Complement activation predicts negative outcomes in COVID-19: The experience from Northen Italian patients.

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) may present as a multi-organ disease with a hyperinflammatory and prothrombotic response (immunothrombosis) in addition to upper and lower airway involvement. Previous data showed that complement activation plays a role in immunothrombosis mainly in severe forms. The study aimed to investigate whether complement involvement is present in the early phases of the disease and can be predictive of a negative outcome. We enrolled 97 symptomatic patients with a positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 presenting to the emergency room. The patients with mild symptoms/lung involvement at CT-scan were discharged and the remaining were hospitalized. All the patients were evaluated after a 4-week follow-up and classified as mild (n. 54), moderate (n. 17) or severe COVID-19 (n. 26). Blood samples collected before starting any anti-inflammatory/immunosuppressive therapy were assessed for soluble C5b-9 (sC5b-9) and C5a plasma levels by ELISA, and for the following serum mediators by ELLA: IL-1ß, IL-6, IL-8, TNFα, IL-4, IL-10, IL-12p70, IFNγ, IFNα, VEGF-A, VEGF-B, GM-CSF, IL-2, IL-17A, VEGFR2, BLyS. Additional routine laboratory parameters were measured (fibrin fragment D-dimer, C-reactive protein, ferritin, white blood cells, neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, platelets, prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, and fibrinogen). Fifty age and sex-matched healthy controls were also evaluated. SC5b-9 and C5a plasma levels were significantly increased in the hospitalized patients (moderate and severe) in comparison with the non-hospitalized mild group. SC5b9 and C5a plasma levels were predictive of the disease severity evaluated one month later. IL-6, IL-8, TNFα, IL-10 and complement split products were higher in moderate/severe versus non-hospitalized mild COVID-19 patients and healthy controls but with a huge heterogeneity. SC5b-9 and C5a plasma levels correlated positively with CRP, ferritin values and the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio. Complement can be activated in the very early phases of the disease, even in mild non-hospitalized patients. Complement activation can be observed even when pro-inflammatory cytokines are not increased, and predicts a negative outcome.

Anti-Phospholipid Antibodies and Coronavirus Disease 2019: Vaccination Does Not Trigger Early Autoantibody Production in Healthcare Workers.

A molecular mimicry between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and human proteins supports the possibility that autoimmunity takes place during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contributing to tissue damage. For example, anti-phospholipid antibodies (aPL) have been reported in COVID-19 as a result of such mimicry and thought to contribute to the immunothrombosis characteristic of the disease. Consistently, active immunization with the virus spike protein may elicit the production of cross-reactive autoantibodies, including aPL. We prospectively looked at the aPL production in healthcare workers vaccinated with RNA- (BNT162b2, n. 100) or adenovirus-based vaccines (ChAdOx1, n. 50). Anti-cardiolipin, anti-beta2 glycoprotein I, anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgA, and IgM before and after vaccination were investigated. Anti-platelet factor 4 immunoglobulins were also investigated as autoantibodies associated with COVID-19 vaccination. Additional organ (anti-thyroid) and non-organ (anti-nuclear) autoantibodies and IgG against human proteome were tested as further post-vaccination autoimmunity markers. The antibodies were tested one or three months after the first injection of ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2, respectively; a 12-month clinical follow-up was also performed. Vaccination occasionally induced low titers of aPL and other autoantibodies but did not affect the titer of pre-existing autoantibodies. No significant reactivities against a microarray of approximately 20,000 human proteins were found in a subgroup of ChAdOx1-vaccinees. Consistently, we did not record any clinical manifestation theoretically associated with an underlying autoimmune disorder. The data obtained after the vaccination (two doses for the RNA-based and one dose for the adenovirus-based vaccines), and the clinical follow-up are not supporting the occurrence of an early autoimmune response in this cohort of healthcare workers.

Clinical and peculiar immunological manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection in systemic lupus erythematosus patients.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in patients with SLE remains unclear and data on clinical manifestations after infection are lacking. The aim of this multicentre study is to describe the effect of SARS-CoV-2 in SLE patients. METHODS: SLE patients referring to four Italian centres were monitored between February 2020 and March 2021. All patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Disease characteristics, treatment, disease activity and SARS-CoV-2-related symptoms were recorded before and after the infection. RESULTS: Fifty-one (6.14%) SLE patients were included among 830 who were regularly followed up. Nine (17.6%) had an asymptomatic infection and 5 (9.8%) out of 42 (82.6%) symptomatic patients developed interstitial pneumonia (no identified risk factor). The presence of SLE major organ involvement (particularly renal involvement) was associated with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (P = 0.02). Chronic corticosteroid therapy was found to be associated with asymptomatic infection (P = 0.018). Three SLE flares (5.9%) were developed after SARS-CoV-2 infection: one of them was characterized by MPO-ANCA-positive pauci-immune crescentic necrotizing glomerulonephritis and granulomatous pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infection determined autoimmune flares in a small number of patients. Our data seem to confirm that there was not an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 in SLE. Patients with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections were those having major SLE organ involvement. This may be explained by the high doses of corticosteroids and immunosuppressive agents used for SLE treatment.

Anti-Phospholipid Antibodies in COVID-19 Are Different From Those Detectable in the Anti-Phospholipid Syndrome.

Background: Critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have a profound hypercoagulable state and often develop coagulopathy which leads to organ failure and death. Because of a prolonged activated partial-thromboplastin time (aPTT), a relationship with anti-phospholipid antibodies (aPLs) has been proposed, but results are controversial. Functional assays for aPL (i.e., lupus anticoagulant) can be influenced by concomitant anticoagulation and/or high levels of C reactive protein. The presence of anti-cardiolipin (aCL), anti-beta2-glycoprotein I (anti-ß2GPI), and anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin (aPS/PT) antibodies was not investigated systematically. Epitope specificity of anti-ß2GPI antibodies was not reported. Objective: To evaluate the prevalence and the clinical association of aPL in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients, and to characterize the epitope specificity of anti-ß2GPI antibodies. Methods: ELISA and chemiluminescence assays were used to test 122 sera of patients suffering from severe COVID-19. Of them, 16 displayed major thrombotic events. Results: Anti-ß2GPI IgG/IgA/IgM was the most frequent in 15.6/6.6/9.0% of patients, while aCL IgG/IgM was detected in 5.7/6.6% by ELISA. Comparable values were found by chemiluminescence. aPS/PT IgG/IgM were detectable in 2.5 and 9.8% by ELISA. No association between thrombosis and aPL was found. Reactivity against domain 1 and 4-5 of ß2GPI was limited to 3/58 (5.2%) tested sera for each domain and did not correlate with aCL/anti-ß2GPI nor with thrombosis. Conclusions: aPL show a low prevalence in COVID-19 patients and are not associated with major thrombotic events. aPL in COVID-19 patients are mainly directed against ß2GPI but display an epitope specificity different from antibodies in antiphospholipid syndrome.