogate neutralization markers, using characterized sera. We found the results of the neutralization assays 75 % concordant overall and 80 % concordant for samples with high antibody levels. This demonstrates that commercial surrogate SARS-CoV-2 assays offer the potential to assess anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies' neutralizing capacity outside CL-3 laboratory containment.

Evaluating Humoral Immunity against SARS-CoV-2: Validation of a Plaque-Reduction Neutralization Test and a Multilaboratory Comparison of Conventional and Surrogate Neutralization Assays.

The evaluation of humoral protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 remains crucial in understanding both natural immunity and protective immunity conferred by the several vaccines implemented in the fight against COVID-19. The reference standard for the quantification of antibodies capable of neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 is the plaque-reduction neutralization test (PRNT). However, given that it is a laboratory-developed assay, validation is crucial in order to ensure sufficient specificity and intra- and interassay precision. In addition, a multitude of other serological assays have been developed, including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), flow cytometry-based assays, luciferase-based lentiviral pseudotype assays, and commercially available human ACE2 receptor-blocking antibody tests, which offer practical advantages in the evaluation of the protective humoral response against SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we validated a SARS-CoV-2 PRNT to assess both 50% and 90% neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 according to guidelines outlined by the World Health Organization. Upon validation, the reference-standard PRNT demonstrated excellent specificity and both intra- and interassay precision. Using the validated assay as a reference standard, we characterized the neutralizing antibody response in specimens from patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Finally, we conducted a small-scale multilaboratory comparison of alternate SARS-CoV-2 PRNTs and surrogate neutralization tests. These assays demonstrated substantial to perfect interrater agreement with the reference-standard PRNT and offer useful alternatives to assess humoral immunity against SARS-CoV-2. IMPORTANCE SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent of COVID-19, has infected over 246 million people and led to over 5 million deaths as of October 2021. With the approval of several efficacious COVID-19 vaccines, methods to evaluate protective immune responses will be crucial for the understanding of long-term immunity in the rapidly growing vaccinated population. The PRNT, which quantifies SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies, is used widely as a reference standard to validate new platforms but has not undergone substantial validation to ensure excellent inter- and intraassay precision and specificity. Our work is significant, as it describes the thorough validation of a PRNT, which we then used as a reference standard for the comparison of several alternative serological methods to measure SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies. These assays demonstrated excellent agreement with the reference-standard PRNT and include high-throughput platforms, which can greatly enhance capacity to assess both natural and vaccine-induced protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2.

Evaluation of a high volume antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Increasing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection in successive waves may strain the capacity of laboratories performing molecular diagnostic testing. Alternative testing approaches may offer additional diagnostic capacity. A high throughput chemiluminescent antigen assay (Ortho VITROS SARS-CoV-2 antigen test) was evaluated using both an inactivated virus preparation and prospective clinical samples (nasopharyngeal swabs in virus transport medium). The limit of detection of the assay was approximately 0.5 TCID50/ml, equivalent to a Ct value of 33. The assay was linear over a wide range. When 528 clinical samples were tested with the antigen assay, the sensitivity was 84.2% and the specificity was 100% (positive predictive value 100% and negative predictive value 97.7%). High volume antigen tests might be used to supplement molecular diagnostic testing capacity.