CD4+ and CD8+ T cell and antibody correlates of protection against Delta vaccine breakthrough infection: A nested case-control study within the PITCH study (preprint)

T cell correlates of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination ('vaccine breakthrough') are incompletely defined, especially the specific contributions of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. We studied 279 volunteers in the Protective Immunity from T Cells in Healthcare Workers (PITCH) UK study, including 32 cases (with SARS-CoV-2 positive testing after two vaccine doses during the Delta-dominant era) and 247 controls (no positive test nor anti-nucleocapsid seroconversion during this period). 28 days after second vaccination, before all breakthroughs occurred, cases had lower ancestral S- and RBD-specific immunoglobulin G titres and S1- and S2-specific T cell interferon gamma (IFN{gamma}) responses compared with controls. In a subset of matched cases and controls, cases had lower CD4+ and CD8+ IFN{gamma} and tumour necrosis factor responses to Delta S peptides with reduced CD8+ responses to Delta versus ancestral peptides compared with controls. Our findings support a protective role for T cells against Delta breakthrough infection.

Omicron BA.1/BA.2 infections in triple-vaccinated individuals enhance a diverse repertoire of mucosal and blood immune responses (preprint)

Pronounced immune escape by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has resulted in large numbers of individuals with hybrid immunity, generated through a combination of vaccination and infection. Based primarily on circulating neutralizing antibody (NAb) data, concerns have been raised that omicron breakthrough infections in triple-vaccinated individuals result in poor induction of omicron-specific immunity, and that a history of prior SARS-CoV-2 in particular is associated with profound immune dampening. Taking a broader and comprehensive approach, we characterized mucosal and blood immunity to both spike and non-spike antigens following BA.1/BA.2 infections in triple mRNA-vaccinated individuals, with and without a history of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. We find that the majority of individuals increase BA.1/BA.2/BA.5-specific NAb following infection, but confirm that the magnitude of increase and post-omicron titres are indeed higher in those who were infection-naive. In contrast, significant increases in nasal antibody responses are seen regardless of prior infection history, including neutralizing activity against BA.5 spike. Spike-specific T cells increase only in infection-naive vaccinees; however, post-omicron T cell responses are still significantly higher in previously-infected individuals, who appear to have maximally induced responses with a CD8+ phenotype of high cytotoxic potential after their 3rd mRNA vaccine dose. Antibody and T cell responses to non-spike antigens also increase significantly regardless of prior infection status, with a boost seen in previously-infected individuals to immunity primed by their first infection. These findings suggest that hybrid immunity induced by omicron breakthrough infections is highly dynamic, complex, and compartmentalised, with significant immune enhancement that can help protect against COVID-19 caused by future omicron variants.

Evolution of long-term hybrid immunity in healthcare workers after different COVID-19 vaccination regimens: a longitudinal observational cohort study (preprint)

Both infection and vaccination, alone or in combination, generate antibody and T cell responses against SARS-CoV-2. However, the maintenance of such responses - and hence protection from disease - requires careful characterisation. In a large prospective study of UK healthcare workers (PITCH, within the larger SIREN study) we previously observed that prior infection impacted strongly on subsequent cellular and humoral immunity induced after long and short dosing intervals of BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) vaccination. Here, we report longer follow up of 684 HCWs in this cohort over 6-9 months following two doses of BNT162b2 or AZ1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) vaccination and following a subsequent BNT162b2 booster vaccination. We make three important observations: Firstly, the dynamics of humoral and cellular responses differ; binding and neutralising antibodies declined whereas T and B cell responses were better maintained after the second vaccine dose. Secondly, vaccine boosting restored IgG levels to post second dose levels and broadened neutralising activity against variants of concern including omicron BA.1, alongside further boosting of T cell responses. Thirdly, prior infection maintained its impact driving larger T cell responses compared to never infected people, including after the third dose. In conclusion, the maintenance of T cell responses in time and against variants of concern may account for continued protection against severe disease.

Comparison of two T cell assays to evaluate T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following vaccination in naive and convalescent healthcare workers (preprint)

Background: T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following infection and vaccination are less characterised than antibody responses, due to a more complex experimental pathway. Methods: We measured T cell responses in 108 healthcare workers (HCWs) in an observational cohort study, using the commercialised Oxford Immunotec T-SPOT Discovery SARS-CoV-2 assay (OI T-SPOT) and the PITCH ELISpot protocol established for academic research settings. Results: Both assays detected T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike, membrane and nucleocapsid proteins. Responses were significantly lower when reported by OI T-SPOT than by PITCH ELISpot. Four weeks after two doses of either Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 AZD1222 vaccine, the responder rate was 63% for OI T-SPOT Panels1+2 (peptides representing SARS-CoV-2 spike protein excluding regions present in seasonal coronaviruses), 69% for OI T-SPOT Panel 14 (peptides representing the entire SARS-CoV-2 spike), and 94% for the PITCH ELISpot assay. The two OI T-SPOT panels correlated strongly with each other showing that either readout quantifies spike-specific T cell responses, although the correlation between the OI T-SPOT panels and the PITCH ELISpot was moderate. Conclusion: The standardisation, relative scalability and longer interval between blood acquisition and processing are advantages of the commercial OI T-SPOT assay. However, the OI T-SPOT assay measures T cell responses at a significantly lower magnitude compared to the PITCH ELISpot assay, detecting T cell responses in a lower proportion of vaccinees. This has implications for the reporting of low-level T cell responses that may be observed in patient populations and for the assessment of T cell durability after vaccination.