Comparison of Reverse Transcription (RT)-Quantitative PCR and RT-Droplet Digital PCR for Detection of Genomic and Subgenomic SARS-CoV-2 RNA.

Most individuals acutely infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exhibit mild symptoms. However, 10 to 20% of those infected develop long-term symptoms, referred to as post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) condition (PCC). One hypothesis is that PCC might be exacerbated by viral persistence in tissue sanctuaries. Therefore, the accurate detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 are not only necessary for viral load monitoring but also crucial for detecting long-term viral persistence and determining whether viral replication is occurring in tissue reservoirs. In this study, the sensitivity and robustness of reverse transcription (RT)-droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and RT-quantitative PCR (qPCR) techniques have been compared for the detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 genomic and subgenomic RNAs from oropharyngeal swabs taken from confirmed SARS-CoV-2-positive, SARS-CoV-2-exposed, and nonexposed individuals as well as from samples from mice infected with SARS-CoV-2. Our data demonstrated that both techniques presented equivalent results in the mid- and high-viral-load ranges. Additionally, RT-ddPCR was more sensitive than RT-qPCR in the low-viral-load range, allowing the accurate detection of positive results in individuals exposed to the virus. Overall, these data suggest that RT-ddPCR might be an alternative to RT-qPCR for detecting low viral loads in samples and for assessing viral persistence in samples from individuals with PCC. IMPORTANCE We developed one-step reverse transcription (RT)-droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) protocols to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA and compared them to the gold-standard RT-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) method. RT-ddPCR was more sensitive than RT-qPCR in the low-viral-load range, while both techniques were equivalent in the mid- and high-viral-load ranges. Overall, these results suggest that RT-ddPCR might be a viable alternative to RT-qPCR when it comes to detecting low viral loads in samples, which is a highly relevant issue for determining viral persistence in as-yet-unknown tissue reservoirs in individuals suffering from post-COVID conditions or long COVID.

Kinetics of immune responses elicited after three mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses in predominantly antibody-deficient individuals.

Mass vaccination campaigns reduced COVID-19 incidence and severity. Here, we evaluated the immune responses developed in SARS-CoV-2-uninfected patients with predominantly antibody-deficiencies (PAD) after three mRNA-1273 vaccine doses. PAD patients were classified based on their immunodeficiency: unclassified primary antibody-deficiency (unPAD, n = 9), common variable immunodeficiency (CVID, n = 12), combined immunodeficiency (CID, n = 1), and thymoma with immunodeficiency (TID, n = 1). unPAD patients and healthy controls (HCs, n = 10) developed similar vaccine-induced humoral responses after two doses. However, CVID patients showed reduced binding and neutralizing titers compared to HCs. Of interest, these PAD groups showed lower levels of Spike-specific IFN-γ-producing cells. CVID individuals also presented diminished CD8+T cells. CID and TID patients developed cellular but not humoral responses. Although the third vaccine dose boosted humoral responses in most PAD patients, it had limited effect on expanding cellular immunity. Vaccine-induced immune responses in PAD individuals are heterogeneous, and should be immunomonitored to define a personalized therapeutic strategies.

Heterogeneous Infectivity and Pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 Variants Beta, Delta and Omicron in Transgenic K18-hACE2 and Wildtype Mice.

The emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) may display enhanced transmissibility, more severity and/or immune evasion; however, the pathogenesis of these new VOCs in experimental SARS-CoV-2 models or the potential infection of other animal species is not completely understood. Here we infected K18-hACE2 transgenic mice with B.1, B.1.351/Beta, B.1.617.2/Delta and BA.1.1/Omicron isolates and demonstrated heterogeneous infectivity and pathogenesis. B.1.351/Beta variant was the most pathogenic, while BA.1.1/Omicron led to lower viral RNA in the absence of major visible clinical signs. In parallel, we infected wildtype (WT) mice and confirmed that, contrary to B.1 and B.1.617.2/Delta, B.1.351/Beta and BA.1.1/Omicron can infect them. Infection in WT mice coursed without major clinical signs and viral RNA was transient and undetectable in the lungs by day 7 post-infection. In silico modeling supported these findings by predicting B.1.351/Beta receptor binding domain (RBD) mutations result in an increased affinity for both human and murine ACE2 receptors, while BA.1/Omicron RBD mutations only show increased affinity for murine ACE2.

Reduced humoral response 3 months following BNT162b2 vaccination in SARS-CoV-2 uninfected residents of long-term care facilities.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is the most effective strategy to protect older residents of long-term care facilities (LTCF) against severe COVID-19, but primary vaccine responses are less effective in older adults. Here, we characterised the humoral responses of institutionalised seniors 3 months after they had received the mRNA/BNT162b2 vaccine. METHODS: plasma levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific total IgG, IgM and IgA antibodies were measured before and 3 months after vaccination in older residents of LTCF. Neutralisation capacity was assessed in a pseudovirus neutralisation assay against the original WH1 and later B.1.617.2/Delta variants. A group of younger adults was used as a reference group. RESULTS: three months after vaccination, uninfected older adults presented reduced SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG levels and a significantly lower neutralisation capacity against the WH1 and Delta variants compared with vaccinated uninfected younger individuals. In contrast, COVID-19-recovered older adults showed significantly higher SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG levels after vaccination than their younger counterparts, whereas showing similar neutralisation activity against the WH1 virus and an increased neutralisation capacity against the Delta variant. Although, similarly to younger individuals, previously infected older adults elicit potent cross-reactive immune responses, higher quantities of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies are required to reach the same neutralisation levels. CONCLUSIONS: although hybrid immunity seems to be active in previously infected older adults 3 months after mRNA/BNT162b2 vaccination, humoral immune responses are diminished in COVID-19 uninfected but vaccinated older residents of LTCF. These results suggest that a vaccine booster dose should be prioritised for this particularly vulnerable population.

Virological and Clinical Determinants of the Magnitude of Humoral Responses to SARS-CoV-2 in Mild-Symptomatic Individuals.

Background: Evidence on the determinants of the magnitude of humoral responses and neutralizing titers in individuals with mild COVID-19 is scarce. Methods: In this cohort study of mild COVID-19 patients, we assessed viral load (VL) by RT-qPCR at two/three time points during acute infection, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by ELISA and plasma neutralizing responses using a pseudovirus assay at day 60. Results: Seventy-one individuals (65% female, median 42 years old) were recruited and grouped into high viral load (VL) >7.5 Log10 copies/mL (n=20), low, VL ≤7.5 Log10 copies/mL (n=22), or as Non-early seroconverters with a positive PCR (n=20), and healthy individuals with a negative PCR (n=9). Individuals with high or low VL showed similar titers of total neutralizing antibodies at day 60, irrespective of maximal VL or viral dynamics. Non-early seroconverters had lower antibody titers on day 60, albeit similar neutralizing activity as the groups with high or low VL. Longer symptom duration and older age were independently associated with increased humoral responses. Conclusions: In mild SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, the duration of symptoms and age (but not VL) contribute to higher humoral responses.

Critical Presentation of a Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Reinfection: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfections have been reported; however, most cases are milder than the primary infection. We report the first case of a life-threatening critical presentation of a SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. METHODS: A 62-year-old man from Palamós (Spain) suffered a first mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) episode in March 2020, confirmed by 2 independent SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays and a normal radiograph. He recovered completely and tested negative on 2 consecutive PCRs. In August 2020, the patient developed a second SARS-CoV-2 infection with life-threatening bilateral pneumonia and Acute respiratory distress syndrome criteria, requiring COVID-19-specific treatment (remdesivir + dexamethasone) plus high-flow oxygen therapy. Nasopharyngeal swabs from the second episode were obtained for virus quantification by real-time PCR, for virus outgrowth and sequencing. In addition, plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells during the hospitalization period were used to determine SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and T-cell responses. RESULTS: Genomic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 showed that the virus had probably originated shortly before symptom onset. When the reinfection occurred, the subject showed a weak immune response, with marginal humoral and specific T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2. All antibody isotypes tested as well as SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies increased sharply after day 8 postsymptoms. A slight increase of T-cell responses was observed at day 19 after symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS: The reinfection was firmly documented and occurred in the absence of robust preexisting humoral and cellular immunity. SARS-CoV-2 immunity in some subjects is unprotective and/or short-lived; therefore, SARS-CoV-2 vaccine schedules inducing long-term immunity will be required to bring the pandemic under control.

High-dose intravenous immunoglobulins might modulate inflammation in COVID-19 patients.

The use of high-dose of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIGs) as immunomodulators for the treatment of COVID-19-affected individuals has shown promising results. IVIG reduced inflammation in these patients, who progressively restored respiratory function. However, little is known about how they may modulate immune responses in COVID-19 individuals. Here, we have analyzed the levels of 41 inflammatory biomarkers in plasma samples obtained at day 0 (pretreatment initiation), 3, 7, and 14 from five hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with a 5-d course of 400 mg/kg/d of IVIG. The plasmatic levels of several cytokines (Tumor Necrosis Factor, IL-10, IL-5, and IL-7), chemokines (macrophage inflammatory protein-1α), growth/tissue repairing factors (hepatic growth factor), complement activation (C5a), and intestinal damage such as Fatty acid-binding protein 2 and LPS-binding protein showed a progressive decreasing trend during the next 2 wk after treatment initiation. This trend was not observed in IVIG-untreated COVID-19 patients. Thus, the administration of high-dose IVIG to hospitalized COVID-19 patients may improve their clinical evolution by modulating their hyperinflammatory and immunosuppressive status.

Pigs are not susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection but are a model for viral immunogenicity studies.

Conventional piglets were inoculated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) through different routes, including intranasal, intratracheal, intramuscular and intravenous ones. Although piglets were not susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 and lacked lesions or viral RNA in tissues/swabs, seroconversion was observed in pigs inoculated parenterally (intramuscularly or intravenously).

Protection against reinfection with D614- or G614-SARS-CoV-2 isolates in golden Syrian hamster.

Reinfections with SARS-CoV-2 have already been documented in humans, although its real incidence is currently unknown. Besides having a great impact on public health, this phenomenon raises the question of immunity generated by a single infection is sufficient to provide sterilizing/protective immunity to a subsequent SARS-CoV-2 re-exposure. The Golden Syrian hamster is a manageable animal model to explore immunological mechanisms able to counteract COVID-19, as it recapitulates pathological aspects of mild to moderately affected patients. Here, we report that SARS-CoV-2-inoculated hamsters resolve infection in the upper and lower respiratory tracts within seven days upon inoculation with the Cat01 (G614) SARS-CoV-2 isolate. Three weeks after the primary challenge, and despite high titres of neutralizing antibodies, half of the animals were susceptible to reinfection by both identical (Cat01, G614) and variant (WA/1, D614) SARS-CoV-2 isolates. However, upon re-inoculation, only nasal tissues were transiently infected with much lower viral replication than those observed after the first inoculation. These data indicate that a primary SARS-CoV-2 infection is not sufficient to elicit a sterilizing immunity in hamster models but protects against lung disease.

Stable neutralizing antibody levels 6 months after mild and severe COVID-19 episodes.

BACKGROUND: Understanding mid-term kinetics of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is the cornerstone for public health control of the pandemic and vaccine development. However, current evidence is rather based on limited measurements, losing sight of the temporal pattern of these changes. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal analysis on a prospective cohort of COVID-19 patients followed up for >6 months. Neutralizing activity was evaluated using HIV reporter pseudoviruses expressing SARS-CoV-2 S protein. IgG antibody titer was evaluated by ELISA against the S2 subunit, the receptor binding domain (RBD), and the nucleoprotein (NP). Statistical analyses were carried out using mixed-effects models. FINDINGS: We found that individuals with mild or asymptomatic infection experienced an insignificant decay in neutralizing activity, which persisted 6 months after symptom onset or diagnosis. Hospitalized individuals showed higher neutralizing titers, which decreased following a 2-phase pattern, with an initial rapid decline that significantly slowed after day 80. Despite this initial decay, neutralizing activity at 6 months remained higher among hospitalized individuals compared to mild symptomatic. The slow decline in neutralizing activity at mid-term contrasted with the steep slope of anti-RBD, S2, or NP antibody titers, all of them showing a constant decline over the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reinforce the hypothesis that the quality of the neutralizing immune response against SARS-CoV-2 evolves over the post-convalescent stage.

SARS-CoV-2 infection elicits a rapid neutralizing antibody response that correlates with disease severity.

The protective effect of neutralizing antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals is not yet well defined. To address this issue, we have analyzed the kinetics of neutralizing antibody responses and their association with disease severity. Between March and May 2020, the prospective KING study enrolled 72 COVID-19+ participants grouped according to disease severity. SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed by serological and virological tests. Plasma neutralizing responses were assessed against replicative virus and pseudoviral particles. Multiple regression and non-parametric tests were used to analyze dependence of parameters. The magnitude of neutralizing titers significantly increased with disease severity. Hospitalized individuals developed higher titers compared to mild-symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals, which together showed titers below the detection limit in 50% of cases. Longitudinal analysis confirmed the strong differences in neutralizing titers between non-hospitalized and hospitalized participants and showed rapid kinetics of appearance of neutralizing antibodies (50% and 80% of maximal activity reached after 11 and 17 days after symptoms onset, respectively) in hospitalized patients. No significant impact of age, gender or treatment on the neutralizing titers was observed in this limited cohort. These data identify a clear association of humoral immunity with disease severity and point to immune mechanisms other than antibodies as relevant players in COVID-19 protection.

Humoral immune responses and neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2; implications in pathogenesis and protective immunity.

The magnitude and the quality of humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 have been associated with clinical outcome. Although the elicitation of humoral responses against different viral proteins is rapid and occurs in most infected individuals, its magnitude is highly variable among them and positively correlates with COVID-19 disease severity. This rapid response is characterized by the almost concomitant appearance of virus-specific IgG, IgA and IgM antibodies that contain neutralizing antibodies directed against different epitopes of the Spike glycoprotein. Of particularly interest, the antibodies against domain of the Spike that interacts with the cellular receptor ACE2, known as the receptor binding domain (RBD), are present in most infected individuals and are block viral entry and infectivity. Such neutralizing antibodies protect different animal species when administered before virus exposure; therefore, its elicitation is the main target of current vaccine approaches and their clinical use as recombinant monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is being explored. Yet, little information exists on the duration of humoral responses during natural infection. This is a key issue that will impact the management of the pandemic and determine the utility of seroconversion studies and the level of herd immunity. Certainly, several cases of reinfection have been reported, suggesting that immunity could be transient, as reported for other coronaviruses. In summary, although the kinetics of the generation of antibodies against SASR-CoV-2 and their protective activity have been clearly defined, their role in COVID-19 pathogenesis and the length of these responses are still open questions.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in a cat owned by a COVID-19-affected patient in Spain.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiological agent of COVID-19, is considered a zoonotic pathogen mainly transmitted human to human. Few reports indicate that pets may be exposed to the virus. The present report describes a cat suffering from severe respiratory distress and thrombocytopenia living with a family with several members affected by COVID-19. Clinical signs of the cat prompted humanitarian euthanasia and a detailed postmortem investigation to assess whether a COVID-19-like disease was causing the condition. Necropsy results showed the animal suffered from feline hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and severe pulmonary edema and thrombosis. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was only detected in nasal swab, nasal turbinates, and mesenteric lymph node, but no evidence of histopathological lesions compatible with a viral infection were detected. The cat seroconverted against SARS-CoV-2, further evidencing a productive infection in this animal. We conclude that the animal had a subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infection concomitant to an unrelated cardiomyopathy that led to euthanasia.