Pan-immunoglobulin assays can simultaneously detect IgG, IgM and IgA directed against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the S1 subunit of the spike protein (S) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 S1-RBD Ig). In this work, we aim to evaluate a quantitative SARS-CoV-2 S1-RBD Ig electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) regarding analytical, diagnostic, operational and clinical characteristics. Our work takes the form of a population-based study in the principality of Liechtenstein, including 125 cases with clinically well-described and laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and 1159 individuals without evidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). SARS-CoV-2 cases were tested for antibodies in sera taken with a median of 48 days (interquartile range, IQR, 43–52) and 139 days (IQR, 129–144) after symptom onset. Sera were also tested with other assays targeting antibodies against non-RBD-S1 and -S1/S2 epitopes. Sensitivity was 97.6% (95% confidence interval, CI, 93.2–99.1), whereas specificity was 99.8% (95% CI, 99.4–99.9). Antibody levels linearly decreased from hospitalized patients to symptomatic outpatients and SARS-CoV-2 infection without symptoms (p < 0.001). Among cases with SARS-CoV-2 infection, smokers had lower antibody levels than non-smokers (p = 0.04), and patients with fever had higher antibody levels than patients without fever (p = 0.001). Pan-SARS-CoV-2 S1-RBD Ig in SARS-CoV-2 infection cases significantly increased from first to second follow-up (p < 0.001). A substantial proportion of individuals without evidence of past SARS-CoV-2 infection displayed non-S1-RBD antibody reactivities (248/1159, i.e., 21.4%, 95% CI, 19.1–23.4). In conclusion, a quantitative SARS-CoV-2 S1-RBD Ig assay offers favorable and sustained assay characteristics allowing the determination of quantitative associations between clinical characteristics (e.g., disease severity, smoking or fever) and antibody levels. The assay could also help to identify individuals with antibodies of non-S1-RBD specificity with potential clinical cross-reactivity to SARS-CoV-2.

No abstract

PurposeDecreased production of the aqueous component of the tear film is an important cause of the development of dry eye disease (DED). Tear production is influenced by hormones and hormone-like factors. Prolactin (PLR), a multifunctional pituitary gland hormone, is regularly present in the lacrimal gland of rats and rabbits. In humans, serum PLR concentration correlates with tear quality. To gain deeper insights of possible effects of PRL, prolactin receptor (PRLR) and prolactin inducible protein (PIP), we analyzed the three proteins in the human lacrimal apparatus and in reflex tears of healthy volunteers as well as patients suffering from DED.MethodsGene expression of PRLR and PIP was analyzed by RT-PCR in cadaveric human lacrimal gland and ocular surface tissues, immortalized human corneal epithelial cells (HCE and hTEPI) and human Meibomian gland epithelial cells (HMGECs). At the protein level, the expression and localization of PRL, PRLR and PIP in formalin-fixed paraffin sections of the lacrimal apparatus were studied by immunohistochemistry. In addition, tear fluid from DED patients and healthy volunteers was analyzed by ELISA to determine the concentration of PRL and PIP.ResultsRT-PCR analyses revealed gene expression of PRLR and PIP in human tissue samples of cornea, lacrimal glands, and eyelids, whereas only PIP, but not PRLR, was detectable in immortalized corneal epithelial cells. Immunohistochemistry revealed for the first time the expression and localization of PRL, PRLR, and PIP in human tissues of the lacrimal apparatus and at the ocular surface. PRL and PRLR were detectable in corneal epithelium, lacrimal glands, and Meibomian glands. Reflex tears from DED patients revealed significantly increased PIP concentrations, whereas PRL was undetectable in tears of DED patients and healthy volunteers.ConclusionPRL, PRLR, and PIP are found in the lacrimal apparatus and on the ocular surface. PIP, but not PRL, is present in human tears and appears to be involved in the physiology of tear film quality. Our clinical data revealed that PIP may affect tear quality, but further functional analyses are needed to fully elucidate the effects of PRL and PIP-associated factors in tear secretion as well as in the connection of DED.

No abstract