Human B cell clonal expansion and convergent antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2

During virus infection B cells are critical for the production of antibodies and protective immunity. Here we show that the human B cell compartment in patients with diagnostically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and clinical COVID-19 is rapidly altered with the early recruitment of B cells expressing a limited subset of IGHV genes, progressing to a highly polyclonal response of B cells with broader IGHV gene usage and extensive class switching to IgG and IgA subclasses with limited somatic hypermutation in the initial weeks of infection. We identify extensive convergence of antibody sequences across SARS-CoV-2 patients, highlighting stereotyped naive responses to this virus. Notably, sequence-based detection in COVID-19 patients of convergent B cell clonotypes previously reported in SARS-CoV infection predicts the presence of SARS-CoV/SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive antibody titers specific for the receptor-binding domain. These findings offer molecular insights into shared features of human B cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 and other zoonotic spillover coronaviruses.

SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Plasma Antigen for Diagnosis and Monitoring of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid antigen in blood has been described, but the diagnostic and prognostic role of antigenemia is not well understood. This study aimed to determine the frequency, duration, and concentration of nucleocapsid antigen in plasma and its association with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity. METHODS: We utilized an ultrasensitive electrochemiluminescence immunoassay targeting SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen to evaluate 777 plasma samples from 104 individuals with COVID-19. We compared plasma antigen to respiratory nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) in 74 individuals with COVID-19 from samples collected ±1 day of diagnostic respiratory NAAT and in 52 SARS-CoV-2-negative individuals. We used Kruskal-Wallis tests, multivariable logistic regression, and mixed-effects modeling to evaluate whether plasma antigen concentration was associated with disease severity. RESULTS: Plasma antigen had 91.9% (95% CI 83.2%-97.0%) clinical sensitivity and 94.2% (84.1%-98.8%) clinical specificity. Antigen-negative plasma samples belonged to patients with later respiratory cycle thresholds (Ct) when compared with antigen-positive plasma samples. Median plasma antigen concentration (log10 fg/mL) was 5.4 (interquartile range 3.9-6.0) in outpatients, 6.0 (5.4-6.5) in inpatients, and 6.6 (6.1-7.2) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. In models adjusted for age, sex, diabetes, and hypertension, plasma antigen concentration at diagnosis was associated with ICU admission [odds ratio 2.8 (95% CI 1.2-6.2), P=.01] but not with non-ICU hospitalization. Rate of antigen decrease was not associated with disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 plasma nucleocapsid antigen exhibited comparable diagnostic performance to upper respiratory NAAT, especially among those with late respiratory Ct. In addition to currently available tools, antigenemia may facilitate patient triage to optimize intensive care utilization.

Use of Outpatient-Derived COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19 Patients Before Seroconversion.

Background: Transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) containing high titers of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies serves as therapy for COVID-19 patients. Transfusions early during disease course was found to be beneficial. Lessons from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic could inform early responses to future pandemics and may continue to be relevant in lower resource settings. We sought to identify factors correlating to high antibody titers in convalescent plasma donors and understand the magnitude and pharmacokinetic time course of both transfused antibody titers and the endogenous antibody titers in transfused recipients. Methods: Plasma samples were collected up to 174 days after convalescence from 93 CCP donors with mild disease, and from 16 COVID-19 patients before and after transfusion. Using ELISA, anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike RBD, S1, and N-protein antibodies, as well as capacity of antibodies to block ACE2 from binding to RBD was measured in an in vitro assay. As an estimate for viral load, viral RNA and N-protein plasma levels were assessed in COVID-19 patients. Results: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels and RBD-ACE2 blocking capacity were highest within the first 60 days after symptom resolution and markedly decreased after 120 days. Highest antibody titers were found in CCP donors that experienced fever. Effect of transfused CCP was detectable in COVID-19 patients who received high-titer CCP and had not seroconverted at the time of transfusion. Decrease in viral RNA was seen in two of these patients. Conclusion: Our results suggest that high titer CCP should be collected within 60 days after recovery from donors with past fever. The much lower titers conferred by transfused antibodies compared to endogenous production in the patient underscore the importance of providing CCP prior to endogenous seroconversion.

Comparison of the Panther Fusion and a laboratory-developed test targeting the envelope gene for detection of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: Numerous nucleic acid amplification assays have recently received emergency use authorization (EUA) for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and there is a need to assess their test performance relative to one another. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the test performance of the Hologic Panther Fusion SARS-CoV-2 assay targeting two regions of open reading frame 1ab (ORF1ab) to a high complexity molecular-based, laboratory-developed EUA from Stanford Health Care (SHC) targeting the SARS-CoV-2 envelope (E) gene. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a diagnostic comparison study by testing nasopharyngeal samples on the two assays. Assay agreement was assessed by overall percent agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient. RESULTS: A total of 184 nasopharyngeal samples were tested using the two assays, of which 180 showed valid results and were included for the comparative analysis. Overall percent agreement between the assays was 98.3 % (95 % confidence interval (CI) 95.2-99.7) and kappa coefficient was 0.97 (95 % CI 0.93-1.0). One sample was detected on the SHC laboratory developed test (LDT) and not on the Panther Fusion, and had a Ct of 35.9. Conversely, 2 samples were detected on the Panther Fusion and not on the LDT, and had Ct values of 37.2 and 36.6. CONCLUSION: The Panther Fusion SARS-CoV-2 assay and the SHC LDT perform similarly on clinical nasopharyngeal swab specimens. Other considerations, including reagent availability, turnaround time, labor requirements, cost and instrument throughput should guide the decision of which assay to perform.

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 total antibody detection via a lateral flow nanoparticle fluorescence immunoassay.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) endgame may benefit from simple, accurate antibody testing to characterize seroprevalence and immunization coverage. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of the lateral flow QIAreach anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total rapid nanoparticle fluorescence immunoassay compared to reference isotype-specific IgG, IgM, and IgA SARS-CoV-2 ELISA using S1 or receptor binding domain (RBD) as antigens. STUDY DESIGN: A diagnostic comparison study was carried out using 154 well-characterized heparin plasma samples. Agreement between assays was assessed by overall, positive, and negative percent agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient. RESULTS: Overall agreement between the QIAreach anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total and any anti-spike domain (S1 or RBD) antibody isotype was 96.0 % (95 % CI 89.8-98.8), the positive percent agreement was 97.6 % (95 % CI 91.0-99.9), the negative percent agreement was 88.2 % (95 % CI 64.4-98.0). The kappa coefficient was 0.86 (95 % CI 0.72 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: The QIAreach anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total rapid antibody test provides comparable performance to high-complexity, laboratory-based ELISA.

Combined SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification testing and respiratory virus panel RT-PCR on the Hologic Panther Fusion system.

BACKGROUND: Significant overlap exists between the symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses. This poses a serious challenge to clinical diagnosis, laboratory testing, and infection control programs. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of the Hologic Panther Fusion Respiratory Assays (RA) compared to the GenMark ePlex Respiratory Pathogen Panel (RPP) and to assess the ability of the Panther Fusion to perform parallel testing of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses from a single sample. STUDY DESIGN: A diagnostic comparison study was carried out using 375 clinical nasopharyngeal specimens. Assay performance was assessed by overall, positive, and negative percent agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient. RESULTS: Overall agreement between the Fusion RA and ePlex RPP was 97.3 % (95 % CI 96.3-98.0), positive percent agreement was 97.2 % (95 % CI 93.0-99.2), negative percent agreement was 97.3 % (95 % CI 96.3-98.0), and the kappa coefficient was 0.85 (95 % CI 0.81-0.89). Forty additional viruses in 30 specimens were detected by Fusion that were not detected by ePlex. The maximum specimen throughput for parallel testing of the Fusion Respiratory Assays with SARS-CoV-2 was 275 samples in 20.7 h for Fusion SARS-CoV-2 and 350 samples in 20.0 h for Aptima Transcription Mediated Amplification SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: Fusion RA demonstrated substantial agreement compared to the ePlex RPP. However, the Fusion detected respiratory viruses not identified by ePlex, consistent with higher clinical sensitivity. Workflows for parallel testing of respiratory pathogens and SARS-CoV-2 demonstrate that the Panther Fusion instrument provides a flexible, moderate to high throughput testing option for pandemic and seasonal respiratory viruses.

Plasma as an alternative COVID-19 diagnostic specimen in a hospitalized patient negative for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal swab.

We present the case of an inpatient with pneumonia and repeatedly negative nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 testing. In such challenging cases, alternative diagnostic options include lower respiratory tract and plasma SARS-CoV-2 RNA testing, of which the latter may be particularly useful where bronchoscopy is deferred due to clinical factors or transmission risk.

Occurrence and Timing of Subsequent Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Reverse-transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Positivity Among Initially Negative Patients.

Using data for 20 912 patients from 2 large academic health systems, we analyzed the frequency of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction test discordance among individuals initially testing negative by nasopharyngeal swab who were retested on clinical grounds within 7 days. The frequency of subsequent positivity within this window was 3.5% and was similar across institutions.

Comparison of the Accula SARS-CoV-2 Test with a Laboratory-Developed Assay for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Clinical Nasopharyngeal Specimens.

Several point-of-care (POC) molecular tests have received emergency use authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The test performance characteristics of the Accula (Mesa Biotech) SARS-CoV-2 POC test need to be evaluated to inform its optimal use. The aim of this study was to assess the test performance of the Accula SARS-CoV-2 test. The performance of the Accula test was assessed by comparing results of 100 nasopharyngeal swab samples previously characterized by the Stanford Health Care EUA laboratory-developed test (SHC-LDT), targeting the envelope (E) gene. Assay concordance was assessed by overall percent agreement, positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA), and Cohen's kappa coefficient. Overall percent agreement between the assays was 84.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 75.3 to 90.6%), PPA was 68.0% (95% CI, 53.3 to 80.5%), and the kappa coefficient was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.82). Sixteen specimens detected by the SHC-LDT were not detected by the Accula test and showed low viral load burden, with a median cycle threshold value of 37.7. NPA was 100% (95% CI, 94.2 to 100%). Compared to the SHC-LDT, the Accula SARS-CoV-2 test showed excellent negative agreement. However, positive agreement was low for samples with low viral load. The false-negative rate of the Accula POC test calls for a more thorough evaluation of POC test performance characteristics in clinical settings and for confirmatory testing in individuals with moderate to high pretest probability of SARS-CoV-2 who test negative on Accula.

Defining the features and duration of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection associated with disease severity and outcome.

SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, particularly those preventing viral spike receptor binding domain (RBD) interaction with host angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, can neutralize the virus. It is, however, unknown which features of the serological response may affect clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients. We analyzed 983 longitudinal plasma samples from 79 hospitalized COVID-19 patients and 175 SARS-CoV-2-infected outpatients and asymptomatic individuals. Within this cohort, 25 patients died of their illness. Higher ratios of IgG antibodies targeting S1 or RBD domains of spike compared to nucleocapsid antigen were seen in outpatients who had mild illness versus severely ill patients. Plasma antibody increases correlated with decreases in viral RNAemia, but antibody responses in acute illness were insufficient to predict inpatient outcomes. Pseudovirus neutralization assays and a scalable ELISA measuring antibodies blocking RBD-ACE2 interaction were well correlated with patient IgG titers to RBD. Outpatient and asymptomatic individuals' SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, including IgG, progressively decreased during observation up to five months post-infection.

High Frequency of SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and Association With Severe Disease.

BACKGROUND: Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA in blood, also known as RNAemia, has been reported, but its prognostic implications are poorly understood. This study aimed to determine the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in plasma and its association with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) clinical severity. METHODS: An analytical cross-sectional study was performed in a single-center tertiary care institution and included consecutive inpatients and outpatients with confirmed COVID-19. The prevalence of SARS CoV-2 RNAemia and the strength of its association with clinical severity variables were examined and included intensive care unit (ICU) admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, and 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Paired nasopharyngeal and plasma samples were included from 85 patients. The median age was 55 years, and individuals with RNAemia were older than those with undetectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA in plasma (63 vs 50 years; P = .04). Comorbidities were frequent including obesity (37.6%), hypertension (30.6%), and diabetes mellitus (22.4%). RNAemia was detected in 28/85 (32.9%) of patients, including 22/28 (78.6%) who required hospitalization. In models adjusted for age, RNAemia was detected more frequently in individuals who developed severe disease including ICU admission (32.1 vs 14.0%; P = .04) and invasive mechanical ventilation (21.4% vs 3.5%; P = .02). All 4 deaths occurred in individuals with detectable RNAemia. An additional 121 plasma samples from 28 individuals with RNAemia were assessed longitudinally, and RNA was detected for a maximum duration of 10 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a high proportion of SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia, and an association between RNAemia and clinical severity suggesting the potential utility of plasma viral testing as a prognostic indicator for COVID-19.

Human B Cell Clonal Expansion and Convergent Antibody Responses to SARS-CoV-2.

B cells are critical for the production of antibodies and protective immunity to viruses. Here we show that patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) who develop coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) display early recruitment of B cells expressing a limited subset of IGHV genes, progressing to a highly polyclonal response of B cells with broader IGHV gene usage and extensive class switching to IgG and IgA subclasses with limited somatic hypermutation in the initial weeks of infection. We identify convergence of antibody sequences across SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, highlighting stereotyped naive responses to this virus. Notably, sequence-based detection in COVID-19 patients of convergent B cell clonotypes previously reported in SARS-CoV infection predicts the presence of SARS-CoV/SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive antibody titers specific for the receptor-binding domain. These findings offer molecular insights into shared features of human B cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV.

Comparison of a Point-of-Care Assay and a High-Complexity Assay for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.

BACKGROUND: Numerous nucleic acid amplification assays utilizing different target genes of the SARS-CoV-2 genome have received emergency use authorization (EUA) by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Limited data are available comparing the test performance characteristics of these assays. METHODS: A diagnostic comparison study was performed to evaluate the performance of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay compared to the Hologic Panther Fusion SARS-CoV-2 assay using clinical nasopharyngeal specimens. Agreement between the two assays was assessed by overall, positive, and negative percent agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient. RESULTS: A total of 104 (54 positive and 50 negative) clinical nasopharyngeal samples were tested by both assays. Using the Panther Fusion as a reference standard, the Xpert demonstrated an overall agreement of 99.0% [95% confidence interval (CI): 94.8-100], positive percent agreement of 98.1% (95% CI: 90.1-100), and a negative percent agreement of 100% (95% CI: 94.2-100). The kappa coefficient was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94-1.0). One sample positive by the Panther Fusion with a cycle threshold (Ct) of 38.6 was found to be reproducibly negative by the Xpert assay. CONCLUSIONS: The Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 assay provides test performance comparable to the Hologic Panther Fusion SARS-CoV-2 assay while offering laboratories rapid, on-demand testing capacity.

Comparison of a laboratory-developed test targeting the envelope gene with three nucleic acid amplification tests for detection of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: Numerous nucleic acid amplification tests, including real-time, reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR) and isothermal amplification methods, have been developed to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA, including many that have received emergency use authorization (EUA). There is a need to assess their test performance relative to one another. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the test performance of a high complexity laboratory-developed rRT-PCR EUA from Stanford Health Care (SHC) targeting the SARS-CoV-2 envelope (E) gene with other tests: the Atila isothermal amplification assay targeting the nucleocapsid (N) gene and open reading frame 1ab (ORF1ab), the Altona E and spike (S) multiplex, real-time RT-PCR, and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) N1 and N2 rRT-PCRs. STUDY DESIGN: A diagnostic comparison study was performed by testing nasopharyngeal samples from persons under investigation for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Assay performance was assessed by percent agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient. RESULTS: Positive percent agreement with the SHC EUA reference assay was 82.8 % (95 % confidence interval (CI) 65.0 to 92.9) for Atila, 86.7 % (95 % CI 69.7 to 95.3) for the Altona E and S targets, and 86.7 % (95 % CI 69.7 to 95.3) and 90.0 % (95 % CI 73.6 to 97.3), for the CDC N1 and N2 targets, respectively. All assays demonstrated 100 % negative percent agreement. Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.86 to 0.92, indicating excellent agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Performance was comparable among the SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification methods tested, with a limited number of discrepancies observed in specimens with low viral loads.