Abstract
Neutralizing antibody responses correlate with protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection, yet higher neutralizing responses associate with more severe disease. Whether people without severe disease can also develop strong neutralizing responses to infection, and the pathways involved, is less clear. We performed a proteomic analysis on sera from 71 individuals infected with ancestral SARS-CoV-2, enrolled during the first South African infection wave. We determined disease severity by whether participants required supplemental oxygen and measured neutralizing antibody levels at convalescence. High neutralizing antibodies were associated with high disease severity, yet 40% of participants with lower disease severity had neutralizing antibody levels comparable to those with severe disease. We found 130 differentially expressed proteins between high and low neutralizers and 40 between people with high versus low disease severity. Five proteins overlapped, including furin, a protease which enhances SARS-CoV-2 infection. High neutralizers with non-severe disease had similar levels of differentially expressed neutralization response proteins to high neutralizers with severe disease, yet similar levels of differentially expressed disease severity proteins to participants with non-severe disease. Furthermore, we could reasonably predict who developed a strong neutralizing response based on a single protein, HSPA8, involved in clathrin pit uncoating. These results indicate that a strong antibody response does not always require severe disease and may involve different pathways.
Competing Interest Statement
Alex Sigal has received an honorarium from Pfizer for consultation.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates award INV-018944 and the National Institute of Health award 5R01AI138546-05 (AS).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The nasopharyngeal swab used to isolate ancestral SARS-CoV-2 as well as all blood samples used for plasma were obtained after written informed consent from adults with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection enrolled in a prospective cohort of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals at the Africa Health Research Institute in Durban, South Africa. The study protocol was approved by the Biomedical Research Ethics Committee at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (reference BREC/00001275/2020). Participants were reimbursed for each visit based on time, inconvenience and expenses as approved in the protocol.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Sequence of isolated SARS-CoV-2 used in this study has been deposited in GISAID and GenBank with accession numbers EPI_ISL_602626.1 (GISAID), OP090658 (GenBank). It is available upon reasonable request. All R-scripts used in the analysis have been deposited to GitHub (https://github.com/Afrah-Khairallah/Omics-).
