IMPORTANCE B-cell-depleting therapies may affect the development of a protective immune response following vaccination. Understanding the ability to develop vaccine-specific immunity to COVID-19 in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with B-cell-depleting therapy is of importance for clinical decisions. OBJECTIVE To assess SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-specific humoral and cellular responses in patients treated with ocrelizumab compared with healthy controls. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This single-center study performed at Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem, Israel, included patients with MS treated with ocrelizumab, healthy controls, and untreated patients with MS. Vaccination occurred between December 2020 and April 2021. Participants donated blood 2 to 4 and 2 to 8 weeks after the second vaccine dose for antibody and T-cell assessments, respectively. EXPOSURES All participants received 2 doses of BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer/BioNTech) and completed the study. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Proportion of patients treated with ocrelizumab with SARS-CoV-2-specific serology and/or T-cell responses following vaccination. All participants underwent SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing; 29 patients treated with ocrelizumab and 15 healthy controls had evaluation of SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses.RESULTS Of 112 participants, 49 (43.8%) had MS and were treated with ocrelizumab (33 [67.3%] female; mean [SD] age, 47.9 [13.3] years), 23 (20.5%) had MS and were not treated with disease-modifying therapies (18 [78.3%] female; mean [SD] age, 49 [13.4] years), and 40 (35.7%) were healthy controls (25 [62.5%] female; mean [SD] age, 45.3 [16] years). Twenty-six of 29 patients (89.7%) treated with ocrelizumab and 15 of 15 healthy controls (100%) had SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells following vaccination at similar levels (mean [SD], 15.4 [7.6] and 14.3 [6.3] spot-forming cells, respectively). Mean antibody titers and positive serology rate were lower in the group of patients treated with ocrelizumab (mean [SD] antibody titers and positive serology rate, 26.2 [49.2] and 376.5 [907.6] AU/mL; 10 of 40 [25%] and 20 of 49 [40.8%] for S1/S2 and receptor-binding domain, respectively) compared with healthy controls (mean [SD] antibody titers and positive serology rate, 283 [100] and 12 712 [9114] AU/mL; 100% S1/S2 and receptor-binding domain) and untreated patients (mean [SD] antibody titers and positive serology rate, 288.3 [113.

Introduction: Testing for active SARS-CoV-2 infection is a fundamental tool in the public health measures taken to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of the overwhelming use of SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription (RT)-PCR tests worldwide, the availability of test kits has become a major bottleneck and the need to increase testing throughput is rising. We aim to overcome these challenges by pooling samples together, and performing RNA extraction and RT-PCR in pools. Methods: We tested the efficiency and sensitivity of pooling strategies for RNA extraction and RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2. We tested 184 samples both individually and in pools to estimate the effects of pooling. We further implemented Dorfman pooling with a pool size of eight samples in large-scale clinical tests. Results: We demonstrated pooling strategies that increase testing throughput while maintaining high sensitivity. A comparison of 184 samples tested individually and in pools of eight samples showed that test results were not significantly affected. Implementing the eight-sample Dorfman pooling to test 26 576 samples from asymptomatic individuals, we identified 31 (0.12%) SARS-CoV-2 positive samples, achieving a 7.3-fold increase in throughput. Discussion: Pooling approaches for SARS-CoV-2 testing allow a drastic increase in throughput while maintaining clinical sensitivity. We report the successful large-scale pooled screening of asymptomatic

STUDY QUESTION Does the immune response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection or the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine involve the ovarian follicle, and does it affect its function? SUMMARY ANSWER We were able to demonstrate anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS–CoV-2) IgG in follicular fluid (FF) from both infected and vaccinated IVF patients, with no evidence for compromised follicular function. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY No research data are available yet. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This is a cohort study, composed of 32 consecutive IVF patients, either infected with COVID-19, vaccinated or non-exposed, conducted between 1 February and 10 March 2021 in a single university hospital-based IVF clinic. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS A consecutive sample of female consenting patients undergoing oocyte retrieval was recruited and assigned to one of the three study groups: recovering from confirmed COVID-19 (n = 9); vaccinated (n = 9); and uninfected, non-vaccinated controls (n = 14). Serum and FF samples were taken and analyzed for anti-COVID IgG as well as estrogen, progesterone and heparan sulfate proteoglycan 2 concentration, as well as the number and maturity of aspirated oocytes and day of trigger estrogen and progesterone measurements. Main outcome measures were follicular function, including steroidogenesis, follicular response to the LH/hCG trigger, and oocyte quality biomarkers. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Both COVID-19 and the vaccine elicited anti-COVID IgG antibodies that were detected in the FF at levels proportional to the IgG serum concentration. No differences between the three groups were detected in any of the surrogate parameters for ovarian follicle quality. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION This is a small study, comprising a mixed fertile and infertile population, and its conclusions should be supported and validated by larger studies. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS This is the first study to examine the impact of SARS–Cov-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination on ovarian function and these early findings suggest no measurable detrimental effect on function of the ovarian follicle. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study was funded out of an internal budget. There are no conflicts of interest for any of the authors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER CinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT04822012.