How to interpret and use COVID-19 serology and immunology tests

BackgroundAlthough molecular tests are considered the reference standard for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnostics, serological and immunological tests may be useful in specific settings.ObjectivesThis review summarizes the underlying principles and performance of COVID-19 serological and immunological testing.SourcesSelected peer-reviewed publications on COVID-19 related serology and immunology published between December 2019 and March 2021.ContentSerological tests are highly specific but heterogeneous in their sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19. For certain indications, including delayed disease presentations, serological tests can have added value. The presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 may indicate a recent or past COVID-19 infection. Lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) antibody tests have the advantages of being easy and fast to perform, but many have a low sensitivity in acute settings. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIAs) have higher sensitivities. Besides humoral immunity, cellular immunity is also essential for successful host defences against viruses. Enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assays can be used to measure T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2. The presence of cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells in never exposed patients suggests the possibility of cellular immunity induced by other circulating coronaviruses. T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2 have also been detected in recovered COVID-19 patients with no detectable antibodies.ImplicationsSerological and immunological tests are primarily applied for population-based seroprevalence studies to evaluate the effectiveness of COVID-19 control measures and increase our understanding of the immunology behind COVID-19. Combining molecular diagnostics with serological tests may optimize the detection of COVID-19. As not all infected patients will develop antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, assessment of cellular immunity may provide complementary information on whether a patient has been previously infected with COVID-19. More studies are needed to understand the correlations of these serological and immunological parameters with protective immunity, taking into account the different circulating virus variants.     

Investigation of an outbreak of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 VOC 202012/01-lineage B.1.1.7 infection in healthcare workers,Italy

ObjectivesIn December 2020, Italy began a national immunization campaign using the BNT162b2 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccine, prioritizing healthcare workers (HCWs). Immune serum from vaccinated subjects seems (largely) to retain titres of neutralizing antibodies, even against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) VOC 202012/01-lineage B.1.1.7. Here, we describe an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 infection in three HCWs in a hospital setting; two of the HCWs were fully vaccinated (i.e. had received two doses).MethodsTwo physicians and one nurse working on the same shift on 20th February 2021 were involved in the outbreak. Real-time PCR, antigen tests, and serological tests for the IgG anti-spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 were performed, along with whole-genome sequencing (WGS).ResultsSARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed in all three HCWs; all presented with mild symptoms of COVID-19. The two physicians were fully vaccinated with BNT162b2 vaccine, with the second dose administered 1 month before symptom onset. Both had high titres of IgG anti-spike antibodies at the time of diagnosis. WGS confirmed that all virus strains were VOC 202012/01-lineage B.1.1.7, suggesting a common source of exposure. Epidemiological investigation revealed that the suspected source was a SARS-CoV-2-positive patient who required endotracheal intubation due to severe COVID-19. All procedures were carried out using a full suite of personal protective equipment (PPE).ConclusionsThis mini-outbreak highlights some important issues about the efficacy of vaccines against transmission of SARS-CoV-2 variants, the high risk of exposure among HCWs, and the need for optimized implementation of PPE in hospitals. The wide circulation of VOC 202012/01 in Europe and Italy highlights the need to improve surveillance and genetic sequencing.     

Characteristics and roles of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific antibodies in patients with different severities of coronavirus 19

The diagnosis of coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) relies mainly upon viral nucleic acid detection, but false negatives can lead to missed diagnosis and misdiagnosis; severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibody detection is convenient, safe and highly sensitive. Immunoglobulin (Ig)M and IgG are commonly used to serologically diagnose COVID-19; however, the role of IgA is not well known. We aimed to quantify the levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM, IgA and IgG antibodies, identify changes in them based on COVID-19 severity, and establish the significance of combined antibody detection. COVID-19 patients, divided into a severe and critical group and a moderate group, and non-COVID-19 patients with respiratory disease were included in this study. A chemiluminescence method was used to detect the levels of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM, IgA and IgG in the blood samples from the three groups. Epidemiological characteristics, symptoms, blood test results and other data were recorded for all patients. Compared to the traditional IgM–IgG combined antibodies, IgA–IgG combined antibodies are more effective for diagnosing COVID-19. During the disease process, IgA appeared first and disappeared last. All three antibodies had significantly higher levels in COVID-19 patients than in non-COVID-19 patients. IgA and IgG were also higher for severe and critical disease than for moderate disease. All antibodies were at or near low levels at the time of tracheal extubation in critical patients. Detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific combined IgA–IgG antibodies is advantageous in diagnosing COVID-19. IgA detection is suitable during early and late stages of the disease. IgA and IgG levels correspond to disease severity.     

Value of anal swabs for SARS-COV-2 detection: a literature review

Facing the unprecedented global public health crisis caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), nucleic acid tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are the gold standard for diagnosing COVID-19. The asymptomatic carriers were not suspected of playing a significant role in the ongoing pandemic, and universal nucleic acid screening in close contacts of confirmed cases and asymptomatic carriers has been carried out in many medium- and high-risk areas for the spread of the virus. Recently, anal swabs for key population screening have been shown to not only reduce missed diagnoses but also facilitate the traceability of infectious sources. As a specimen for the detection of viruses, the goal of this paper is to briefly review the transmission route of SARS-CoV-2 and the necessity of using anal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 screening to minimize transmission and a threat to other people with COVID-19.     

Multicenter evaluation of four immunoassays for the performance of early diagnosis of COVID-19 and assessment of antibody responses of patients with pneumonia in Taiwan

Background/purposeOur study goals were to evaluate the diagnostic performance of four anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies tests and the differences in dynamic immune responses between COVID-19 patients with and without pneumonia.MethodsWe collected 184 serum samples from 70 consecutively qRT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients at four participating hospitals from 23 January 2020 to 30 September 2020. COVID-19 pneumonia was defined as the presence of new pulmonary infiltration. Serum samples were grouped by the duration after symptom onset on a weekly basis for antibody testing and analysis. The four immunoassays: Beckman SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM (Beckman Test), Siemens (ADVIA Centaur®) SARS-CoV-2 Total (COV2T) (Siemens Test), SBC COVID-19 IgG ELISA (SBC Test) and EliA SARS-CoV-2-Sp1 IgG/IgM/IgA P2 Research (EliA Test) were used for detecting the SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies.ResultsThe sensitivity of all tests reached 100% after 42 days of symptom onset. Siemens Test, the only test detecting total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, had the best performance in the early diagnosis of COVID-19 infection (day 0–7: 77%; day 8–14: 95%) compared to the other 3 serological tests. All tests showed 100% specificity except SBC Test (98%). COVID-19 patients with pneumonia had significantly higher testing signal values than patients without pneumonia (all p values < 0.05, except EliA IgM Test). However, Siemens Test and SBC Test had highest probability in early prediction of the presence of COVID-19 pneumonia.ConclusionChronological analysis of immune response among COVID-19 patients with different serological tests provides important information in the early diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and prediction of the risk of pneumonia after infection.     

Association between COVID-19 and chronic liver disease: Mechanism,diagnosis, damage,and treatment

As the outbreak evolves, our understanding of the consequences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the liver has grown. In this review, we discussed the hepatotropic nature of SARS-CoV-2 and described the distribution of receptors for SARS-CoV-2 (e.g., angiotensin-converting enzyme 2) in the vascular endothelium and cholangiocytes of the liver. Also, we proposed mechanisms for possible viral entry that mediate liver injury, such as liver fibrosis. Due to SARS-CoV-2-induced liver damage, many COVID-19 patients develop liver dysfunction, mainly characterized by moderately elevated serum aminotransferase levels. Patients with chronic liver disease (CLD), such as cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and viral hepatitis, are also sensitive to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We discussed the longer disease duration and higher mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection in CLD patients. Correspondingly, relevant risk factors and possible mechanisms were proposed, including cirrhosis-related immune dysfunction and liver deco-mpensation. Finally, we discussed the potential hepatotoxicity of COVID-19-related vaccines and drugs, which influence the treatment of CLD patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, we suggested that COVID-19 vaccines in terms of immunogenicity, duration of protection, and long-term safety for CLD patients need to be further researched. The diagnosis and treatment for liver injury caused by COVID-19 were also analyzed in this review.     

Characterization and application of a series of monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has a significant global social and economic impact, and the emergence of new and more destructive mutant strains highlights the need for accurate virus detection. Here, 90 monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) that exclusively reacted with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid protein (NP) were generated. These MAbs did not cross-react with NPs of common human coronaviruses (HCoVs, i.e., 229E, OC43, HKU1, and NL63) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus. Subsequently, overlapped peptides in individual fragments (N1–N4) of NP were synthesized. N1-3 (25-GSNQNGERSGARSKQ-39), N3-1 (217-AALALLLLDRLNQL-230), and N4-8 (393-TLLPAADLDDFSKQL-407) were identified as major epitopes using enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) and recognized by 47, 1, and 18 MAbs, respectively. The 24 remaining MAbs exhibited no reactivity with all synthetic peptides. Among MAb-epitope pairs, only MAbs targeting epitope N1-3 displayed no cross-reaction with NPs of SARS-CoV-1 and other SARS-related CoVs. All Omicron variants contained a three-amino acid deletion (31ERS33) in the N1-3 region. Thus, MAbs targeting N1-3 failed to recognize these variants. Furthermore, a double-antibody sandwich ELISA for antigen detection was established using the optimal MAbs. Overall, a series of MAbs targeting SARS-CoV-2 NP was prepared, characterized with epitope mapping, and applied for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigens, and some novel B-cell epitopes of the viral NP were identified.     

Clinical performance of different SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody tests

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).     

The epidemiology and clinical characteristics of co-infection of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses in patients during COVID-19 outbreak

In this study, we performed a single-centered study of 307 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected patients. It was found that co-infection of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza virus was common during COVID-19 outbreak. And patients coinfected with SARS-CoV-2 and influenza B virus have a higher risk of developing poor outcomes so a detection of both viruses was recommended during COVID-19 outbreak.     

An evolving approach to the laboratory assessment of COVID-19

As the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak has evolved in each country, the approach to the laboratory assessment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has had to evolve as well. This review addresses the evolving approach to the laboratory assessment of COVID-19 and discusses how algorithms for testing have been driven, in part, by the demand for testing overwhelming the capacity to accomplish such testing. This review focused on testing in the USA, as this testing is evolving, whereas in China and other countries such as South Korea testing is widely available and includes both molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 as well as serological testing using both enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay methodology and lateral flow immunoassay methodology. Although commercial testing systems are becoming available, there will likely be insufficient numbers of such tests due to high demand. Serological testing will be the next testing issue as the COVID-19 begins to subside. This will allow immunity testing as well as will allow the parameters of the COVID-19 outbreak to be defined.     

Homologous and heterologous serological response to the N-terminal domain of SARS-CoV-2 in humans and mice

The increasing numbers of infected cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) poses serious threats to public health and the global economy. Most SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies target the receptor binding domain (RBD) and some the N-terminal domain (NTD) of the spike protein, which is the major antigen of SARS-CoV-2. While the antibody response to RBD has been extensively characterized, the antigenicity and immunogenicity of the NTD protein are less well studied. Using 227 plasma samples from COVID-19 patients, we showed that SARS-CoV-2 NTD-specific antibodies could be induced during infection. As compared to the results of SARS-CoV-2 RBD, the serological response of SARS-CoV-2 NTD is less cross-reactive with SARS-CoV, a pandemic strain that was identified in 2003. Furthermore, neutralizing antibodies are rarely elicited in a mice model when NTD is used as an immunogen. We subsequently demonstrate that NTD has an altered antigenicity when expressed alone. Overall, our results suggest that while NTD offers a supplementary strategy for serology testing, it may not be suitable as an immunogen for vaccine development.     

Development and clinical application of a rapid IgM-IgG combined antibody test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis

The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) quickly spread all over China and to more than 20 other countries. Although the virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus [SARS-Cov-2]) nucleic acid real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test has become the standard method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, these real-time PCR test kits have many limitations. In addition, high false-negative rates were reported. There is an urgent need for an accurate and rapid test method to quickly identify a large number of infected patients and asymptomatic carriers to prevent virus transmission and assure timely treatment of patients. We have developed a rapid and simple point-of-care lateral flow immunoassay that can detect immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG antibodies simultaneously against SARS-CoV-2 virus in human blood within 15 minutes which can detect patients at different infection stages. With this test kit, we carried out clinical studies to validate its clinical efficacy uses. The clinical detection sensitivity and specificity of this test were measured using blood samples collected from 397 PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients and 128 negative patients at eight different clinical sites. The overall testing sensitivity was 88.66% and specificity was 90.63%. In addition, we evaluated clinical diagnosis results obtained from different types of venous and fingerstick blood samples. The results indicated great detection consistency among samples from fingerstick blood, serum and plasma of venous blood. The IgM-IgG combined assay has better utility and sensitivity compared with a single IgM or IgG test. It can be used for the rapid screening of SARS-CoV-2 carriers, symptomatic or asymptomatic, in hospitals, clinics, and test laboratories.     

Will Mutations in the Spike Protein of SARS-CoV-2 Lead to the Failure of COVID-19 Vaccines?

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has spread worldwide since it was first identified in Wuhan, China, at the end of 2019. With the global transmission of the virus, a large number of SARS-CoV-2 variants have also appeared, especially, emerging strains that have recently been discovered in the United Kingdom (variant 20I/501Y.V1, lineage B.1.1.7), South Africa (variant 20H/501Y.V2, lineage B.1.351), and Brazil (variant 20 J/501Y.V3, and lineage P.1). The common feature of these variants is that they share the N501Y mutation involving the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein, which is precisely the target of most COVID-19 vaccines. Furthermore, mutations such as N501Y, E484K, and K417N in the S protein may affect viral fitness and transmissibility. However, current research on the impact of these variants on COVID-19 vaccines is still lacking. Herein, we briefly explain why most COVID-19 vaccines target the S protein, update the progress of research regarding S protein-related COVID-19 vaccines, review the latest studies concerning the effects of S protein variants on COVID-19 vaccines, and finally, propose certain strategies to deal with SARS-CoV-2 variants.