Jihyun Lee

Background: Cellular and humoral immunity are key to the immune response against SARS-CoV-2, but the comparability and correlation across different assays remain underexplored. This study compares three T-cell and three antibody assays in two vaccine groups. Methods: This prospective longitudinal cohort study involved 46 naïve healthcare workers: a total of 11 in the homologous mRNA-1273 group (three doses) and 35 in the heterologous ChAd group (two ChAd doses followed by a BNT booster). Blood samples were collected at five time points. Cellular immunity was assessed using ELISPOT and two commercial interferon-gamma release assays: (IGRA)-QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 (QF) and Covi-FERON ELISA (CoVF). Humoral immunity was evaluated using total and IgG antibody assays and a surrogate virus neutralization test. Results: The mRNA-1273 group exhibited stronger and more consistent responses than the ChAd group. The correlations between ELISPOT and IGRA varied from weak to moderate (ρ = 0.300–0.410), while QF-IGRA and CoVF-IGRA showed stronger correlations (ρ = 0.700–0.737). The ELISPOT assay showed substantial agreement with QF [Ag2]-IGRA (k = 0.697–0.774) and CoVF [O-sp]-IGRA (k = 0.641–0.718), and an 80.4% agreement rate (k = 0.608) was found between the QF [Ag2]- and CoVF [O-sp]-IGRA tests. Three antibody assays demonstrated very strong correlations with each other and substantial to near-perfect agreement with ELISPOT (k = 0.866–0.949), QF [Ag2]-IGRA (k = 0.807–0.831), and CoVF [O-sp]-IGRA (k = 0.753–0.777). Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2-specific cellular and antibody responses vary by platform and vaccine type, highlighting the importance of measuring both T-cell and B-cell responses using multiple assays to comprehensively assess immune status.

The immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) becomes increasingly complex as individuals receive different combinations of vaccine doses and encounter breakthrough infections. Our study focused on the immunogenicity observed over a two-year period in healthy individuals who completed a two-dose series and then experienced booster and/or Omicron infection. In June 2023, we recruited 78 healthcare workers who had previously participated in clinical research initiated in March 2021 at a single medical center in South Korea. At 1, 5, 11, and 25 months after a second dose, we assessed SARS-CoV-2–specific humoral and cellular immune responses. Longitudinal monitoring revealed a significant decline in humoral immunity levels after the second vaccine dose, followed by a substantial increase post-third vaccination or breakthrough infection. In contrast, stable cellular immune responses were consistently observed, with peak humoral and cellular immune measures reached at 25 months after the second dose. Among infection-naïve participants, three-dose vaccinated individuals had decreased neutralizing activity against wild-type (WT) and negative activities against Omicron subvariants BA.2 and BA.4/5, whereas those who received a fourth dose of bivalent BNT had significantly increased neutralizing activity (p < 0.05). All immune metrics tended to increase as the number of vaccine doses increased. Among participants with 4-exposure, homologous vaccination (mRNA × 4) led to higher humoral immunity, whereas heterologous vaccination (ChAd × 2/mRNA × 2) induced stronger cellular responses against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants by enzyme-linked immunospot assays (p < 0.05). Immune responses from bivalent vaccines or Omicron infection did not show statistically significant differences among exposure number-matched participants (p > 0.05). Omicron exposure significantly increased cross-neutralizing activity, but magnitude of cellular immunity was not significantly altered by Omicron exposure. Our longitudinal study highlights the evolving complexity of SARS-CoV-2 immune responses, showing enhanced immunity with multiple vaccine doses and robust cellular responses from heterologous vaccination. These findings emphasize the need for ongoing surveillance to optimize vaccination strategies against emerging variants.

With the ongoing evolution of severe acute respiratory virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases continues to rise. This study aims to investigate the impact of vaccination status, SARS-CoV-2 variants, and disease severity on the humoral immune response, including cross-neutralizing activity, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This retrospective cohort study involved 122 symptomatic COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a single center. Patients were categorized based on the causative specific SARS-CoV-2 variants (33 wild-type (WT), 54 Delta and 35 Omicron) and their vaccination history. Sequential samples were collected to assess binding antibody responses (anti-S/RBD and anti-N) and surrogate virus neutralization tests (sVNTs) against WT, Omicron BA.1, and BA.4/5. The vaccinated breakthrough infection group (V) exhibited higher levels of anti-S/RBD compared to the variant-matched unvaccinated groups (UVs). The Delta infection resulted in a more rapid production of anti-S/RBD levels compared to infections with WT or Omicron variants. Unvaccinated severe WT or Delta infections had higher anti-S/RBD levels compared to mild cases, but this was not the case with Omicron infection. In vaccinated patients, there was no difference in antibody levels between mild and severe infections. Both Delta (V) and Omicron (V) groups showed strong cross-neutralizing activity against WT and Omicron (BA.1 and BA.4/5), ranging from 79.3% to 97.0%. WT (UV) and Delta (UV) infections had reduced neutralizing activity against BA.1 (0.8% to 12.0%) and BA.4/5 (32.8% to 41.0%). Interestingly, patients who received vaccines based on the ancestral spike exhibited positive neutralizing activity against BA.4/5, even though none of the study participants had been exposed to BA.4/5 and it is antigenically more advanced. Our findings suggest that a previous vaccination enhanced the humoral immune response and broadened cross-neutralizing activity to SARS-CoV-2 variants in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Assessing immune responses post-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is crucial for optimizing vaccine strategies. This prospective study aims to evaluate immune responses and breakthrough infection in 235 infection-naïve healthcare workers up to 13–15 months after initial vaccination in two vaccine groups (108 BNT/BNT/BNT and 127 ChAd/ChAd/BNT). Immune responses were assessed using the interferon-gamma enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay, total immunoglobulin, and neutralizing activity through surrogate virus neutralization test at nine different time points. Both groups exhibited peak responses one to two months after the second or third dose, followed by gradual declines over six months. Notably, the ChAd group exhibited a gradual increase in ELISPOT results, but their antibody levels declined more rapidly after reaching peak response compared to the BNT group. Six months after the third dose, both groups had substantial cellular responses, with superior humoral responses in the BNT group (p < 0.05). As many as 55 breakthrough infection participants displayed higher neutralization activities against Omicron variants, but similar cellular responses compared to 127 infection-naïve individuals, suggesting cross-immunity. Distinct neutralization classifications (80% inhibition) correlated with different ELISPOT results. Our study reveals diverse immune response patterns based on vaccine strategies and breakthrough infections, emphasizing the importance of understanding these dynamics for optimized vaccination decisions.

Neutralizing antibody (NAb) detection is critical for evaluating herd immunity and monitoring the efficacy of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this study, quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels after vaccination were measured by chemiluminescent immunoassays, enzyme immunoassays, and surrogate virus neutralization tests (sVNTs), as well as plaque reduction neutralization tests (PRNT). Sequential blood samples were collected before and 1 and 3 months after vaccination in 30 healthy participants (two doses of Oxford-AstraZeneca [AZ] or Pfizer-BioNTech [BNT]). After vaccination, all sera tested positive for PRNT, with NAb titers ranging from 1:10 to 1:723. Median NAb titers were higher in the BNT vaccine group than in the AZ vaccine group at both one and three months post-vaccination. Excellent overall concordance rates were observed between serological assays and PRNT. In a quantitative correlation analysis, the results of sVNTs showed a strong correlation with those of PRNT. Results of the four binding antibody assays showed a significant correlation with those of PRNT. The serologic assays evaluated in this study could be used as sVNTs to evaluate the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays against the spike (S) protein are useful for monitoring immune response after infection or vaccination. We compared the results of three chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs) (Abbott, Roche, Siemens) and a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT, GenScript) using 191 sequential samples from 32 COVID-19 patients. All assays detected >90% of samples collected 14 days after symptom onset (Abbott 97.4%, Roche 96.2%, Siemens 92.3%, and GenScript 96.2%), and overall agreement among the four assays was 91.1% to 96.3%. When we assessed time-course antibody levels, the Abbott and Siemens assays showed higher levels in patients with severe disease (p < 0.05). Antibody levels from the three CLIAs were correlated (r = 0.763–0.885). However, Passing–Bablok regression analysis showed significant proportional differences between assays and converting results to binding antibody units (BAU)/mL still showed substantial bias. CLIAs had good performance in predicting sVNT positivity (Area Under the Curve (AUC), 0.959–0.987), with Abbott having the highest AUC value (p < 0.05). SARS-CoV-2 S protein antibody levels as assessed by the CLIAs were not interchangeable, but showed reliable performance for predicting sVNT results. Further standardization and harmonization of immunoassays might be helpful in monitoring immune status after COVID-19 infection or vaccination.