Effective DNA damage response after acute but not chronic immune challenge: SARS-CoV-2 vaccine versus Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Whether and how an acute immune challenge may affect DNA Damage Response (DDR) is unknown. By studying vaccinations against Influenza and SARS-CoV-2 (mRNA-based) we found acute increases of type-I interferon-inducible gene expression, oxidative stress and DNA damage accumulation in blood mononuclear cells of 9 healthy controls, coupled with effective anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody production in all. Increased DNA damage after SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, partly due to increased oxidative stress, was transient, whereas the inherent DNA repair capacity was found intact. In contrast, in 26 patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, who served as controls in the context of chronic immune activation, we validated increased DNA damage accumulation, increased type-I interferon-inducible gene expression and induction of oxidative stress, however aberrant DDR was associated with deficiencies in nucleotide excision repair pathways. These results indicate that acute immune challenge can indeed activate DDR pathways, whereas, contrary to chronic immune challenge, successful repair of DNA lesions occurs.

Efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Covid-19 Vaccine against the B.1.351 Variant.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the safety and efficacy of vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in different populations is essential, as is investigation of the efficacy of the vaccines against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including the B.1.351 (501Y.V2) variant first identified in South Africa. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) in people not infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in South Africa. Participants 18 to less than 65 years of age were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses of vaccine containing 5×1010 viral particles or placebo (0.9% sodium chloride solution) 21 to 35 days apart. Serum samples obtained from 25 participants after the second dose were tested by pseudovirus and live-virus neutralization assays against the original D614G virus and the B.1.351 variant. The primary end points were safety and efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic coronavirus 2019 illness (Covid-19) more than 14 days after the second dose. RESULTS: Between June 24 and November 9, 2020, we enrolled 2026 HIV-negative adults (median age, 30 years); 1010 and 1011 participants received at least one dose of placebo or vaccine, respectively. Both the pseudovirus and the live-virus neutralization assays showed greater resistance to the B.1.351 variant in serum samples obtained from vaccine recipients than in samples from placebo recipients. In the primary end-point analysis, mild-to-moderate Covid-19 developed in 23 of 717 placebo recipients (3.2%) and in 19 of 750 vaccine recipients (2.5%), for an efficacy of 21.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], -49.9 to 59.8). Among the 42 participants with Covid-19, 39 cases (95.1% of 41 with sequencing data) were caused by the B.1.351 variant; vaccine efficacy against this variant, analyzed as a secondary end point, was 10.4% (95% CI, -76.8 to 54.8). The incidence of serious adverse events was balanced between the vaccine and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: A two-dose regimen of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine did not show protection against mild-to-moderate Covid-19 due to the B.1.351 variant. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04444674; Pan African Clinical Trials Registry number, PACTR202006922165132).

Comorbid illnesses are associated with altered adaptive immune responses to SARS-CoV-2.

Comorbid medical illnesses, such as obesity and diabetes, are associated with more severe COVID-19, hospitalization, and death. However, the role of the immune system in mediating these clinical outcomes has not been determined. We used multiparameter flow cytometry and systems serology to comprehensively profile the functions of T cells and antibodies targeting spike, nucleocapsid, and envelope proteins in a convalescent cohort of COVID-19 subjects who were either hospitalized (n = 20) or not hospitalized (n = 40). To avoid confounding, subjects were matched by age, sex, ethnicity, and date of symptom onset. Surprisingly, we found that the magnitude and functional breadth of virus-specific CD4+ T cell and antibody responses were consistently higher among hospitalized subjects, particularly those with medical comorbidities. However, an integrated analysis identified more coordination between polyfunctional CD4+ T cells and antibodies targeting the S1 domain of spike among subjects who were not hospitalized. These data reveal a functionally diverse and coordinated response between T cells and antibodies targeting SARS-CoV-2, which is reduced in the presence of comorbid illnesses that are known risk factors for severe COVID-19.

COVID-19, varying genetic resistance to viral disease and immune tolerance checkpoints.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a zoonosis like most of the great plagues sculpting human history, from smallpox to pandemic influenza and human immunodeficiency virus. When viruses jump into a new species the outcome of infection ranges from asymptomatic to lethal, historically ascribed to "genetic resistance to viral disease." People have exploited these differences for good and bad, for developing vaccines from cowpox and horsepox virus, controlling rabbit plagues with myxoma virus and introducing smallpox during colonization of America and Australia. Differences in resistance to viral disease are at the core of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) crisis, yet our understanding of the mechanisms in any interspecies leap falls short of the mark. Here I review how the two key parameters of viral disease are countered by fundamentally different genetic mechanisms for resistance: (1) virus transmission, countered primarily by activation of innate and adaptive immune responses; and (2) pathology, countered primarily by tolerance checkpoints to limit innate and adaptive immune responses. I discuss tolerance thresholds and the role of CD8 T cells to limit pathological immune responses, the problems posed by tolerant superspreaders and the signature coronavirus evasion strategy of eliciting only short-lived neutralizing antibody responses. Pinpointing and targeting the mechanisms responsible for varying pathology and short-lived antibody were beyond reach in previous zoonoses, but this time we are armed with genomic technologies and more knowledge of immune checkpoint genes. These known unknowns must now be tackled to solve the current COVID-19 crisis and the inevitable zoonoses to follow.