BackgroundIgG anti-spike (S) antibodies arise after SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as vaccination. Levels of IgG anti-S are linked to neutralizing antibody titers and protection against (re)infection.MethodsWe measured IgG anti-S and surrogate neutralizing antibody kinetics against Wild Type (WT) and 4 Variants of Concern (VOC) in health care workers (HCW) 3 and 10 months after natural infection (“infection”, n=83) or vaccination (2 doses of BNT162b2) with (“hybrid immunity”, n=17) or without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (“vaccination”, n=97).ResultsThe humoral immune response in the “vaccination” cohort was higher at 3 months, but lower at 10 months, compared to the “infection” cohort due to a faster decline. The “hybrid immunity” cohort had the highest antibody levels at 3 and 10 months with a slower decline compared to the “vaccination” cohort. Surrogate neutralizing antibody levels (expressed as %inhibition of ACE-2 binding) showed a linear relation with log10 of IgG anti-S against WT and four VOC. IgG anti-S corresponding to 90% inhibition ranged from 489 BAU/mL for WT to 1756 BAU/mL for Beta variant. Broad pseudoneutralization predicted live virus neutralization of Omicron BA.1 in 20 randomly selected high titer samples.ConclusionsHybrid immunity resulted in the strongest humoral immune response. Antibodies induced by natural infection decreased more slowly than after vaccination, resulting in higher antibody levels at 10 months compared to vaccinated HCW without prior infection. There was a linear relationship between surrogate neutralizing activity and log10 IgG anti-S for WT and 4 VOC, although some VOC showed reduced sensitivity to pseudoneutralization.
Introduction:The presence of macroenzymes in blood can cause diagnostic confusion. Therefore, confirming the presence of macroenzymes is important to reduce unnecessary (non-)invasive investigations. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) precipitation is a simple and fast first-line method for the detection of macroenzymes. However, there is no consensus on the upper reference limit for the PEG-precipitable activity (%PPA) of monomeric enzymes. The aim of this study was to verify a PEG precipitation protocol for the detection of macroenzymes in our laboratory by establishing upper reference limits (URLs) and determining imprecision for eight enzymes after PEG precipitation. In addition, we aimed to clinically verify the URLs using samples containing macroenzymes as identified by electrophoresis. Materials and methods: Per enzyme, at least 40 leftover blood samples from adult patients with either normal or increased enzyme activities were diluted 1:1 with 25% PEG 6000 and 1:1 with 0.9% NaCl. Mixtures were incubated for 10 min at 37°C and centrifuged. Supernatant enzyme activity was measured on Cobas c702 and the %PPA was calculated.
Results:The following URLs were obtained: 26% PPA for amylase, 29% PPA for alkaline phosphatase (ALP), 61% PPA for alanine aminotransferase, 48% PPA for aspartate aminotransferase, 24% PPA for creatine kinase (CK), 55% PPA for gamma-glutamyltransferase, 65% PPA for lactate dehydrogenase, and 56% PPA for lipase. The within-lab imprecision was < 15%. Regarding the clinical verification, the two historical samples with proven macroCK showed a %PPA of 69% and 43%, respectively, and a sample with proven macroALP had a %PPA of 52%.
Conclusion:In this study, URLs for monomeric enzyme activities after PEG precipitation for eight different enzymes were established. The URLs are suitable for clinical use, but are only partially in line with other studies. Therefore, our data highlight the importance of establishing laboratory-specific upper reference limits for %PPA to allow a correct interpretation.
A Corrigendum onIgG anti-spike antibodies and surrogate neutralizing antibody levels decline faster 3 to 10 months after BNT162b2 vaccination than after SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.