RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 SARS-CoV-2 Antibody persistence in COVID-19 convalescent plasma donors
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.03.24.21254260
DO 10.1101/2021.03.24.21254260
A1 Di Germanio, Clara
A1 Simmons, Graham
A1 Kelly, Kathleen
A1 Martinelli, Rachel
A1 Darst, Orsolya
A1 Azimpouran, Mahzad
A1 Stone, Mars
A1 Hazegh, Kelsey
A1 Grebe, Eduard
A1 Zhang, Shuting
A1 Ma, Peijun
A1 Orzechowski, Marek
A1 Gomez, James E
A1 Livny, Jonathan
A1 Hung, Deborah T.
A1 Vassallo, Ralph
A1 Busch, Michael P.
A1 Dumont, Larry J.
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/26/2021.03.24.21254260.abstract
AB Background Antibody response duration following SARS-CoV-2 infection tends to be variable and depends on severity of disease and method of detection.Study design and methods COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) from 18 donors was collected longitudinally for a maximum of 63 - 129 days following resolution of symptoms. All the samples were initially screened by the Ortho Total Ig test to confirm positivity and subsequently tested with 7 additional direct sandwich or indirect binding assays (Ortho, Roche, Abbott, Broad Institute) directed against a variety of antigen targets (S1, RBD, and NC), along with 2 neutralization assays (Broad Institute live virus PRNT and Vitalant Research Institute Pseudovirus RVPN).Results The direct detection assays (Ortho Total Ig total and Roche Total Ig) showed increasing levels of antibodies over the time period, in contrast to the indirect IgG assays that showed a decline.Neutralization assays also demonstrated declining responses; the VRI RVPN pseudovirus had a greater rate of decline than the Broad PRNT live virus assay.Discussion These data show that in addition to variable individual responses and associations with disease severity, the detection assay chosen contributes to the heterogeneous results in antibody stability over time. Depending on the scope of the research, one assay may be preferable over another. For serosurveillance studies, direct, double Ag-sandwich assays appear to be the best choice due to their stability; in particular, algorithms that include both S1 and NC based assays can help reduce the rate of false-positivity and discriminate between natural infection and vaccine-derived seroreactivity.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Trialnot applicableFunding StatementFunding provided by Vitalant and U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Protocol Title: Blood Donor Broad Consent for the Maintenance and Storage of Identifiable Private Information and Biospecimens Protocol Number: Vitalant-18-001 EXEMPT DETERMINATION - Advarra, Columbia, MDAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData are available by request.