Search

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving in-centre hemodialysis are at high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and death if infected. One dose of the BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is efficacious in the general population, but responses in patients receiving hemodialysis are uncertain. METHODS: We obtained serial plasma from patients receiving hemodialysis and health care worker controls before and after vaccination with 1 dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, as well as convalescent plasma from patients receiving hemodialysis who survived COVID-19. We measured anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels and stratified groups by evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Our study included 154 patients receiving hemodialysis (135 without and 19 with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection), 40 controls (20 without and 20 with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection) and convalescent plasma from 16 patients. Among those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, anti-RBD IgG was undetectable at 4 weeks in 75 of 131 (57%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 47% to 65%) patients receiving hemodialysis, compared with 1 of 20 (5%, 95% CI 1% to 23%) controls (p < 0.001). No patient with nondetectable levels at 4 weeks developed anti-RBD IgG by 8 weeks. Results were similar in non-immunosuppressed and younger individuals. Three patients receiving hemodialysis developed severe COVID-19 after vaccination. Among those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, median anti-RBD IgG levels at 8 weeks in patients receiving hemodialysis were similar to controls at 3 weeks (p = 0.3) and to convalescent plasma (p = 0.8). INTERPRETATION: A single dose of BNT162b2 vaccine failed to elicit a humoral immune response in most patients receiving hemodialysis without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, even after prolonged observation. In those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, the antibody response was delayed. We advise that patients receiving hemodialysis be prioritized for a second BNT162b2 dose at the recommended 3-week interval.

The evaluation of humoral protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 remains crucial in understanding both natural immunity and protective immunity conferred by the several vaccines implemented in the fight against COVID-19. The reference standard for the quantification of antibodies capable of neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 is the plaque-reduction neutralization test (PRNT). However, given that it is a laboratory-developed assay, validation is crucial in order to ensure sufficient specificity and intra- and interassay precision. In addition, a multitude of other serological assays have been developed, including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), flow cytometry-based assays, luciferase-based lentiviral pseudotype assays, and commercially available human ACE2 receptor-blocking antibody tests, which offer practical advantages in the evaluation of the protective humoral response against SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we validated a SARS-CoV-2 PRNT to assess both 50% and 90% neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 according to guidelines outlined by the World Health Organization. Upon validation, the reference-standard PRNT demonstrated excellent specificity and both intra- and interassay precision. Using the validated assay as a reference standard, we characterized the neutralizing antibody response in specimens from patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Finally, we conducted a small-scale multilaboratory comparison of alternate SARS-CoV-2 PRNTs and surrogate neutralization tests. These assays demonstrated substantial to perfect interrater agreement with the reference-standard PRNT and offer useful alternatives to assess humoral immunity against SARS-CoV-2. IMPORTANCE SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent of COVID-19, has infected over 246 million people and led to over 5 million deaths as of October 2021. With the approval of several efficacious COVID-19 vaccines, methods to evaluate protective immune responses will be crucial for the understanding of long-term immunity in the rapidly growing vaccinated population. The PRNT, which quantifies SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies, is used widely as a reference standard to validate new platforms but has not undergone substantial validation to ensure excellent inter- and intraassay precision and specificity. Our work is significant, as it describes the thorough validation of a PRNT, which we then used as a reference standard for the comparison of several alternative serological methods to measure SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies. These assays demonstrated excellent agreement with the reference-standard PRNT and include high-throughput platforms, which can greatly enhance capacity to assess both natural and vaccine-induced protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2.

The standard regimen of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 includes two doses administered three weeks apart. However, some public health authorities spaced these doses, raising questions about efficacy. We analyzed longitudinal humoral responses against the D614G strain and variants of concern for SARS-CoV-2 in a cohort of SARS-CoV-2 naïve and previously infected individuals who received the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine with sixteen weeks between doses. While administering a second dose to previously infected individuals did not significantly improve humoral responses, these responses significantly increased in naïve individuals after a 16-week spaced second dose, achieving similar levels as in previously infected individuals. Comparing these responses to those elicited in individuals receiving a short (4-week) dose interval showed that a 16-week interval induced more robust responses among naïve vaccines. These findings suggest that longer interval between vaccine doses does not compromise efficacy and may allow greater flexibility in vaccine administration., Graphical Abstract, Tauzin et al. characterize longitudinal humoral responses induced with an extended BNT162b2 vaccine interval between doses. They show that delaying the second dose in naïve individuals elicits higher humoral responses than in those receiving a four-week interval. Vaccinated convalescent individuals present higher responses that don’t improve after a boost.

SummaryEmerging evidence in animal models indicate that both neutralizing activity and Fc- mediated effector functions of neutralizing antibodies contribute to protection against SARS-CoV-2. It is unclear if antibody effector functions alone could protect against SARS-CoV-2. Here we isolated CV3-13, a non-neutralizing antibody from a convalescent individual with potent Fc-mediated effector functions that targeted the N- terminal domain (NTD) of SARS-CoV-2 Spike. The cryo-EM structure of CV3-13 in complex with SAR-CoV-2 spike revealed that the antibody bound from a distinct angle of approach to a novel NTD epitope that partially overlapped with a frequently mutated NTD supersite in SARS-CoV-2 variants. While CV3-13 did not alter the replication dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in a K18-hACE2 transgenic mouse model, an Fc-enhanced CV3-13 significantly delayed neuroinvasion and death in prophylactic settings. Thus, we demonstrate that efficient Fc-mediated effector functions can contribute to the in vivo efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies in the absence of neutralization.

While the standard regimen of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 includes two doses administered three weeks apart, some public health authorities are spacing these doses, raising concerns about efficacy. However, data indicate that a single dose can be up to 90% effective starting 14 days post administration. To assess the mechanisms contributing to protection, we analyzed humoral and T cell responses three weeks after a single BNT162b2 dose. We observed weak neutralizing activity elicited in SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals but strong anti-receptor binding domain and Spike antibodies with Fc-mediated effector functions and cellular CD4+ T cell responses. In previously-infected individuals, a single dose boosted all humoral and T-cell responses, with strong correlations between T helper and antibody immunity. Our results highlight the potential role of Fc-mediated effector functions and T-cell responses in vaccine efficacy. They also provide support for spacing doses to vaccinate more individuals in conditions of vaccine scarcity., Graphical Abstract, Tauzin, Nayrac et al., characterize humoral and cellular responses three weeks after a single dose of mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine. They show, in SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals, that the antibodies elicited have weak neutralizing activity but potent Fc-mediated effector functions and, in SARS-CoV-2 previously infected individuals, that all responses are significantly boosted.

BackgroundPatients receiving in-center hemodialysis (HD) are at high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 with high mortality, and response to vaccination is uncertain.MethodsWe obtained serial plasma from 58 HD patients and 32 health-care workers (HCW) before and after vaccination with one dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine; as well as convalescent plasma from 11 HD patients who survived COVID-19. Anti-RBD (region binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein) IgG and IgM levels were measured by ELISA. Groups were stratified by evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsIn HD patients without prior SARS-CoV-2, antiRBD levels were significantly lower at 4 and 8 weeks after vaccination, compared to in HCWs after 3 weeks (pInterpretationWhile the BNT162b2 vaccine was well-tolerated in hemodialysis patients, a single dose failed to elicit a humoral immune response in the majority of SARS-CoV-2 naïve patients even after prolonged observation. In those with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, the humoral response after vaccination was delayed. Whether HD patients develop T-cell responses requires further study. Until then, we advise the second dose be administered to all HD patients at the recommended 3-week time interval, and that rigorous SARS-CoV-2 infection prevention and control measures be continued in dialysis units until vaccine efficacy is proven.

SUMMARYNeutralizing antibodies (NAbs) are effective in treating COVID-19 but the mechanism of immune protection is not fully understood. Here, we applied live bioluminescence imaging (BLI) to monitor the real-time effects of NAb treatment in prophylaxis and therapy of K18-hACE2 mice intranasally infected with SARS-CoV-2-nanoluciferase. We could visualize virus spread sequentially from the nasal cavity to the lungs and thereafter systemically to various organs including the brain, which culminated in death. Highly potent NAbs from a COVID-19 convalescent subject prevented, and also effectively resolved, established infection when administered within three days. In addition to direct Fab-mediated neutralization, Fc effector interactions of NAbs with monocytes, neutrophils and natural killer cells were required to effectively dampen inflammatory responses and limit immunopathology. Our study highlights that both Fab and Fc effector functions of NAbs are essential for optimalin vivoefficacy against SARS-CoV-2.

The standard dosing of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine validated in clinical trials includes two doses administered three weeks apart. While the decision by some public health authorities to space the doses because of limiting supply has raised concerns about vaccine efficacy, data indicate that a single dose is up to 90% effective starting 14 days after its administration. We analyzed humoral and T cells responses three weeks after a single dose of this mRNA vaccine. Despite the proven efficacy of the vaccine at this time point, no neutralizing activity were elicited in SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals. However, we detected strong anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) and Spike antibodies with Fc-mediated effector functions and cellular responses dominated by the CD4+ T cell component. A single dose of this mRNA vaccine to individuals previously infected by SARS-CoV-2 boosted all humoral and T cell responses measured, with strong correlations between T helper and antibody immunity. Neutralizing responses were increased in both potency and breadth, with distinctive capacity to neutralize emerging variant strains. Our results highlight the importance of vaccinating uninfected and previously-infected individuals and shed new light into the potential role of Fc-mediated effector functions and T cell responses in vaccine efficacy. They also provide support to spacing the doses of two-vaccine regimens to vaccinate a larger pool of the population in the context of vaccine scarcity against SARS-CoV-2.

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 surrogate neutralization assays that obviate the need for viral culture offer substantial advantages regarding throughput and cost. The cPass SARS-CoV-2 Neutralization Antibody Detection Kit (Genscript) is the first such commercially available assay, detecting antibodies that block RBD/ACE-2 interaction. We aimed to evaluate cPass to inform its use and assess its added value compared to anti-RBD ELISA assays.MethodsSerum reference panels comprising 205 specimens were used to compare cPass to plaque-reduction neutralization test (PRNT) and a pseudotyped lentiviral neutralization (PLV) assay for detection of neutralizing antibodies. We assessed the correlation of cPass with an ELISA detecting anti-RBD IgG, IgM, and IgA antibodies at a single timepoint and across intervals from onset of symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsCompared to PRNT-50, cPass sensitivity ranged from 77% - 100% and specificity was 95% - 100%. Sensitivity was also high compared to the pseudotyped lentiviral neutralization assay (93% [95%CI 85-97]), but specificity was lower (58% [95%CI 48-67]). Highest agreement between cPass and ELISA was for anti-RBD IgG (r=0.823). Against the pseudotyped lentiviral neutralization assay, anti-RBD IgG sensitivity (99% [95%CI 94-100]) was very similar to that of cPass, but overall specificity was lower (37% [95%CI 28-47]). Against PRNT-50, results of cPass and anti-RBD IgG were nearly identical.ConclusionsThe added value of cPass compared to an IgG anti-RBD ELISA was modest.

With the recent approval of highly effective COVID-19 vaccines, functional and lasting immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is currently under investigation as antibody levels in plasma were shown to decline during convalescence. Since the absence of antibodies does not equate to absence of immune memory, we evaluate the presence of SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B cells in convalescent individuals. Here we report a longitudinal assessment of humoral immune responses on 32 donors up to 8 months post-symptom onset. Our observations indicate that anti-Spike and anti-RBD IgM in plasma decay rapidly, whereas the reduction of IgG is less prominent. Neutralizing activity also declines rapidly when compared to Fc-effector functions. Concomitantly, the frequencies of RBD-specific IgM+ B cells wane significantly when compared to RBD-specific IgG+ B cells which remain stable. Our results add to the current understanding of immune memory following SARS-CoV-2 infection, which is critical for the prevention of secondary infections and vaccine efficacy., Graphical Abstract, In a cohort of SARS-CoV-2 recovered individuals, Anand et al. observe a concomitant decrease of IgM and neutralization while IgG and Fc-effector functions remain relatively stable. The presence and persistence of antigen-specific memory B cells in all individuals is encouraging with regards to long-term immunity.

Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) are effective in treating COVID-19 but the mechanism of immune protection is not fully understood. Here, we applied live bioluminescence imaging (BLI) to monitor the real-time effects of NAb treatment in prophylaxis and therapy of K18-hACE2 mice intranasally infected with SARS-CoV-2-nanoluciferase. We visualized sequential spread of virus from the nasal cavity to the lungs followed by systemic spread to various organs including the brain, culminating in death. Highly potent NAbs from a COVID-19 convalescent subject prevented, and also effectively resolved, established infection when administered within three days of infection. In addition to direct neutralization, in vivo efficacy required Fc effector functions of NAbs, with contributions from monocytes, neutrophils and natural killer cells, to dampen inflammatory responses and limit immunopathology. Thus, our study highlights the requirement of both Fab and Fc effector functions for an optimal in vivo efficacy afforded by NAbs against SARS-CoV-2. Funding: This work was supported by NIH grants P50AI150464 to WM and PJB; R33AI122384 and RO1AI145164 to PK; George Mason University Fast Grants to MSL and PJB; P20GM125498 (awarded to UVM Translational Global Infectious Disease Research Center) to EAB; le Ministere de l’Economie et de l’Innovation du Quebec, Programmede soutien aux organismes de recherche et d’innovation, Foundation du CHUM, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) foundation grant #352417 & Rapid Research Funding Opportunity #FRN440388 to JDD and G.A.D, Canada Research Chair on Retroviral Entry no.RCHS0235 950-232424 to AF; Canada’s COVID-19 Immunity Task Force (CITF) & Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) #41027 to AF and DEK & #36287 to JDD. and GAD; FRQS Merit Research Scholarship to DEK; CIHR fellowships to JP, SPA and GBB,MITACS Acceleration postdoctoral fellowship to RG; Fred Hutch COVID-19 Research Fund to LS and ATM. Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethical Approval: PBMCs from healthy individuals as a source of effector cells in our ADCC assay were obtained under CRCHUM institutional review board (protocol #19.381). Research adhered to the standards indicated by the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants were adults and provided informed written consent prior to enrollment in accordance with Institutional Review Board approval. All experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC) of and Institutional Biosafety Committee of Yale University (IBSCYU). All standard operating procedures and protocols for IVIS imaging of SARS-CoV-2 infected animals under ABSL-3 conditions were approved by IACUC, IBSCYU and YARC.

Convalescent plasma from SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals and monoclonal antibodies were shown to potently neutralize viral and pseudoviral particles carrying the S glycoprotein. However, a non-negligent proportion of plasma samples from infected individuals as well as S-specific monoclonal antibodies were reported to be non-neutralizing despite efficient interaction with the S glycoprotein in different biochemical assays using soluble recombinant forms of S or when expressed at the cell surface. How neutralization relates to binding of S glycoprotein in the context of viral particles remains to be established. Here we developed a pseudovirus capture assay (VCA) to measure the capacity of plasma samples or antibodies immobilized on ELISA plates to bind to membrane-bound S glycoproteins from SARS-CoV-2 expressed at the surface of lentiviral particles. By performing VCA and neutralization assays we observed a strong correlation between these two parameters. However, while we found that plasma samples unable to capture viral particles did not neutralize, capture did not guarantee neutralization, indicating that the capacity of antibodies to bind to the S glycoprotein at the surface of viral particles is required but not sufficient to mediate neutralization. Altogether, our results highlights the importance of better understanding the inactivation of S by plasma and neutralizing antibodies.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus is responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, infecting millions of people and causing hundreds of thousands of deaths. The Spike glycoproteins of SARS-CoV-2 mediates viral entry and is the main target for neutralizing antibodies. Understanding the antibody response directed against SARS-CoV-2 is crucial for the development of vaccine, therapeutic and public health interventions. Here we perform a cross-sectional study on 106 different SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals to evaluate humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 Spike. The vast majority of infected individuals elicits anti-Spike antibodies within 2 weeks after the onset of symptoms. The levels of receptor-binding domain (RBD)-specific IgG persist overtime, while the levels of anti-RBD IgM decrease after symptoms resolution. While most of individuals develop neutralizing antibodies within two weeks of infection, the level of neutralizing activity is significantly decreased over time. Our results highlight the importance of studying the persistence of neutralizing activity upon natural SARS-CoV-2 infection., Graphical Abstract, Highlights • Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Spike correlate with COVID-19 disease severity • RBD-specific IgM and IgA decline more rapidly than IgG • SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies are elicited within two weeks of infection • Neutralizing antibodies decline significantly after resolution of the infection

Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) are effective in treating COVID-19, but the mechanism of immune protection is not fully understood. Here, we applied live bioluminescence imaging (BLI) to monitor the real-time effects of NAb treatment during prophylaxis and therapy of K18-hACE2 mice intranasally infected with SARS-CoV-2-nanoluciferase. Real-time imaging revealed that the virus spread sequentially from the nasal cavity to the lungs in mice and thereafter systemically to various organs including the brain, culminating in death. Highly potent NAbs from a COVID-19 convalescent subject prevented, and also effectively resolved, established infection when administered within three days. In addition to direct neutralization, depletion studies indicated that Fc effector interactions of NAbs with monocytes, neutrophils, and natural killer cells were required to effectively dampen inflammatory responses and limit immunopathology. Our study highlights that both Fab and Fc effector functions of NAbs are essential for optimal in vivo efficacy against SARS-CoV-2.