Refine
Language
- English (11)
Has Fulltext
- yes (11)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (11)
Keywords
- SARS-CoV-2 (3)
- PCR (2)
- PRNT (2)
- Ag-RDT (1)
- B.1.1.7 (1)
- BNT162b2 (1)
- ChAdOx1-S (1)
- Donor screening (1)
- ELISA (1)
- Heterologous prime-boost (1)
Institute
- Medizin (11)
The plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) is a preferred method for the detection of functional, SARS-CoV-2 specific neutralizing antibodies from serum samples. Alternatively, surrogate enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) using ACE2 as the target structure for the detection of neutralization-competent antibodies have been developed. They are capable of high throughput, have a short turnaround time, and can be performed under standard laboratory safety conditions. However, there are very limited data on their clinical performance and how they compare to the PRNT. We evaluated three surrogate immunoassays (GenScript SARS-CoV-2 Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test Kit (GenScript Biotech, Piscataway Township, NJ, USA), the TECO® SARS-CoV-2 Neutralization Antibody Assay (TECOmedical AG, Sissach, Switzerland), and the Leinco COVID-19 ImmunoRank™ Neutralization MICRO-ELISA (Leinco Technologies, Fenton, MO, USA)) and one automated quantitative SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein-based IgG antibody assay (Abbott GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany) by testing 78 clinical samples, including several follow-up samples of six BNT162b2 (BioNTech/Pfizer, Mainz, Germany/New York, NY, USA) vaccinated individuals. Using the PRNT as a reference method, the overall sensitivity of the examined assays ranged from 93.8 to 100% and specificity ranged from 73.9 to 91.3%. Weighted kappa demonstrated a substantial to almost perfect agreement. The findings of our study allow these assays to be considered when a PRNT is not available. However, the latter still should be the preferred choice. For optimal clinical performance, the cut-off value of the TECO assay should be individually adapted.
Background: International travel is a major driver of the introduction and spread of SARS- CoV-2. Aim: To investigate SARS-CoV-2 genetic diversity in the region of a major transport hub in Germany, we characterized the viral sequence diversity of the SARS-CoV-2 variants circulating in Frankfurt am Main, the city with the largest airport in Germany, from the end of October to the end of December 2020. Methods: In total, we recovered 136 SARS-CoV-2 genomes from nasopharyngeal swab samples. We isolated 104 isolates that were grown in cell culture and RNA from the recovered viruses and subjected them to full-genome sequence analysis. In addition, 32 nasopharyngeal swab samples were directly sequenced. Results and conclusion: We found 28 different lineages of SARS- CoV-2 circulating during the study period, including the variant of concern B.1.1.7 (∆69/70, N501Y). Six of the lineages had not previously been observed in Germany. We detected the spike protein (S) deletion ∆69/∆70 in 15% of all sequences, a four base pair (bp) deletion (in 2.9% of sequences) and a single bp deletion (in 0.7% of sequences) in ORF3a, leading to ORF3a truncations. In four sequences (2.9%), an amino acid deletion at position 210 in S was identified. In a single sample (0.7%), both a 9 bp deletion in ORF1ab and a 7 bp deletion in ORF7a were identified. One sequence in lineage B.1.1.70 had an N501Y substitution while lacking the ∆69/70 in S. The high diversity of sequences observed over two months in Frankfurt am Main highlights the persisting need for continuous SARS-CoV-2 surveillance using full-genome sequencing, particularly in cities with international airport connections.
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) serological assays are urgently needed for rapid diagnosis, contact tracing, and for epidemiological studies. So far, there is limited data on how commercially available tests perform with real patient samples, and if positive tested samples show neutralizing abilities. Focusing on IgG antibodies, we demonstrate the performance of two enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) assays (Euroimmun SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG and Vircell COVID‐19 ELISA IgG) in comparison to one lateral flow assay (FaStep COVID‐19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device) and two in‐house developed assays (immunofluorescence assay [IFA] and plaque reduction neutralization test [PRNT]). We tested follow up serum/plasma samples of individuals polymerase chain reaction‐diagnosed with COVID‐19. Most of the SARS‐CoV‐2 samples were from individuals with moderate to the severe clinical course, who required an in‐patient hospital stay. For all examined assays, the sensitivity ranged from 58.8 to 76.5% for the early phase of infection (days 5‐9) and from 93.8% to 100% for the later period (days 10‐18).
This case series assessed a commercial airline flight from Tel Aviv, Israel, to Frankfurt, Germany, that occurred on March 9th, 2020. Among 102 passengers on a Boeing 737-900 aircraft were 24 members of a tourist group. Starting 7 days earlier, the group had contact with a hotel manager who later received a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). No member of the group had received a diagnosis of COVID-19 before the flight, and no measures to prevent transmission (eg, wearing of masks) had been applied. The flight duration was 4 hours 40 minutes.
Reduced neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant by vaccine sera and monoclonal antibodies
(2021)
Due to numerous mutations in the spike protein, the SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern Omicron (B.1.1.529) raises serious concerns since it may significantly limit the antibody-mediated neutralization and increase the risk of reinfections. While a rapid increase in the number of cases is being reported worldwide, until now there has been uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccinations and monoclonal antibodies. Our in vitro findings using authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants indicate that in contrast to the currently circulating Delta variant, the neutralization efficacy of vaccine-elicited sera against Omicron was severely reduced highlighting T-cell mediated immunity as essential barrier to prevent severe COVID-19. Since SARS-CoV-2 Omicron was resistant to casirivimab and imdevimab, genotyping of SARS-CoV-2 may be needed before initiating mAb treatment. Variant-specific vaccines and mAb agents may be required to treat COVID-19 due to Omicron and other emerging variants of concern.
Reduced neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant by vaccine sera and monoclonal antibodies
(2021)
Due to numerous mutations in the spike protein, the SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern Omicron (B.1.1.529) raises serious concerns since it may significantly limit the antibody-mediated neutralization and increase the risk of reinfections. While a rapid increase in the number of cases is being reported worldwide, until now there has been uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccinations and monoclonal antibodies. Our in vitro findings using authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants indicate that in contrast to the currently circulating Delta variant, the neutralization efficacy of vaccine-elicited sera against Omicron was severely reduced highlighting T-cell mediated immunity as essential barrier to prevent severe COVID-19. Since SARS-CoV-2 Omicron was resistant to casirivimab and imdevimab, genotyping of SARS-CoV-2 may be needed before initiating mAb treatment. Variant-specific vaccines and mAb agents may be required to treat COVID-19 due to Omicron and other emerging variants of concern.
Due to globally rising numbers of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, resources for real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR)-based testing have been exhausted. In order to meet the demands of testing and reduce transmission, SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) are being considered. These tests are fast, inexpensive, and simple to use, but whether they detect potentially infectious cases has not been well studied. We evaluated three lateral flow assays (RIDA®QUICK SARS-CoV-2 Antigen (R-Biopharm), SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (Roche)), and NADAL® COVID-19 Ag Test (Nal von Minden GmbH, Regensburg, Germany) and one microfluidic immunofluorescence assay (SARS-CoV-2 Ag Test (LumiraDx GmbH, Cologne, Germany)) using 100 clinical samples. Diagnostic rRT-PCR and cell culture testing as a marker for infectivity were performed in parallel. The overall Ag-RDT sensitivity for rRT-PCR-positive samples ranged from 24.3% to 50%. However, for samples with a viral load of more than 6 log10 RNA copies/mL (22/100), typically seen in infectious individuals, Ag-RDT positivity was between 81.8% and 100%. Only 51.6% (33/64) of the rRT-PCR-positive samples were infectious in cell culture. In contrast, three Ag-RDTs demonstrated a more significant correlation with cell culture infectivity (61.8–82.4%). Our findings suggest that large-scale SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT-based testing can be considered for detecting potentially infective individuals and reducing the virus spread.
As the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues, serological assays are urgently needed for rapid diagnosis, contact tracing and for epidemiological studies. So far, there is little data on how commercially available tests perform with real patient samples and if detected IgG antibodies provide protective immunity. Focusing on IgG antibodies, we demonstrate the performance of two ELISA assays (Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG & Vircell COVID-19 ELISA IgG) in comparison to one lateral flow assay ((LFA) FaStep COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Device) and two in-house developed assays (immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT)). We tested follow up serum/plasma samples of individuals PCR-diagnosed with COVID-19. Most of the SARS-CoV-2 samples were from individuals with moderate to severe clinical course, who required an in-patient hospital stay.
For all examined assays, the sensitivity ranged from 58.8 to 76.5% for the early phase of infection (days 5-9) and from 93.8 to 100% for the later period (days 10-18) after PCR-diagnosed with COVID-19. With exception of one sample, all positive tested samples in the analysed cohort, using the commercially available assays examined (including the in-house developed IFA), demonstrated neutralizing (protective) properties in the PRNT, indicating a potential protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2. Regarding specificity, there was evidence that samples of endemic coronavirus (HCoV-OC43, HCoV-229E) and Epstein Barr virus (EBV) infected individuals cross-reacted in the ELISA assays and IFA, in one case generating a false positive result (may giving a false sense of security). This need to be further investigated.
Background: To minimize the risk of disease transmission in cornea transplantation, donor screening for blood-derived viral infections is mandatory. Ideally, pre-mortem blood samples are used, but based on availability, cadaveric blood samples of cornea donors may also be used. However, serological and nucleic acid amplification tests (NATs) need to be validated for the use of cadaveric specimens.
Methods: Hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV) 1/2, and Treponema pallidum (syphilis)-specific serological and/or NAT assays were validated on different platforms (Abbott Alinity i, Alinity m, Roche Cobas 6800, and Roche Cobas AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan (CAP/CTM)) using (un)spiked paired pre- and post-mortem cornea donor blood samples from the same individual (up to 23.83 h after death) of 28 individuals in accordance with the specifications of the German Federal Institute for Vaccines and Biomedicines (Paul-Ehrlich-Institut [PEI]). In addition, routinely HBV-, HCV- and HIV-PCR-negative tested post-mortem blood samples of 24 individuals were used to assess NAT specificity.
Results: For the majority of serological parameters on the Abbott Alinity i (HBsAg, anti-HBc, anti-HBs, anti-HCV, anti-HIV, anti-HTLV 1/2, and anti-Treponema pallidum), ratios of generated test results of (un)spiked paired pre- and post-mortem blood samples differed ≤25%, with an agreement of qualitative pre- and post-mortem test results ranging from 91.2 to 100%. For NAT parameters (HBV, HCV, and HIV) on the Cobas 6800, Alinity m, and CAP/CTM, no significant deviation in virus concentrations (factor >5) of spiked pre- and post-mortem blood samples could be observed. Ct-values of corresponding internal controls did also not differ significantly (>1.5 Ct-values). In addition, no false-positive test results were generated when specificity was assessed.
Conclusion: Overall, fluctuations of test results for serological and NAT parameters in pre- and post-mortem blood samples examined in this study, were only limited and within the range of what is also observed when routinely testing fresh patient specimens. We conclude that all examined assays are eligible for the screening of blood samples taken up to about 24 h after the occurrence of death.
Objectives: Regarding reactogenicity and immunogenicity, heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens are considered as an alternative to conventional immunization schemes.
Methods: Individuals receiving either heterologous (ChAdOx1-S [AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK]/BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech, Mainz, Germany]; n = 306) or homologous (messenger RNA [mRNA]-1273 [Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA]; n = 139) vaccination were asked to participate when receiving their second dose. Reactogenicity was assessed after 1 month, immunogenicity after 1, 3, and/or 6 months, including a third dose, through SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G, surrogate virus neutralization test, and a plaque reduction neutralization test against the Delta (B.1.167.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529; BA.1) variants of concern.
Results: The overall reactogenicity was lower after heterologous vaccination. In both cohorts, SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G concentrations waned over time with the heterologous vaccination demonstrating higher neutralizing activity than homologous mRNA vaccination after 3 months to low neutralizing levels in the Delta plaque reduction neutralization test after 6 months. At this point, 3.2% of the heterologous and 11.4% of the homologous cohort yielded low neutralizing activity against Omicron. After a third dose of an mRNA vaccine, ≥99% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity against Delta. Depending on the vaccination scheme and against Omicron, 60% to 87.5% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity.
Conclusion: ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2 vaccination demonstrated an acceptable reactogenicity and immunogenicity profile. A third dose of an mRNA vaccine is necessary to maintain neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2. However, variants of concern-adapted versions of the vaccines would be desirable.
