ABSTRACT
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein is the main antigen in all approved COVID-19 vaccines and is also the only target for monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies. Immune responses to other viral antigens are generated after SARS-CoV-2 infection, but their contribution to the antiviral response remains unclear. Here, we interrogated whether nucleocapsid-specific antibodies can improve protection against SARS-CoV-2. We first immunized mice with a nucleocapsid-based vaccine and then transferred sera from these mice into naive mice, followed by challenge with SARS-CoV-2. We show that mice that received nucleocapsid-specific sera or a nucleocapsid-specific mAb exhibited enhanced control of SARS-CoV-2. Nucleocapsid-specific antibodies elicited NK-mediated, antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) against infected cells. To our knowledge, these findings provide the first demonstration in the coronavirus literature that antibody responses specific to the nucleocapsid protein can improve viral clearance, providing a rationale for the clinical evaluation of nucleocapsid-based mAb therapies to treat COVID-19.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal , COVID-19 , Nucleocapsid , Animals , Mice , Antibodies, Monoclonal/pharmacology , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines , Nucleocapsid/immunology , SARS-CoV-2 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunologyABSTRACT
Serological and plasmablast responses and plasmablast-derived IgG monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have been analysed in three COVID-19 patients with different clinical severities. Potent humoral responses were detected within 3 weeks of onset of illness in all patients and the serological titre was elicited soon after or concomitantly with peripheral plasmablast response. An average of 13.7% and 3.5% of plasmablast-derived MAbs were reactive with virus spike glycoprotein or nucleocapsid, respectively. A subset of anti-spike (10 of 32) antibodies cross-reacted with other betacoronaviruses tested and harboured extensive somatic mutations, indicative of an expansion of memory B cells upon SARS-CoV-2 infection. Fourteen of 32 anti-spike MAbs, including five anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD), three anti-non-RBD S1 and six anti-S2, neutralised wild-type SARS-CoV-2 in independent assays. Anti-RBD MAbs were further grouped into four cross-inhibiting clusters, of which six antibodies from three separate clusters blocked the binding of RBD to ACE2 and five were neutralising. All ACE2-blocking anti-RBD antibodies were isolated from two recovered patients with prolonged fever, which is compatible with substantial ACE2-blocking response in their sera. Finally, the identification of non-competing pairs of neutralising antibodies would offer potential templates for the development of prophylactic and therapeutic agents against SARS-CoV-2.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/antagonists & inhibitors , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/immunology , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/genetics , Antibody-Producing Cells/immunology , Binding Sites , Epitopes , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Nucleocapsid/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunologyABSTRACT
The majority of infections with SARS-CoV-2 are asymptomatic or mild without the necessity of hospitalization. It is of importance to reveal if these patients develop an antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 and to define which antibodies confer virus neutralization. We conducted a comprehensive serological survey of 49 patients with a mild course of disease and quantified neutralizing antibody responses against a clinical SARS-CoV-2 isolate employing human cells as targets. Four patients (8%), even though symptomatic, did not develop antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, and two other patients (4%) were positive in only one of the six serological assays employed. For the remaining 88%, antibody response against the S protein correlated with serum neutralization whereas antibodies against the nucleocapsid were poor predictors of virus neutralization. None of the sera enhanced infection of human cells with SARS-CoV-2 at any dilution, arguing against antibody-dependent enhancement of infection in our system. Regarding neutralization, only six patients (12%) could be classified as high neutralizers. Furthermore, sera from several individuals with fairly high antibody levels had only poor neutralizing activity. In addition, employing a novel serological Western blot system to characterize antibody responses against seasonal coronaviruses, we found that antibodies against the seasonal coronavirus 229E might contribute to SARS-CoV-2 neutralization. Altogether, we show that there is a wide breadth of antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 in patients that differentially correlate with virus neutralization. This highlights the difficulty to define reliable surrogate markers for immunity against SARS-CoV-2.IMPORTANCE There is strong interest in the nature of the neutralizing antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 in infected individuals. For vaccine development, it is especially important which antibodies confer protection against SARS-CoV-2, if there is a phenomenon called antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection, and if there is cross-protection by antibodies directed against seasonal coronaviruses. We addressed these questions and found in accordance with other studies that neutralization is mediated mainly by antibodies directed against the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 in general and the receptor binding site in particular. In our test system, utilizing human cells for infection experiments, we did not detect ADE. However, using a novel diagnostic test we found that antibodies against the coronavirus 229E might be involved in cross-protection to SARS-CoV-2.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antibody Formation/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibody-Dependent Enhancement/immunology , Binding Sites/immunology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Neutralization Tests/methods , Nucleocapsid/immunology , Seasons , Serologic Tests/methods , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Vaccines/immunologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel member of the coronavirus family that caused the global coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The prevalence remains largely unknown because of early testing supply shortages. Although it cannot currently be used to determine level of immunity, antibody testing can contribute to epidemiological studies, identify convalescent plasma donors, or satisfy curiosity about previous exposure to the virus. METHODS: 407 samples collected from hospitalized inpatients with and without a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 170 remnant clinical specimens collected and frozen prior to the COVID-19 outbreak, and paired serum and plasma samples from 23 convalescent plasma donors were used to determine performance characteristics of the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG and Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays. The sensitivity, specificity, imprecision, interferences, and sample stability were determined. These assays were then used to characterize the antibody response in serial samples from 20 SARS-CoV-2 positive inpatients. RESULTS: Both assays exhibited 100% specificity (95% CI; 99.05-100.00), giving no positive results in 170 specimens collected before July 2019 and 215 specimens from patients without a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Differences between platforms were most notable in SARS-CoV-2 positive samples. Roche offered higher sensitivity in convalescent plasma donors at 95.7% (95% CI; 78.1-99.9) versus 91.3% (95% CI; 72.0-98.9) but Abbott detected antibodies in 2 immunocompromised patients whereas Roche did not. The Roche and Abbott platforms also exhibited different trends in antibody signal for a subset of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Both the Abbott and Roche platforms offer excellent specificity but different trends in antibody signal may reflect qualitative differences in the types of antibodies recognized by the 2 assays. Negative serologic results do not exclude previous SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing/instrumentation , COVID-19/diagnosis , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/isolation & purification , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Nucleocapsid/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sensitivity and Specificity , SeroconversionABSTRACT
The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has previously never been identified with humans, thereby creating devastation in public health. The need for an effective vaccine to curb this pandemic cannot be overemphasized. In view of this, we designed a subcomponent antigenic peptide vaccine targeting the N-terminal (NT) and C-terminal (CT) RNA binding domains of the nucleocapsid protein that aid in viral replication. Promising antigenic B cell and T cell epitopes were predicted using computational pipelines. The peptides "RIRGGDGKMKDL" and "AFGRRGPEQTQGNFG" were the B cell linear epitopes with good antigenic index and nonallergenic property. Two CD8+ and Three CD4+ T cell epitopes were also selected considering their safe immunogenic profiling such as allergenicity, antigen level conservancy, antigenicity, peptide toxicity, and putative restrictions to a number of MHC-I and MHC-II alleles. With these selected epitopes, a nonallergenic chimeric peptide vaccine incapable of inducing a type II hypersensitivity reaction was constructed. The molecular interaction between the Toll-like receptor-5 (TLR5) which was triggered by the vaccine was analyzed by molecular docking and scrutinized using dynamics simulation. Finally, in silico cloning was performed to ensure the expression and translation efficiency of the vaccine, utilizing the pET-28a vector. This research, therefore, provides a guide for experimental investigation and validation.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , Nucleocapsid/immunology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Viral Vaccines/immunology , CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , COVID-19 , Epitopes, B-Lymphocyte/genetics , Epitopes, B-Lymphocyte/immunology , Epitopes, T-Lymphocyte/genetics , Epitopes, T-Lymphocyte/immunology , Humans , Molecular Docking Simulation , Molecular Dynamics Simulation , Nucleocapsid Proteins/metabolism , RNA Recognition Motif Proteins/immunology , RNA-Binding Motifs/immunology , SARS-CoV-2 , Toll-Like Receptor 5/metabolism , Vaccines, Attenuated/immunology , Vaccines, Subunit/immunologyABSTRACT
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has created an unprecedented need for rapid diagnostic testing to enable the efficient treatment and mitigation of COVID-19. The primary diagnostic tool currently employed is reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), which can have good sensitivity and excellent specificity. Unfortunately, implementation costs and logistical problems with reagents during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have hindered its universal on demand adoption. Lateral flow assays (LFAs) represent a class of diagnostic that, if sufficiently clinically sensitive, may fill many of the gaps in the current RT-PCR testing regime, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To date, many serology LFAs have been developed, though none meet the performance requirements necessary for diagnostic use cases, primarily due to the relatively long delay between infection and seroconversion. However, on the basis of previously reported results from SARS-CoV-1, antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 assays may have significantly better clinical sensitivity than serology assays. To date, only a very small number of antigen-detecting LFAs have been developed. Development of a half-strip LFA is a useful first step in the development of any LFA format. In this work, we present a half-strip LFA using commercially available antibodies for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. We have tested this LFA in buffer and measured an LOD of 0.65 ng/mL (95% CI of 0.53 to 0.77 ng/mL) ng/mL with recombinant antigen using an optical reader with sensitivity equivalent to a visual read. Further development, including evaluating the appropriate sample matrix, will be required for this assay approach to be made useful in a point of care setting, though this half-strip LFA may serve as a useful starting point for others developing similar tests.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/metabolism , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Immunoassay/methods , Nucleocapsid/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Point-of-Care Systems , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antigens/immunology , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Limit of Detection , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Evaluation of potential immunity against the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus that emerged in 2019 (SARS-CoV-2) is essential for health, as well as social and economic recovery. Generation of antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 (seroconversion) may inform on acquired immunity from prior exposure, and antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor binding domain (S-RBD) are speculated to neutralize virus infection. Some serology assays rely solely on SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein (N-protein) as the antibody detection antigen; however, whether such immune responses correlate with S-RBD response and COVID-19 immunity remains unknown. Here, we generated a quantitative serological ELISA using recombinant S-RBD and N-protein for the detection of circulating antibodies in 138 serial serum samples from 30 reverse transcription PCR-confirmed, SARS-CoV-2-hospitalized patients, as well as 464 healthy and non-COVID-19 serum samples that were collected between June 2017 and June 2020. Quantitative detection of IgG antibodies against the 2 different viral proteins showed a moderate correlation. Antibodies against N-protein were detected at a rate of 3.6% in healthy and non-COVID-19 sera collected during the pandemic in 2020, whereas 1.9% of these sera were positive for S-RBD. Approximately 86% of individuals positive for S-RBD-binding antibodies exhibited neutralizing capacity, but only 74% of N-protein-positive individuals exhibited neutralizing capacity. Collectively, our studies show that detection of N-protein-binding antibodies does not always correlate with presence of S-RBD-neutralizing antibodies and caution against the extensive use of N-protein-based serology testing for determination of potential COVID-19 immunity.