No abstract

SARS-CoV-2 remdesivir resistance mutations have been generated in vitro but have not been reported in patients receiving treatment with the antiviral agent. We present a case of an immunocompromised patient with acquired B-cell deficiency who developed an indolent, protracted course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Remdesivir therapy alleviated symptoms and produced a transient virologic response, but her course was complicated by recrudescence of high-grade viral shedding. Whole genome sequencing identified a mutation, E802D, in the nsp12 RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, which was not present in pre-treatment specimens. In vitro experiments demonstrated that the mutation conferred a ~6-fold increase in remdesivir IC50 but resulted in a fitness cost in the absence of remdesivir. Sustained clinical and virologic response was achieved after treatment with casirivimab-imdevimab. Although the fitness cost observed in vitro may limit the risk posed by E802D, this case illustrates the importance of monitoring for remdesivir resistance and the potential benefit of combinatorial therapies in immunocompromised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

As Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread, characterization of its antibody epitopes, emerging strains, related coronaviruses, and even the human proteome in naturally infected patients can guide the development of effective vaccines and therapies. Since traditional epitope identification tools are dependent upon pre-defined peptide sequences, they are not readily adaptable to diverse viral proteomes. The Serum Epitope Repertoire Analysis (SERA) platform leverages a high diversity random bacterial display library to identify proteome-independent epitope binding specificities which are then analyzed in the context of organisms of interest. When evaluating immune response in the context of SARS-CoV-2, we identify dominant epitope regions and motifs which demonstrate potential to classify mild from severe disease and relate to neutralization activity. We highlight SARS-CoV-2 epitopes that are cross-reactive with other coronaviruses and demonstrate decreased epitope signal for mutant SARS-CoV-2 strains. Collectively, the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 mutants towards reduced antibody response highlight the importance of data-driven development of the vaccines and therapies to treat COVID-19.

ImportanceThe benefit of primary and booster vaccination in people who experienced prior SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unclear.ObjectiveTo estimate the effectiveness of a primary (two-dose) and booster (third dose) vaccination against Omicron infection among previously infection people.DesignTest-negative case-control study.SettingYale New Haven Health System facilities serving southern Connecticut communities.ParticipantsVaccine eligible people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing between November 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022.ExposureCOVID-19 mRNA primary and booster vaccination.Main Outcomes and MeasuresWe conducted two analyses, each with an outcome of Omicron BA.1 variant infection (S-gene target failure defined) and each stratified by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status. We estimated the effectiveness of primary vaccination during the period before and during booster eligibility (14-149 and ≥150 days, respectively, after 2nd dose) and of booster vaccination (≥14 days after booster dose). To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds among boosted and booster eligible people.ResultsOverall, 10,676 cases and 119,397 controls were included (median age: cases: 35 years, controls: 39 years). Among cases and controls, 6.1% and 7.8% had a prior infection. The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14-149 days after 2nd dose was 36.1% (95% CI, 7.1-56.1%) and 28.5% (95% CI, 20.0-36.2%) for people with and without prior infection, respectively. The effectiveness of booster vaccination was 45.8% (95% CI, 20.0-63.2%) and 56.9% (95% CI, 52.1-61.2%) in people with and without prior infection, respectively. The odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people with prior infection was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.56-1.23), whereas the odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people without prior infection was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.46-0.56).Conclusions and RelevancePrimary vaccination provided significant but limited protection against Omicron BA.1 infection among people with and without prior infection. While booster vaccination was associated with additional protection in people without prior infection, it was not associated with additional protection among people with prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of prior infection status but suggest that infection history should be considered when evaluating the need for booster vaccination.

SARS-CoV-2 remdesivir resistance mutations have been generated in vitro but have not been reported in patients receiving treatment with the antiviral agent. We present a case of an immunocompromised patient with acquired B-cell deficiency who developed an indolent, protracted course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Remdesivir therapy alleviated symptoms and produced a transient virologic response, but her course was complicated by recrudescence of high-grade viral shedding. Whole genome sequencing identified a mutation, E802D, in the nsp12 RNA-dependent RNA polymerase which was not present in pre-treatment specimens. In vitro experiments demonstrated that the mutation conferred a ∼6-fold increase in remdesivir IC50 but resulted in a fitness cost in the absence of remdesivir. Sustained clinical and virologic response was achieved after treatment with casirivimab-imdevimab. Although the fitness cost observed in vitro may limit the risk posed by E802D, this case illustrates the importance of monitoring for remdesivir resistance and the potential benefit of combinatorial therapies in immunocompromised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Background The benefit of primary and booster vaccination in people who experienced a prior Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains unclear. The objective of this study was to estimate the effectiveness of primary (two-dose series) and booster (third dose) mRNA vaccination against Omicron (lineage BA.1) infection among people with a prior documented infection. Methods and findings We conducted a test-negative case–control study of reverse transcription PCRs (RT-PCRs) analyzed with the TaqPath (Thermo Fisher Scientific) assay and recorded in the Yale New Haven Health system from November 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. Overall, 11,307 cases (positive TaqPath analyzed RT-PCRs with S-gene target failure [SGTF]) and 130,041 controls (negative TaqPath analyzed RT-PCRs) were included (median age: cases: 35 years, controls: 39 years). Among cases and controls, 5.9% and 8.1% had a documented prior infection (positive SARS-CoV-2 test record ≥90 days prior to the included test), respectively. We estimated the effectiveness of primary and booster vaccination relative to SGTF-defined Omicron (lineage BA.1) variant infection using a logistic regression adjusted for date of test, age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance, comorbidities, social venerability index, municipality, and healthcare utilization. The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14 to 149 days after the second dose was 41.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 14.1% to 59.4%, p 0.006) and 27.1% (95% CI: 18.7% to 34.6%, p < 0.001) for people with and without a documented prior infection, respectively. The effectiveness of booster vaccination (≥14 days after booster dose) was 47.1% (95% CI: 22.4% to 63.9%, p 0.001) and 54.1% (95% CI: 49.2% to 58.4%, p < 0.001) in people with and without a documented prior infection, respectively. To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds of infection among boosted (≥14 days after booster dose) and booster-eligible people (≥150 days after second dose). The odds ratio (OR) comparing boosted and booster-eligible people with a documented prior infection was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.54 to 1.16, p 0.222), whereas the OR comparing boosted and booster-eligible people without a documented prior infection was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49 to 0.59, p < 0.001). This study’s limitations include the risk of residual confounding, the use of data from a single system, and the reliance on TaqPath analyzed RT-PCR results. Conclusions In this study, we observed that primary vaccination provided significant but limited protection against Omicron (lineage BA.1) infection among people with and without a documented prior infection. While booster vaccination was associated with additional protection against Omicron BA.1 infection in people without a documented prior infection, it was not found to be associated with additional protection among people with a documented prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of documented prior infection status but suggest that infection history may impact the relative benefit of booster doses.

No abstract

No abstract