Understanding how antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 evolve during infection may provide important insight into therapeutic approaches and vaccination for COVID-19. Here we profile the antibody responses of 162 COVID-19 symptomatic patients in the COVID-BioB cohort followed longitudinally for up to eight months from symptom onset to find SARS-CoV-2 neutralization, as well as antibodies either recognizing SARS-CoV-2 spike antigens and nucleoprotein, or specific for S2 antigen of seasonal beta-coronaviruses and hemagglutinin of the H1N1 flu virus. The presence of neutralizing antibodies within the first weeks from symptoms onset correlates with time to a negative swab result (p = 0.002), while the lack of neutralizing capacity correlates with an increased risk of a fatal outcome (p = 0.008). Neutralizing antibody titers progressively drop after 5–8 weeks but are still detectable up to 8 months in the majority of recovered patients regardless of age or co-morbidities, with IgG to spike antigens providing the best correlate of neutralization. Antibody responses to seasonal coronaviruses are temporarily boosted, and parallel those to SARS-CoV-2 without dampening the specific response or worsening disease progression. Our results thus suggest compromised immune responses to the SARS-CoV-2 spike to be a major trait of COVID-19 patients with critical conditions, and thereby inform on the planning of COVID-19 patient care and therapy prioritization.

BackgroundNeutralizing antibody assessments play a central role in human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) vaccine development but it is unclear which assay, or combination of assays, will provide reliable measures of correlates of protection. To address this, an international collaboration (NeutNet) involving 18 independent participants was organized to compare different assays.MethodsEach laboratory evaluated four neutralizing reagents (TriMab, 447-52D, 4E10, sCD4) at a given range of concentrations against a panel of 11 viruses representing a wide range of genetic subtypes and phenotypes. A total of 16 different assays were compared. The assays utilized either uncloned virus produced in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) (virus infectivity assays, VI assays), or their Env-pseudotyped (gp160) derivatives produced in 293T cells (PSV assays) from molecular clones or uncloned virus. Target cells included PBMC and genetically-engineered cell lines in either a single- or multiple-cycle infection format. Infection was quantified by using a range of assay read-outs that included extracellular or intracellular p24 antigen detection, RNA quantification and luciferase and beta-galactosidase reporter gene expression.FindingsPSV assays were generally more sensitive than VI assays, but there were important differences according to the virus and inhibitor used. For example, for TriMab, the mean IC50 was always lower in PSV than in VI assays. However, with 4E10 or sCD4 some viruses were neutralized with a lower IC50 in VI assays than in the PSV assays. Inter-laboratory concordance was slightly better for PSV than for VI assays with some viruses, but for other viruses agreement between laboratories was limited and depended on both the virus and the neutralizing reagent.ConclusionsThe NeutNet project demonstrated clear differences in assay sensitivity that were dependent on both the neutralizing reagent and the virus. No single assay was capable of detecting the entire spectrum of neutralizing activities. Since it is not known which in vitro assay correlates with in vivo protection, a range of neutralization assays is recommended for vaccine evaluation.

Antibodies (Abs) are the major component of the humoral immune response and a key player in vaccination. The precise Ab-mediated inhibitory mechanisms leading to in vivo protection against HIV have not been elucidated. In addition to the desired viral capture and neutralizing Ab functions, complex Ab-dependent mechanisms that involve engaging immune effector cells to clear infected host cells, immune complexes, and opsonized virus have been proposed as being relevant. These inhibitory mechanisms involve Fc-mediated effector functions leading to Ab-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, phagocytosis, cell-mediated virus inhibition, aggregation, and complement inhibition. Indeed, the decreased risk of infection observed in the RV144 HIV-1 vaccine trial was correlated with the production of non-neutralizing inhibitory Abs, highlighting the role of Ab inhibitory functions besides neutralization. Moreover, Ab isotypes and subclasses recognizing specific HIV envelope epitopes as well as pecular Fc-receptor polymorphisms have been associated with disease progression. These findings further support the need to define which Fc-mediated Ab inhibitory functions leading to protection are critical for HIV vaccine design. Herein, based on our previous review Su & Moog Front Immunol 2014, we update the different inhibitory properties of HIV-specific Abs that may potentially contribute to HIV protection.

Purpose The aim of this study was to characterise the kinetics and durability of neutralizing antibody (Nab) response against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the presence of hyperglycemia. Methods Using a lentiviral-vector-based SARS-CoV-2 neutralization assay to measure Nabs, we characterised 150 patients randomly selected from a cohort of 509 patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia. We analysed Nab response according to the presence of diabetes or hyperglycaemia, at the time of hospitalisation and during the post discharge follow-up, i.e., 1, 3 and 6 months outpatient visits. Results Among 150 randomly selected patients 40 (26.6%) had diabetes. Diabetes (HR 8.9, p < 0.001), glucose levels (HR 1.25 x 1.1 mmol/L, p < 0.001) and glucose variability (HR 1.17 x 0.6 mmol/L, p < 0.001) were independently associated with an increased risk of mortality. The neutralizing activity of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in patients with diabetes was superimposable, as for kinetics and extent, to that of patients without diabetes. It was similar across glucose levels and correlated with the humoral response against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Positivity for Nabs at the time of hospital admission conferred protection on mortality, both in the presence (HR 0.28, p=0.046) or absence of diabetes (HR 0.26, p=0.030). The longevity of the Nab response was not affected by diabetes. Conclusions Diabetes and hyperglycaemia do not affect the kinetics and durability of the neutralizing antibody response to SARS-CoV-2. These findings provide the rational to include patients with diabetes in the early phase of the vaccination campaign against SARS-CoV-2.

These findings suggest that a specific substitution in a 3S-based immunogen might allow the generation of specific antibodies, providing a foundation for a rational vaccine that combine a capacity to neutralize HIV-1 and to protect CD4(+) T cells.