Differential antibody production by symptomatology in SARS-CoV-2 convalescent individuals (preprint)

The association between COVID-19 symptoms and antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 is poorly characterized. We analyzed antibody levels in individuals with known SARS-CoV-2 infection to identify potential antibody-symptom associations. Convalescent plasma from 216 SARS-CoV-2 RNA+ individuals with symptomatology information were tested for the presence of IgG to the spike S1 subunit (Euroimmun ELISA), IgG to receptor binding domain (RBD, CoronaCHEK rapid test), and for IgG, IgA, and IgM to nucleocapsid (N, Bio-Rad ELISA). Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of having a COVID-19 symptom from the antibody response, adjusting for sex and age. Cough strongly associated with antibodies against S1 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]= 5.33; 95% CI from 1.51 to 18.86) and RBD (aOR=4.36; CI 1.49, 12.78). In contrast, sore throat significantly associated with the absence of antibodies to S1 and N (aOR=0.25; CI 0.08, 0.80 and aOR=0.31; 0.11, 0.91). Similarly, lack of symptoms associated with the absence of antibodies to N and RBD (aOR=0.16; CI 0.03, 0.97 and aOR=0.16; CI 0.03, 1.01). Cough appeared to be correlated with a seropositive result, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals exhibiting lower respiratory symptoms generate a robust antibody response. Conversely, those without symptoms or limited to a sore throat while infected with SARS-CoV-2 were likely to lack a detectable antibody response. These findings strongly support the notion that severity of infection correlates with robust antibody response.

Differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 naturally infected and vaccinated individuals in an inner-city emergency department (preprint)

Background: Emergency Departments (EDs) can serve as surveillance sites for infectious diseases. Our purpose was to determine the burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection and prevalence of vaccination against COVID-19 among patients attending an urban ED in Baltimore City. Methods: Using 1914 samples of known exposure status, we developed an algorithm to differentiate previously infected, vaccinated, and unexposed individuals using a combination of antibody assays. We applied this testing algorithm to 4360 samples ED patients obtained in the springs of 2020 and 2021. Using multinomial logistic regression, we determined factors associated with infection and vaccination. Results: For the algorithm, sensitivity and specificity for identifying vaccinated individuals was 100% and 99%, respectively, and 84% and 100% for naturally infected individuals. Among the ED subjects, seroprevalence to SARS-CoV-2 increased from 2% to 24% between April 2020 and March 2021. Vaccination prevalence rose to 11% by mid-March 2021. Marked differences in burden of disease and vaccination coverage were seen by sex, race, and ethnicity. Hispanic patients, though 7% of the study population, had the highest relative burden of disease (16 % of total infections) but similar vaccination rates. Women and White individuals were more likely to be vaccinated than men or Black individuals (adjusted odds ratios aOR 1.35 [95% CI: 1.02, 1.80] and aOR 2.26 [95% CI: 1.67, 3.07], respectively). Conclusions: Individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 can be differentiated from vaccinated individuals using a serologic testing algorithm. SARS-CoV-2 exposure and vaccination uptake frequencies reflect gender, race and ethnic health disparities in this urban context.

Antibody Attributes that Predict the Neutralization and Effector Function of Polyclonal Responses to SARS-CoV-2 (preprint)

While antibodies provide significant protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease sequelae, the specific attributes of the humoral response that contribute to immunity are incompletely defined. In this study, we employ machine learning to relate characteristics of the polyclonal antibody response raised by natural infection to diverse antibody effector functions and neutralization potency with the goal of generating both accurate predictions of each activity based on antibody response profiles as well as insights into antibody mechanisms of action. To this end, antibody-mediated phagocytosis, cytotoxicity, complement deposition, and neutralization were accurately predicted from biophysical antibody profiles in both discovery and validation cohorts. These predictive models identified SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM as a key predictor of neutralization activity whose mechanistic relevance was supported experimentally by depletion. Validated models of how different aspects of the humoral response relate to antiviral antibody activities suggest desirable attributes to recapitulate by vaccination or other antibody-based interventions.

A hemagglutination-based, semi-quantitative test for point-of-care determination of SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels (preprint)

Serologic, point-of-care tests to detect antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are an important tool in the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority of current point-of-care antibody tests developed for SARS-CoV-2 rely on lateral flow assays, but these do not offer quantitative information. To address this, we developed a new method of COVID-19 antibody testing employing hemagglutination tested on a dry card, similar to that which is already available for rapid typing of ABO blood groups. A fusion protein linking red blood cells (RBCs) to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was placed on the card. 200 COVID-19 patient and 200 control plasma samples were reconstituted with O-negative RBCs to form whole blood and added to the dried protein, followed by a stirring step and a tilting step, 3-minute incubation, and a second tilting step. The sensitivity for the hemagglutination test, Euroimmun IgG ELISA test and RBD-based CoronaChek lateral flow assay was 87.0%, 86.5%, and 84.5%, respectively, using samples obtained from recovered COVID-19 individuals. Testing pre-pandemic samples, the hemagglutination test had a specificity of 95.5%, compared to 97.3% and 98.9% for the ELISA and CoronaChek, respectively. A distribution of agglutination strengths was observed in COVID-19 convalescent plasma samples, with the highest agglutination score (4) exhibiting significantly higher neutralizing antibody titers than weak positives (2) (p<0.0001). Strong agglutinations were observed within 1 minute of testing, and this shorter assay time also increased specificity to 98.5%. In conclusion, we developed a novel rapid, point-of-care RBC agglutination test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies that can yield semi-quantitative information on neutralizing antibody titer in patients. The five-minute test may find use in determination of serostatus prior to vaccination, post-vaccination surveillance and travel screening.

Comparative performance of multiplex salivary and commercially available serologic assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG and neutralization titers (preprint)

ABSTRACT Oral fluid (hereafter saliva) offers a non-invasive sampling method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, data comparing performance of salivary tests against commercially-available serologic and neutralizing antibody (nAb) assays are lacking. This study compared the performance of a multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay targeting antibodies to nucleocapsid (N), receptor binding domain (RBD) and spike (S) antigens to three commercially-available SARS-CoV-2 serology enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) (Ortho Vitros, Euroimmun, and BioRad) and nAb. Paired saliva and plasma samples were collected from 101 eligible COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donors >14 days since PCR+ confirmed diagnosis. Concordance was evaluated using positive (PPA) and negative (NPA) percent agreement, overall percent agreement (PA), and Cohen’s kappa coefficient. The range between salivary and plasma EIAs for SARS-CoV-2-specific N was PPA: 54.4-92.1% and NPA: 69.2-91.7%, for RBD was PPA: 89.9-100% and NPA: 50.0-84.6%, and for S was PPA: 50.6-96.6% and NPA: 50.0-100%. Compared to a plasma nAb assay, the multiplex salivary assay PPA ranged from 62.3% (N) and 98.6% (RBD) and NPA ranged from 18.8% (RBD) to 96.9% (S). Combinations of N, RBD, and S and a summary algorithmic index of all three (N/RBD/S) in saliva produced ranges of PPA: 87.6-98.9% and NPA: 50-91.7% with the three EIAs and ranges of PPA: 88.4-98.6% and NPA: 21.9-34.4% with the nAb assay. A multiplex salivary SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay demonstrated comparable performance to three commercially-available plasma EIAs and a nAb assay, and may be a viable alternative to assist in screening CCP donors and monitoring population-based seroprevalence and vaccine antibody response.

Comparative performance of five commercially available serologic assays to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and identify individuals with high neutralizing titers (preprint)

Accurate serological assays to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are needed to characterize the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and identify potential candidates for COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donation. This study compared the performance of commercial enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and neutralizing antibodies (nAb). The diagnostic accuracy of five commercially available EIAs (Abbott, Euroimmun, EDI, ImmunoDiagnostics, and Roche) to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated from cross-sectional samples of potential CCP donors that had prior molecular confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection for sensitivity (n=214) and pre-pandemic emergency department patients for specificity (n=1,102). Of the 214 potential CCP donors, all were sampled >14 days since symptom onset and only a minority had been hospitalized due to COVID-19 (n=16 [7.5%]); 140 potential CCP donors were tested by all five EIAs and a microneutralization assay. When performed according to the manufacturers protocol to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, the sensitivity of each EIA ranged from 76.4% to 93.9%, and the specificity of each EIA ranged from 87.0% to 99.6%. Using a nAb titer cutoff of [≥]160 as the reference positive test (n=140 CCP donors), the empirical area under receiver operating curve of each EIA ranged from 0.66 (Roche) to 0.90 (Euroimmun). Commercial EIAs with high diagnostic accuracy to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies did not necessarily have high diagnostic accuracy to detect high nAbs. Some but not all commercial EIAs may be useful in the identification of individuals with high nAbs in convalescent individuals.

Sex, age, and hospitalization drive antibody responses in a COVID-19 convalescent plasma donor population (preprint)

Convalescent plasma is currently one of the leading treatments for COVID-19, but there is a paucity of data identifying therapeutic efficacy. A comprehensive analysis of the antibody responses in potential plasma donors and an understanding of the clinical and demographic factors that drive variant antibody responses is needed. Among 126 potential convalescent plasma donors, the humoral immune response was evaluated by a SARS-CoV-2 virus neutralization assay using Vero-E6-TMPRSS2 cells, commercial IgG and IgA ELISA to Spike (S) protein S1 domain (Euroimmun), IgA, IgG and IgM indirect ELISAs to the full-length S or S-receptor binding domain (S-RBD), and an IgG avidity assay. Multiple linear regression and predictive models were utilized to assess the correlations between antibody responses with demographic and clinical characteristics. IgG titers were greater than either IgM or IgA for S1, full length S, and S-RBD in the overall population. Of the 126 plasma samples, 101 (80%) had detectable neutralizing titers. Using neutralization titer as the reference, the sensitivity of the IgG ELISAs ranged between 95-98%, but specificity was only 20-32%. Male sex, older age, and hospitalization with COVID-19 were all consistently associated with increased antibody responses across the serological assays. Neutralizing antibody titers were reduced over time in contrast to overall antibody responses. There was substantial heterogeneity in the antibody response among potential convalescent plasma donors, but sex, age and hospitalization emerged as factors that can be used to identify individuals with a high likelihood of having strong antiviral antibody levels.