Retinal Vascular Occlusion after COVID-19 Vaccination: More Coincidence than Causal Relationship? Data from a Retrospective Multicentre Study.

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is associated with the onset of retinal vascular occlusive disease (RVOD). METHODS: In this multicentre study, data from patients with central and branch retinal vein occlusion (CRVO and BRVO), central and branch retinal artery occlusion (CRAO and BRAO), and anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy (AION) were retrospectively collected during a 2-month index period (1 June-31 July 2021) according to a defined protocol. The relation to any previous vaccination was documented for the consecutive case series. Numbers of RVOD and COVID-19 vaccination were investigated in a case-by-case analysis. A case-control study using age- and sex-matched controls from the general population (study participants from the Gutenberg Health Study) and an adjusted conditional logistic regression analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty-one subjects presenting during the index period (61 days) were enrolled: one hundred and twenty-one patients with CRVO, seventy-five with BRVO, fifty-six with CRAO, sixty-five with BRAO, and one hundred and four with AION. Three hundred and thirty-two (78.9%) patients had been vaccinated before the onset of RVOD. The vaccines given were BNT162b2/BioNTech/Pfizer (n = 221), followed by ChadOx1/AstraZeneca (n = 57), mRNA-1273/Moderna (n = 21), and Ad26.COV2.S/Johnson & Johnson (n = 11; unknown n = 22). Our case-control analysis integrating population-based data from the GHS yielded no evidence of an increased risk after COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.60-1.45, p = 0.75) in connection with a vaccination within a 4-week window. CONCLUSIONS: To date, there has been no evidence of any association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and a higher RVOD risk.

Analysis of BNT162b2- and CVnCoV-elicited sera and of convalescent sera toward SARS-CoV-2 viruses.

BACKGROUND: The mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, BioNTech/Pfizer) and the vaccine candidate CVnCoV (Curevac) each encode a stabilized spike protein of SARS-CoV2 as antigen but differ with respect to the nature of the mRNA (modified versus unmodified nucleotides) and the mRNA amount (30 µg versus 12 µg RNA). This study characterizes antisera elicited by these two vaccines in comparison to convalescent sera. METHODS: Sera from BNT162b2 vaccinated healthcare workers, and sera from participants of a phase I trial vaccinated with 2, 4, 6, 8, or 12 µg CVnCoV and convalescent sera from hospitalized patients were analyzed by ELISA, neutralization tests, surface plasmon resonance (SPR), and peptide arrays. RESULTS: BNT162b2-elicited sera and convalescent sera have a higher titer of spike-RBD-specific antibodies and neutralizing antibodies as compared to the CVnCoV-elicited sera. For all analyzed sera a reduction in binding and neutralizing antibodies was found for the lineage B.1.351 variant of concern. SPR analyses revealed that the CVnCoV-elicited sera have a lower fraction of slow-dissociating antibodies. Accordingly, the CVnCoV sera almost fail to compete with the spike-ACE2 interaction. The significance of common VOC mutations K417N, E484K, or N501Y focused on linear epitopes was analyzed using a peptide array approach. The peptide arrays showed a strong difference between convalescent sera and vaccine-elicited sera. Specifically, the linear epitope at position N501 was affected by the mutation and elucidates the escape of viral variants to antibodies against this linear epitope. CONCLUSION: These data reveal differences in titer, neutralizing capacity, and affinity of the antibodies between BNT162b2- and CVnCoV-elicited sera, which could contribute to the apparent differences in vaccine efficacy.

Comparative Investigation of Methods for Analysis of SARS-CoV-2-Spike-Specific Antisera.

In light of an increasing number of vaccinated and convalescent individuals, there is a major need for the development of robust methods for the quantification of neutralizing antibodies; although, a defined correlate of protection is still missing. Sera from hospitalized COVID-19 patients suffering or not suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) were comparatively analyzed by plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) and pseudotype-based neutralization assays to quantify their neutralizing capacity. The two neutralization assays showed comparable data. In case of the non-ARDS sera, there was a distinct correlation between the data from the neutralization assays on the one hand, and enzyme-linked immune sorbent assay (ELISA), as well as biophysical analyses, on the other hand. As such, surface plasmon resonance (SPR)-based assays for quantification of binding antibodies or analysis of the stability of the antigen-antibody interaction and inhibition of syncytium formation, determined by cell fusion assays, were performed. In the case of ARDS sera, which are characterized by a significantly higher fraction of RBD-binding IgA antibodies, there is a clear correlation between the neutralization assays and the ELISA data. In contrast to this, a less clear correlation between the biophysical analyses on the one hand and ELISAs and neutralization assays on the other hand was observed, which might be explained by the heterogeneity of the antibodies. To conclude, for less complex immune sera-as in cases of non-ARDS sera-combinations of titer quantification by ELISA with inhibition of syncytium formation, SPR-based analysis of antibody binding, determination of the stability of the antigen-antibody complex, and competition of the RBD-ACE2 binding represent alternatives to the classic PRNT for analysis of the neutralizing potential of SARS-CoV-2-specific sera, without the requirement for a BSL3 facility.

Antidepressant drug treatment protecting from COVID-19: one more piece in the repurposing puzzle.

In the article Analysis of the impact of antidepressants and other medications on COVID-19 infection risk in a chronic psychiatric in-patient cohort, Catherine L. Clelland and colleagues for the first time suggest a protective effect of antidepressants against infection with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) itself. During the observation period of the first wave of the pandemic in New York, more than 50% of patients in the psychiatric hospital studied were infected. From retrospective analysis of the hospital medical records, the authors found a significantly lower risk for infection in patients with antidepressant medication compared to treatment with other psychiatric drugs. The findings of a reduced infection incidence in patients who were already on antidepressant drug therapy underlines a preventive efficacy of antidepressants against COVID-19. Taken together with the prior obtained data of efficacy against deterioration of COVID-19 disease, this study adds a piece of evidence to the positive benefit-risk of antidepressants in repurposing condition against COVID-19.

Comirnaty-Elicited and Convalescent Sera Recognize Different Spike Epitopes.

Many of the approved SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are based on a stabilized variant of the spike protein. This raises the question of whether the immune response against the stabilized spike is identical to the immune response that is elicited by the native spike in the case of a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Using a peptide array-based approach, we analysed the binding of antibodies from Comirnaty-elicited, convalescent, and control sera to the peptides covering the spike protein. A total of 37 linear epitopes were identified. A total of 26 of these epitopes were almost exclusively recognized by the convalescent sera. Mapping these epitopes to the spike structures revealed that most of these 26 epitopes are masked in the pre-fusion structure. In particular, in the conserved central helix, three epitopes that are only exposed in the post-fusion conformation were identified. This indicates a higher spike-specific antibody diversity in convalescent sera. These differences could be relevant for the breadth of spike-specific immune response.