Mucosal immune response after the booster dose of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine.

BACKGROUND: To date, only a few studies reported data regarding the development of mucosal immune response after the BNT162b2-booster vaccination. METHODS: Samples of both serum and saliva of 50 healthcare workers were collected at the day of the booster dose (T3) and after two weeks (T4). Anti-S1-protein IgG and IgA antibody titres and the neutralizing antibodies against the Wuhan wild-type Receptor-Binding Domain in both serum and saliva were measured by quantitative and competitive ELISA, respectively. Data were compared with those recorded after the primary vaccination cycle (T2). Neutralizing antibodies against the variants of concern were measured in those individuals with anti-Wuhan neutralizing antibodies in their saliva. FINDINGS: After eight months from the second dose, IgG decreased in both serum (T2GMC: 23,838.5 ng/ml; T3GMC: 1473.8 ng/ml) and saliva (T2GMC: 12.9 ng/ml; T3GMC: 0.3 ng/ml). Consistently, serum IgA decreased (T2GMC: 48.6 ng/ml; T3GMC: 6.4 ng/ml); however, salivary IgA showed a different behaviour and increased (T2GMC: 0.06 ng/ml; T3GMC: 0.41 ng/ml), indicating a delayed activation of mucosal immunity. The booster elicited higher titres of both IgG and IgA when compared with the primary cycle, in both serum (IgG T4GMC: 98,493.9 ng/ml; IgA T4GMC: 187.5 ng/ml) and saliva (IgG T4GMC: 21.9 ng/ml; IgA T4GMC: 0.65 ng/ml). Moreover, the booster re-established the neutralizing activity in the serum of all individuals, not only against the Wuhan wild-type antigen (N = 50; INH: 91.6%) but also against the variants (Delta INH: 91.3%; Delta Plus INH: 89.8%; Omicron BA.1 INH: 85.1%). By contrast, the salivary neutralizing activity was high against the Wuhan antigen in 72% of individuals (N = 36, INH: 62.2%), but decreased against the variants, especially against the Omicron BA.1 variant (Delta N = 27, INH: 43.1%; Delta Plus N = 24, INH: 35.2%; Omicron BA.1 N = 4; INH: 4.7%). This was suggestive for a different behaviour of systemic immunity observed in serum with respect to mucosal immunity described in saliva (Wald chi-square test, 3 df of interaction between variants and sample type = 308.2, p < 0.0001). INTERPRETATION: The BNT162b2-booster vaccination elicits a strong systemic immune response but fails in activating an effective mucosal immunity against the Omicron BA.1 variant. FUNDING: This work was funded by the Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Insubria, and supported by Fondazione Umberto Veronesi (COVID-19 Insieme per la ricerca di tutti, 2020), Italy.

Mucosal immune response in BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine recipients.

BACKGROUND: Although the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine is known to induce IgG neutralizing antibodies in serum protecting against COVID-19, it has not been studied in detail whether it could generate specific immunity at mucosal sites, which represent the primary route of entry of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Samples of serum and saliva of 60 BNT162b2-vaccinated healthcare workers were collected at baseline, two weeks after the first dose and two weeks after the second dose. Anti-S1-protein IgG and IgA total antibodies titres and the presence of neutralizing antibodies against the Receptor Binding Domain in both serum and saliva were measured by quantitative and by competitive ELISA, respectively. FINDINGS: Complete vaccination cycle generates a high serum IgG antibody titre as a single dose in previously infected seropositive individuals. Serum IgA concentration reaches a plateau after a single dose in seropositive individuals and two vaccine doses in seronegative subjects. After the second dose IgA level was higher in seronegative than in seropositive subjects. In saliva, IgG level is almost two orders of magnitude lower than in serum, reaching the highest values after the second dose. IgA concentration remains low and increases significantly only in seropositive individuals after the second dose. Neutralizing antibody titres were much higher in serum than in saliva. INTERPRETATION: The mRNA BNT162b2 vaccination elicits a strong systemic immune response by drastically boosting neutralizing antibodies development in serum, but not in saliva, indicating that at least oral mucosal immunity is poorly activated by this vaccination protocol, thus failing in limiting virus acquisition upon its entry through this route. FUNDING: This work was funded by the Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Insubria, and partially supported by Fondazione Umberto Veronesi (COVID-19 Insieme per la ricerca di tutti, 2020).

SARS-CoV-2 on Ocular Surfaces in a Cohort of Patients With COVID-19 From the Lombardy Region, Italy.

Importance: Since February 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly all over the world, with an epidemiological cluster in Lombardy, Italy. The viral communicability may be mediated by various body fluids, but insufficient information is available on the presence of the virus in human tears. Objectives: To investigate the rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in tears collected from patients with COVID-19 by means of real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assay and to assess the association of virus presence with concomitant clinical conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional study conducted between April 9 and May 5, 2020. The setting was intensive care units at Azienda Socio-Sanitaria Territoriale (ASST) Sette-Laghi Hospital, University of Insubria, in Varese, Lombardy, Italy. A conjunctival swab was performed in 91 patients hospitalized for COVID-19, which was clinically diagnosed by rRT-PCR assay on nasopharyngeal swabs and by radiological imaging. Conjunctival swabs from 17 additional healthy volunteer participants with no symptoms of COVID-19 were examined to evaluate the availability and applicability of the conjunctival swab test. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 detection by means of rRT-PCR assay performed on the collected samples obtained by conjunctival swabs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Conjunctival swab and nasopharyngeal swab results are reported, as well as demographic and clinical data. Results: A total of 108 participants (mean [SD] age, 58.7 [14.2] years; 55 female and 53 male) were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using rRT-PCR assay, including 91 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and 17 were healthy volunteers. SARS-CoV-2 was found on the ocular surface in 52 of 91 patients with COVID-19 (57.1%; 95% CI, 46.3%-67.5%), with a wide variability in the mean viral load from both eyes. Among a subset of 41 patients, concordance of 63.0% (95% CI, 41.0%-81.0%) was found between positive conjunctival and nasopharyngeal swab test results when performed within 2 days of each other. In 17 of these patients, nasopharyngeal swab results were negative for SARS-CoV-2. In 10 of these 17 patients, conjunctival swab results were positive for the virus. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was found on the ocular surface in a large part of this cohort of patients with COVID-19, although the infectivity of this material could not be determined. Because patients may have positive test results with a conjunctival swab and negative results with a nasopharyngeal swab, use of the slightly invasive conjunctival swab may be considered as a supplementary diagnostic test.

Saliva is a reliable tool to detect SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVES: This study analyzed salivary samples of COVID-19 patients and compared the results with their clinical and laboratory data. METHODS: Salivary samples of 25 COVID-19 patients were analyzed by rRT-PCR. The following data were collected: age, sex, comorbidities, drugs. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and ultrasensitive reactive C protein (usRCP) values were registered on the same day when a salivary swab was collected. Prevalence of positivity in saliva and association between clinical data and the cycle threshold as a semiquantitative indicator of viral load were considered. RESULTS: Twenty-five subjects were recruited into this study, 17 males and 8 females. The mean age was 61.5 +/- 11.2 years. Cardiovascular and/or dysmetabolic disorders were observed in 65.22% of cases. All the samples tested positive for the presence of SARS-CoV-2, while there was an inverse association between LDH and Ct values. Two patients showed positive salivary results on the same days when their pharyngeal or respiratory swabs showed conversion. CONCLUSIONS: Saliva is a reliable tool to detect SARS-CoV-2. The role of saliva in COVID-19 diagnosis could not be limited to a qualitative detection of the virus, but it may also provide information about the clinical evolution of the disease.