ABSTRACT
Reports suggest that COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is decreasing, either due to waning immune protection, emergence of new variants of concern, or both. Heterologous prime/boost vaccination with a vector-based approach (ChAdOx-1nCov-19, ChAd) followed by an mRNA vaccine (e.g. BNT162b2, BNT) appeared to be superior in inducing protective immunity, and large scale second booster vaccination is ongoing. However, data comparing declining immunity after homologous and heterologous vaccination as well as effects of a third vaccine application after heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination are lacking. We longitudinally monitored immunity in ChAd/ChAd (n=41) and ChAd/BNT (n=88) vaccinated individuals and assessed the impact of a second booster with BNT in both groups. The second booster greatly augmented waning anti-spike IgG but only moderately increased spike-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in both groups to cell frequencies already present after the boost. More importantly, the second booster efficiently restored neutralizing antibody responses against Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta, but neutralizing activity against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) stayed severely impaired. Our data suggest that inferior SARS-CoV-2 specific immune responses after homologous ChAd/ChAd vaccination can be cured by a heterologous BNT vaccination. However, prior heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination provides no additional benefit for spike-specific T cell immunity or neutralizing Omicron after the second boost.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Reports suggest that COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is decreasing, either due to waning immune protection, emergence of new variants of concern, or both. Heterologous prime/boost vaccination with a vector-based approach (ChAdOx-1nCov-19, ChAd) followed by an mRNA vaccine (e.g. BNT162b2, BNT) appeared to be superior in inducing protective immunity, and large scale second booster vaccination is ongoing. However, data comparing declining immunity after homologous and heterologous vaccination as well as effects of a third vaccine application after heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination are lacking. We longitudinally monitored immunity in ChAd/ChAd (n=41) and ChAd/BNT (n=88) vaccinated individuals and assessed the impact of a second booster with BNT in both groups. The second booster greatly augmented waning anti-spike IgG but only moderately increased spike-specific CD4 + and CD8 + T cells in both groups to cell frequencies already present after the boost. More importantly, the second booster efficiently restored neutralizing antibody responses against Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta, but neutralizing activity against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) stayed severely impaired. Our data suggest that inferior SARS-CoV-2 specific immune responses after homologous ChAd/ChAd vaccination can be cured by a heterologous BNT vaccination. However, prior heterologous ChAd/BNT vaccination provides no additional benefit for spike-specific T cell immunity or neutralizing Omicron after the second boost.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
BackgroundSerology testing is explored for epidemiological research and to inform individuals after suspected infection. During the COVID-19 pandemic, frontline healthcare professionals (HCP) may be at particular risk for infection. No longitudinal data on functional seroconversion in HCP in regions with low COVID-19 prevalence and low pre-test probability exist. MethodsIn a large German university hospital, we performed weekly questionnaire assessments and anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG measurements with various commercial tests, a novel surrogate virus neutralization test, and a neutralization assay using live SARS-CoV-2. ResultsFrom baseline to week six, n=1,080 screening measurements for anti-SARS CoV-2 (S1) IgG from n=217 frontline HCP (65% female) were performed. Overall, 75.6% of HCP reported at least one symptom of respiratory infection. Self-perceived infection probability declined over time (from mean 20.1% at baseline to 12{middle dot}4 % in week six, p<0.001). In sera of convalescent PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients, we measured high anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels, obtained highly concordant results from ELISAs using e.g. the S1 spike protein domain and the nucleocapsid protein (NCP) as targets, and confirmed antiviral neutralization. However, in HCP the cumulative incidence for anti-SARS-CoV-2 (S1) IgG was 1.86% for positive and 0.93% for equivocal positive results over the six week study period. Except for one HCP, none of the eight initial positive results were confirmed by alternative serology tests or showed in vitro neutralization against live SARS CoV-2. The only true seroconversion occurred without symptoms and mounted strong functional humoral immunity. Thus, the confirmed cumulative incidence for neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG was 0.47%. ConclusionWhen assessing anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune status in individuals with low pre-test probability, we suggest confirming positive results from single measurements by alternative serology tests or functional assays. Our data highlight the need for a methodical serology screening approach in regions with low SARS-CoV-2 infection rates.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Neutralizing antibodies targeting the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) block severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) entry into cells using surface-expressed angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). We developed a surrogate neutralization test (sVNT) to assess at what degree serum antibodies interfere with the binding of SARS-CoV-2-S-RBD to ACE2. The sVNT revealed neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2-S antibodies in the sera of 90% of mildly and 100% of severely affected coronavirus-disease-2019 (COVID-19) convalescent patients. Importantly, sVNT results correlated strongly to the results from pseudotyped-vesicular stomatitis virus-vector-based neutralization assay and to levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2-S1 IgG and IgA antibodies. Moreover, levels of neutralizing antibodies also correlated to duration and severity of clinical symptoms, but not patient age or gender. These findings together with the sVNT will not only be important for evaluating the prevalence of neutralizing antibodies in a population but also for identifying promising plasma donors for successful passive antibody therapy.