Understanding how antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 evolve during infection may provide important insight into therapeutic approaches and vaccination for COVID-19. Here we profile the antibody responses of 162 COVID-19 symptomatic patients in the COVID-BioB cohort followed longitudinally for up to eight months from symptom onset to find SARS-CoV-2 neutralization, as well as antibodies either recognizing SARS-CoV-2 spike antigens and nucleoprotein, or specific for S2 antigen of seasonal beta-coronaviruses and hemagglutinin of the H1N1 flu virus. The presence of neutralizing antibodies within the first weeks from symptoms onset correlates with time to a negative swab result (p = 0.002), while the lack of neutralizing capacity correlates with an increased risk of a fatal outcome (p = 0.008). Neutralizing antibody titers progressively drop after 5–8 weeks but are still detectable up to 8 months in the majority of recovered patients regardless of age or co-morbidities, with IgG to spike antigens providing the best correlate of neutralization. Antibody responses to seasonal coronaviruses are temporarily boosted, and parallel those to SARS-CoV-2 without dampening the specific response or worsening disease progression. Our results thus suggest compromised immune responses to the SARS-CoV-2 spike to be a major trait of COVID-19 patients with critical conditions, and thereby inform on the planning of COVID-19 patient care and therapy prioritization.
Significance
There is growing evidence that preexisting autoantibodies neutralizing type I interferons (IFNs) are strong determinants of life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia. It is important to estimate their quantitative impact on COVID-19 mortality upon SARS-CoV-2 infection, by age and sex, as both the prevalence of these autoantibodies and the risk of COVID-19 death increase with age and are higher in men. Using an unvaccinated sample of 1,261 deceased patients and 34,159 individuals from the general population, we found that autoantibodies against type I IFNs strongly increased the SARS-CoV-2 infection fatality rate at all ages, in both men and women. Autoantibodies against type I IFNs are strong and common predictors of life-threatening COVID-19. Testing for these autoantibodies should be considered in the general population.
BACKGROUND
The Islet Autoantibody Standardization Program (IASP) aims to improve the performance of immunoassays measuring type 1 diabetes (T1D)-associated autoantibodies and the concordance of results among laboratories. IASP organizes international interlaboratory assay comparison studies in which blinded serum samples are distributed to participating laboratories, followed by centralized collection and analysis of results, providing participants with an unbiased comparative assessment. In this report, we describe the results of glutamic acid decarboxylase autoantibody (GADA) assays presented in the IASP 2018 workshop.
METHODS
In May 2018, IASP distributed to participants uniquely coded sera from 43 new-onset T1D patients, 7 multiple autoantibody-positive nondiabetic individuals, and 90 blood donors. Results were analyzed for the following metrics: sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, area under the ROC curve (ROC-AUC), partial ROC-AUC at 95% specificity (pAUC95), and concordance of qualitative and quantitative results.
RESULTS
Thirty-seven laboratories submitted results from a total of 48 different GADA assays adopting 9 different formats. The median ROC-AUC and pAUC95 of all assays were 0.87 [interquartile range (IQR), 0.83–0.89] and 0.036 (IQR, 0.032–0.039), respectively. Large differences in pAUC95 (range, 0.001–0.0411) were observed across assays. Of formats widely adopted, bridge ELISAs showed the best median pAUC95 (0.039; range, 0.036–0.041).
CONCLUSIONS
Several novel assay formats submitted to this study showed heterogeneous performance. In 2018, the majority of the best performing GADA immunoassays consisted of novel or established nonradioactive tests that proved on a par or superior to the radiobinding assay, the previous gold standard assay format for GADA measurement.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.