Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22272669

ABSTRACT

The combination of cilgavimab-tixagevimab (Evusheld, Astra Zeneca) became the mainstay for protecting transplant recipients with poor response to vaccination against the omicron variant. Serum neutralizing capacity against SARS-CoV-2 is positively associated with protection against severe forms of Covid-19. Both anti-RBD IgG titers and neutralizing antibody titers against the omicron BA.1 variant were measured in serum samples collected from 63 adult kidney transplant recipients who received prophylactic injections of Evusheld. Patients who received prophylactic Ronapreve (casirivimab-imdevimab, n = 39) and those who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the fifth wave of the pandemic (n = 14) served as negative and positive controls, respectively. After a median interval from injection of 29 days (interquartile range 29-33 days), only 9.5% of patients who received Evusheld were able to neutralize the omicron variant compared to 71% of patients who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and 2.6% of those who received Ronapreve. Interestingly, convalescent patients displayed higher levels of neutralizing antibodies than those who received EvusheldTM (median: 2.3 log IC50, IQR: 1.5-2.7 versus 0.00 log IC50, IQR: 0&[ndash] 0.05; p<0.001). A high interindividual variability in anti-RBD IgG titers was observed after Evusheld (range: 262-7032 BAU/mL). This variability was largely explained by the patientsbody mass index, which showed an inverse correlation with anti-RBD IgG titers. These findings suggest that Evusheld given at a dose of 300 mg is not sufficient to elicit an anti-RDB titer that confers in vivo neutralizing activity and support recent FDA recommendations, derived from in vitro models, regarding the need to increase the dose of Evusheld

2.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22272575

ABSTRACT

While the combination of casirivimab-imdevimab (Ronapreve Roche Regeneron) has been shown to confer satisfactory protection against the delta variant kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with COVID-19, it has limited neutralizing activity against the current variants of concern (Omicron BA.1, BA.1.1 and BA.2). In contrast, cilgavimab-tixagevimab combination (Evusheld, Astra Zeneca) retains a partial neutralizing activity against omicron in vitro. We examined whether preexposure prophylaxis with Evusheld can effectively protect kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) against the Omicron variant. Of the 416 KTRs who received intramuscular prophylactic injections of Evusheld (150 mg tixagevimab and 150 mg cilgavimab), 39 (9.4%) developed COVID-19. With the exception of one patient, all KTRs were symptomatic. Hospitalization and admission to an intensive care unit were required for 14 (35.9%) and three patients, respectively. Two KTRs died of COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome. SARS-CoV-2 sequencing was carried out in 15 cases (BA.1, n = 5; BA.1.1, n = 9; BA.2, n=1). Viral neutralizing activity of the serum against BA.1 variant was negative in the 12 tested patients, suggesting that this prophylaxis strategy provides insufficient protection against this variant of concern. Preexposure prophylaxis with Evusheld does not adequately protect KTRs against Omicron. Further clarification of the optimal dosing can assist in our understanding of how best to harness its protective potential.

3.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21266252

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTIONThe objectives of this study were to assess the dynamics of the SARS-CoV-2 anti-RBD IgG response over time among older people after COVID-19 infection or vaccination and its comparison with speculative levels of protection assumed by current data. METHODSFrom November 2020 to October 2021, we included geriatric patients with serological test results for COVID-19. We considered antibody titre thresholds thought to be high enough to protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection: 141 BAU/ml for protection/vaccine efficacy > 89.3%. Three cohorts are presented. A vaccine group (n=34) that received two BNT162b2/Comirnaty injections 21 days apart, a group of natural COVID-19 infection (n=32) and a third group who contracted COVID-19 less than 15 days after the first BNT162b2/Comirnaty injection (n=17). RESULTS83 patients were included, the median age was 87 (81-91) years. In the vaccine group at 1 month since the first vaccination, the median BAU/ml with IQR was 620 (217-1874) with 87% of patients above the threshold of 141 BAU/ml. Seven months after the first vaccination the BAU/ml was 30 (19-58) with 9.5% of patients above the threshold of 141 BAU/ml. In the natural COVID-19 infection group, at 1 month since the date of first symptom onset, the median BAU/ml was 798 (325-1320) with 86.7% of patients above the threshold of 141 BAU/ml and fell to 88 (37-385) with 42.9% of patients above the threshold of 141 BAU/ml at 2 months. The natural infection group was vaccinated three months after the infection. Five months after the end of the vaccination cycle the BAU/ml was 2048 (471-4386) with 83.3% of patients above the threshold of 141 BAU/ml. DISCUSSIONOn the humoral level, this supports the clinical results describing the decrease in vaccine protection over time.

4.
Preprint in English | bioRxiv | ID: ppbiorxiv-445838

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617 lineage emerged in October 2020 in India1-6. It has since then become dominant in some indian regions and further spread to many countries. The lineage includes three main subtypes (B1.617.1, B.1617.2 and B.1.617.3), which harbour diverse Spike mutations in the N-terminal domain (NTD) and the receptor binding domain (RBD) which may increase their immune evasion potential. B.1.617.2 is believed to spread faster than the other versions. Here, we isolated infectious B.1.617.2 from a traveller returning from India. We examined its sensitivity to monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and to antibodies present in sera from COVID-19 convalescent individuals or vaccine recipients, in comparison to other viral lineages. B.1.617.2 was resistant to neutralization by some anti-NTD and anti-RBD mAbs, including Bamlanivimab, which were impaired in binding to the B.1.617.2 Spike. Sera from convalescent patients collected up to 12 months post symptoms and from Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine recipients were 3 to 6 fold less potent against B.1.617.2, relative to B.1.1.7. Sera from individuals having received one dose of AstraZeneca Vaxzevria barely inhibited B.1.617.2. Thus, B.1.617.2 spread is associated with an escape to antibodies targeting non-RBD and RBD Spike epitopes.

5.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21256823

ABSTRACT

Assessment of the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is essential to predict protection against reinfection and durability of vaccine protection. Here, we longitudinally measured Spike (S) and Nucleocapsid (N)-specific antibodies in 1,309 healthcare workers (HCW) including 393 convalescent COVID-19 and 916 COVID-19 negative HCW up to 405 days. From M1 to M7-9 after infection, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies decreased moderately in convalescent HCW in a biphasic model, with men showing a slower decay of anti-N (p=0.02), and a faster decay of anti-S (p=0.0008) than women. At M11-13, anti-N antibodies dramatically decreased (half-life: 210 days) while anti-S stabilized (half-life: 630 days) at a median of 2.41 log Arbitrary Units (AU)/mL (Interquartile Range (IQR): 2.11 -2.75). One case of reinfection was recorded in convalescent HCW (0.47 per 100 person-years) versus 50 in COVID-19 negative HCW (10.11 per 100 person-years). Correlation with live-virus neutralization assay revealed that variants D614G and B.1.1.7, but not B.1.351, were sensitive to anti-S antibodies at 2.3 log AU/mL, while IgG [≥] 3 log AU/mL neutralized all three variants. After SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, anti-S levels reached 4 logs regardless of pre-vaccination IgG levels, type of vaccine, and number of doses. Our study demonstrates a long-term persistence of anti-S IgG antibodies that may protect against reinfection. By significantly increasing cross-neutralizing antibody titers, a single-dose vaccination strengthens protection against escape mutants.

6.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21252532

ABSTRACT

Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) induces a complex antibody response that varies by orders of magnitude between individuals and over time. Waning antibody levels lead to reduced sensitivity of serological diagnostic tests over time. This undermines the utility of serological surveillance as the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic progresses into its second year. Here we develop a multiplex serological test for measuring antibodies of three isotypes (IgG, IgM, IgA) to five SARS-CoV-2 antigens (Spike (S), receptor binding domain (RBD), Nucleocapsid (N), Spike subunit 2, Membrane-Envelope fusion) and the Spike proteins of four seasonal coronaviruses. We measure antibody responses in several cohorts of French and Irish hospitalized patients and healthcare workers followed for up to eleven months after symptom onset. The data are analysed with a mathematical model of antibody kinetics to quantify the duration of antibody responses accounting for inter-individual variation. One year after symptoms, we estimate that 36% (95% range: 11%, 94%) of anti-S IgG remains, 31% (9%, 89%) anti-RBD IgG remains, and 7% (1%, 31%) anti-N IgG remains. Antibodies of the IgM isotype waned more rapidly, with 9% (2%, 32%) anti-RBD IgM remaining after one year. Antibodies of the IgA isotype also waned rapidly, with 10% (3%, 38%) anti-RBD IgA remaining after one year. Quantitative measurements of antibody responses were used to train machine learning algorithms for classification of previous infection and estimation of time since infection. The resulting diagnostic test classified previous infections with 99% specificity and 98% (95% confidence interval: 94%, 99%) sensitivity, with no evidence for declining sensitivity over the time scale considered. The diagnostic test also provided accurate classification of time since infection into intervals of 0 - 3 months, 3 - 6 months, and 6 - 12 months. Finally, we present a computational method for serological reconstruction of past SARS-CoV-2 transmission using the data from this test when applied to samples from a single cross-sectional sero-prevalence survey.

7.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20230466

ABSTRACT

The evolution of SARS-CoV-2 humoral response in infected individuals remains poorly characterized. Here, we performed a longitudinal study of sera from 308 RT-qPCR+ individuals with mild disease, collected at two time-points, up to 6 months post-onset of symptoms (POS). We performed two anti-S and one anti-N serology assays and quantified neutralizing antibodies (NAbs). At month 1 (M1), males, individuals > 50 years of age or with a body mass index (BMI) > 25 exhibited higher levels of antibodies. Antibody levels decreased over time. At M3-6, anti-S antibodies persisted in 99% of individuals while anti-N IgG were measurable in only 59% of individuals. The decline in anti-S and NAbs was faster in males than in females, independently of age and BMI. Our results show that some serology tests are less reliable overtime and suggest that the duration of protection after SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination will be different in women and men.

8.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20132449

ABSTRACT

BackgroundIn the background of the current COVID-19 pandemic, serological tests are being used to assess past infection and immunity against SARS-CoV-2. This knowledge is paramount to determine the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 through the post pandemic period. Several individuals belonging to households with an index COVID-19 patient, reported symptoms of COVID-19 but discrepant serology results. MethodsHere we investigated the humoral and cellular immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 in seven families, including nine index patients and eight contacts, who had evidence of serological discordances within the households. Ten unexposed healthy donors were enrolled as controls. ResultsAll index patients recovered from a mild COVID-19. They all developed anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and a significant T cell response detectable up to 69 days after symptom onset. Six of the eight contacts reported COVID-19 symptoms within 1 to 7 days after the index patients but all were SARS-CoV-2 seronegative. Six out of eight contacts developed a SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response against structural and/or accessory proteins that lasts up to 80 days post symptom onset suggesting a past SARS-CoV-2 infection. ConclusionExposure to SARS-CoV-2 can induce virus-specific T cell responses without seroconversion. T cell responses may be more sensitive indicators of SARS-Co-V-2 exposure than antibodies. Our results indicate that epidemiological data relying only on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies may lead to a substantial underestimation of prior exposure to the virus.

9.
Preprint in English | bioRxiv | ID: ppbiorxiv-156166

ABSTRACT

Rapid and accurate diagnosis is crucial for successful outbreak containment. During the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency, the gold standard for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection diagnosis is the detection of viral RNA by reverse transcription (RT)-PCR. Additional diagnostic methods enabling the detection of current or past SARS-CoV-2 infection would be highly beneficial to ensure the timely diagnosis of all infected and recovered patients. Here, we investigated several serological tools, i.e., two immunochromatographic lateral flow assays (LFA-1 (Biosynex COVID-19 BSS) and LFA-2 (COVID-19 Sign IgM/IgG)) and two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) detecting IgA (ELISA-1 Euroimmun), IgM (ELISA-2 EDI) and/or IgG (ELISA-1 and ELISA-2) based on well-characterized panels of serum samples from patients and healthcare workers with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 and from SARS-CoV-2-negative patients. A total of 272 serum samples were used, including 62 serum samples from hospitalized patients (panel 1 and panel 3), 143 serum samples from healthcare workers (panel 2) diagnosed with COVID-19 and 67 serum samples from negative controls. Diagnostic performances of each assay were assessed according to days after symptom onset (dso) and the antigenic format used by manufacturers. We found overall sensitivities ranging from 69% to 93% on panels 1 and 2 and specificities ranging from 83% to 98%. The clinical sensitivity varied greatly according to the panel tested and the dso. The assays we tested showed poor mutual agreement. A thorough selection of serological assays for the detection of ongoing or past infections is advisable.

10.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20132076

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread widely, causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and significant mortality. However, data on viral loads and antibody kinetics in immunocompromised populations are lacking. We aimed to determine nasopharyngeal and plasma viral loads via RT-PCR and SARS-CoV-2 serology via ELISA and study their association with severe forms of COVID-19 and death in kidney transplant recipients. In this study we examined hospitalized kidney transplant recipients with non-severe (n = 21) and severe (n =19) COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal and plasma viral load and serological response were evaluated based on outcomes and disease severity. Ten recipients (25%) displayed persistent viral shedding 30 days after symptom onset. The SARS-CoV-2 viral load of the upper respiratory tract was not associated with severe COVID-19, whereas the plasma viral load was associated with COVID-19 severity (p=0.0087) and mortality (p=0.024). All patients harbored antibodies the second week after symptom onset that persisted for two months. We conclude that plasma viral load is associated with COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, whereas nasopharyngeal viral load is not. SARS-CoV-2 shedding is prolonged in kidney transplant recipients and the humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 does not show significant impairment in this series of transplant recipients.

11.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20101832

ABSTRACT

BackgroundThe serologic response of individuals with mild forms of SARS-CoV-2 infection is poorly characterized. MethodsHospital staff who had recovered from mild forms of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using two assays: a rapid immunodiagnostic test (99.4% specificity) and the S-Flow assay ([~]99% specificity).The neutralizing activity of the sera was tested with a pseudovirus-based assay. ResultsOf 162 hospital staff who participated in the investigation, 160 reported SARS-CoV-2 infection that had not required hospital admission and were included in these analyses. The median time from symptom onset to blood sample collection was 24 days (IQR: 21-28, range 13-39). The rapid immunodiagnostic test detected antibodies in 153 (95.6%) of the samples and the S-Flow assay in 159 (99.4%), failing to detect antibodies in one sample collected 18 days after symptom onset (the rapid test did not detect antibodies in that patient). Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) were detected in 79%, 92% and 98% of samples collected 13-20, 21-27 and 28-41 days after symptom onset, respectively (P=0.02). ConclusionAntibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were detected in virtually all hospital staff sampled from 13 days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. This finding supports the use of serologic testing for the diagnosis of individuals who have recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection. The neutralizing activity of the antibodies increased overtime. Future studies will help assess the persistence of the humoral response and its associated neutralization capacity in recovered patients.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL