Relative Ratios of Human Seasonal Coronavirus Antibodies Predict the Efficiency of Cross-Neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Binding to ACE2

Galipeau, Yannick; Siragam, Vinayakumar; Laroche, Geneviève; Marion, Erika; Greig, Matthew; McGuinty, Michaeline; Booth, Ronald A.; Durocher, Yves; Čuperlović-Culf, Miroslava; Bennett, Steffany A. L.; Crawley, Angela M.; Giguère, Patrick M.; Cooper, Curtis; Langlois, Marc‐André

doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103700

Cited by 47 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the MN assay represents the gold standard for neutralizing antibody detection, this assay requires biosafety containment Level 3 and, thereby, it is not available for some researchers [ 11 , 15 ]. Furthermore, recent evidence demonstrated cross-neutralization activity of antibodies raised to other coronaviruses against SARS-CoV-2 [ 20 , 21 ]. To overcome this issue, the developed assays were evaluated with sera containing antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and human coronavirus HKU1 (HCoV-HKU1), and demonstrated specificity to SARS-CoV-2 antibodies [ 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Development Of Serological Assays For Covid-19mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Serological Assays and Seroprevalence Studies of the New Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19): Reports from Saudi Arabia

Alandijany

Faizo

2021

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Serological assays are valuable tools for tracking COVID-19 spread, estimation of herd immunity, and evaluation of vaccine effectiveness. Several reports from Saudi Arabia describe optimized in-house protocols that enable detection of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies and measurement of their neutralizing activity. Notably, there were variations in the approaches utilized to develop and validate these immunoassays in term of sample size, validation methodologies, and statistical analyses. The developed enzyme-linked immunoassays (ELISAs) were based on the viral full-length spike (S), S1 subunit, and nucleocapsid (NP), and enabled detection of IgM and/or IgG. ELISAs were evaluated and validated against a microneutralization assay utilizing a local SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolate, FDA-approved commercially available immunoassays, and/or real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Overall, the performance of the described assays was high, reaching up to 100% sensitivity and 98.9% specificity with no cross-reactivity with other coronaviruses. In-house immunoassays, along with commercially available kits, were subsequently applied in a number of sero-epidemiological studies aiming to estimate sero-positivity status among local populations including healthcare workers, COVID-19 patients, non-COVID-19 patients, and healthy blood donors. The reported seroprevalence rates differed widely among these studies, ranging from 0.00% to 32.2%. These variations are probably due to study period, targeted population, sample size, and performance of the immunoassays utilized. Indeed, lack of sero-positive cases were reported among healthy blood donors during the lockdown, while the highest rates were reported when the number of COVID-19 cases peaked in the country, particularly among healthcare workers working in referral hospitals and quarantine sites. In this review, we aim to (1) provide a critical discussion about the developed in-house immunoassays, and (2) summarize key findings of the sero-epidemiological studies and highlight strengths and weaknesses of each study.

show abstract

Section: Development Of Serological Assays For Covid-19mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Serological Assays and Seroprevalence Studies of the New Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19): Reports from Saudi Arabia

Alandijany

Faizo

2021

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The six negative samples ranged from 0% to 32% inhibition with a median of 26%, consistent with our previous observation that pre‐pandemic samples can achieve partial inhibition of the spike‐ACE2 interaction due to cross‐reactivity of antibodies targeting seasonal coronaviruses. 20 For DBS samples, four 3 mm punches eluted in 100 μL of PBS from a double‐vaccinated individual showed measurable neutralisation activity (Supplementary figure 15 ); however, we were unable to measure neutralisation in DBS samples from convalescent or singly vaccinated individuals (in contrast to serum). Therefore, while it is possible to detect neutralisation activity from DBSs, this is limited to samples with high neutralising activity.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

A scalable serology solution for profiling humoral immune responses to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and vaccination

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Antibody testing against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) has been instrumental in detecting previous exposures and analyzing vaccine‐elicited immune responses. Here, we describe a scalable solution to detect and quantify SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies, discriminate between natural infection‐ and vaccination‐induced responses, and assess antibody‐mediated inhibition of the spike‐angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) interaction. Methods We developed methods and reagents to detect SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The main assays focus on the parallel detection of immunoglobulin (Ig)Gs against the spike trimer, its receptor binding domain (RBD) and nucleocapsid (N). We automated a surrogate neutralisation (sn)ELISA that measures inhibition of ACE2‐spike or ‐RBD interactions by antibodies. The assays were calibrated to a World Health Organization reference standard. Results Our single‐point IgG‐based ELISAs accurately distinguished non‐infected and infected individuals. For seroprevalence assessment (in a non‐vaccinated cohort), classifying a sample as positive if antibodies were detected for ≥ 2 of the 3 antigens provided the highest specificity. In vaccinated cohorts, increases in anti‐spike and ‐RBD (but not ‐N) antibodies are observed. We present detailed protocols for serum/plasma or dried blood spots analysis performed manually and on automated platforms. The snELISA can be performed automatically at single points, increasing its scalability. Conclusions Measuring antibodies to three viral antigens and identify neutralising antibodies capable of disrupting spike‐ACE2 interactions in high‐throughput enables large‐scale analyses of humoral immune responses to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and vaccination. The reagents are available to enable scaling up of standardised serological assays, permitting inter‐laboratory data comparison and aggregation.

show abstract

“…Among these 34 patients, only two patients had elevated prevaccination levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgA antibodies, and one patient had elevated prevaccination levels of anti-RBD IgG antibodies ( Figure S1B ). However, since these patients were negative for anti-NCP IgG antibodies and prepandemic antibodies raised against human seasonal coronaviruses were reported to cross-react with SARS-CoV-2 antigens ( 37 ), these patients were still included in the analyses. The patient with a borderline anti-NCP IgG antibody titer was also included, and this patient was, in contrast, found to be negative for prevaccination anti-RBD IgA and IgG antibodies ( Figure S1C ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness and Durability of mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2-Specific Humoral and Cellular Immunity in Severe Asthma Patients on Biological Therapy

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines effectively elicit humoral and cellular immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in healthy populations. This immunity decreases several months after vaccination. However, the efficacy of vaccine-induced immunity and its durability in patients with severe asthma on biological therapy are unknown. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness and durability of mRNA vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and cellular immunity in severe asthma patients on biological therapy. The study included 34 patients with severe asthma treated with anti-IgE (omalizumab, n=17), anti-IL5 (mepolizumab, n=13; reslizumab, n=3), or anti-IL5R (benralizumab, n=1) biological therapy. All patients were vaccinated with two doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine with a 6-week interval between the doses. We found that this COVID-19 vaccination regimen elicited SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and cellular immunity, which had significantly declined 6 months after receipt of the second dose of the vaccine. The type of biological treatment did not affect vaccine-elicited immunity. However, patient age negatively impacted the vaccine-induced humoral response. On the other hand, no such age-related impact on vaccine-elicited cellular immunity was observed. Our findings show that treatment of patients with severe asthma with biological therapy does not compromise the effectiveness or durability of COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity.

show abstract

Relative Ratios of Human Seasonal Coronavirus Antibodies Predict the Efficiency of Cross-Neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Binding to ACE2

Cited by 47 publications

References 65 publications

Development of Serological Assays and Seroprevalence Studies of the New Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19): Reports from Saudi Arabia

Development of Serological Assays and Seroprevalence Studies of the New Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19): Reports from Saudi Arabia

A scalable serology solution for profiling humoral immune responses to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and vaccination

Effectiveness and Durability of mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2-Specific Humoral and Cellular Immunity in Severe Asthma Patients on Biological Therapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About