Abstract
Background Estimating the response of different cohorts (e.g. vaccinated or critically ill) to new SARS-CoV-2 variants is important to customize measures of control. Thus, our goal was to evaluate binding of antibodies from sera of infected and vaccinated people to different antigens expressed by SARS-CoV-2 variants.
Methods We compared sera from vaccinated donors with sera from four patient/donor cohorts: critically ill patients admitted to an intensive care unit (split in sera collected between 2 and 7 days after admission and more than ten days later), a NIBSC/WHO reference panel of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals, and ambulatory or hospitalized (but not critically ill) positive donors. Samples were tested with an anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG serological assay designed with microplates coated with a SARS-CoV-2 RBD recombinant antigen. The same sample sets were also tested with microplates coated with antigens harbouring RBD mutations present in eleven of the most widespread variants.
Results Sera from vaccinated individuals exhibited higher antibody binding (P<0.001) than sera from infected (but not critically ill) individuals when tested against the WT and each of 11 variants’ RBD.
The optical density generated by sera from non-critically ill convalescence individuals upon binding to variant’s antigens was different (P<0.05) from that of the WT in some variants—noteworthy, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Delta Plus variants.
Conclusions Understanding differences in binding and neutralizing antibody titers against WT vs variant RBD antigens from different donor cohorts can help design variant-specific immunoassays and complement other diagnostic and clinical data to evaluate the epidemiology of new variants.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: PH, IH, CM, MAP, XW, JZ, JAC are currently employed by Diagnostics Biochem Canada, the manufacturer of the DBC ELISA used in this study; there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Funding Statement
This study was partially funded by the Industrial Research Assistance Program of the National Research Council of Canada and a Grant from the National Defense of Canada. D.D.F. received funding from Western University (Research), the Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics at Western University, the Lawson Health Research Institute (https://www.lawsonresearch.ca/), the London Health Sciences Foundation (https://lhsf.ca/), London Community Foundation and the AMOSO Innovation Fund.
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:
Commercial samples were sourced through Access Biologicals (Vista, California, USA), Lampire Biological Laboratories (Pipersville, PA, USA), or Plasma Services Group, Inc (Moorestown, NJ, USA), each of which confirmed patient consent and participation in an Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved protocol. For critically ill patient recruitment, waived consent was approved for a short, defined period (Western University, Research Ethics Board [REB] number 1670). Samples obtained through the WHO database were originally collected under WHO protocols and ethical considerations as follows. Convalescent plasma and serum from PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients was kindly donated by Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium (ISARIC4C consortium) through the University of Liverpool, UK; Papworth Hospital, Cambridge, UK; NHS Blood and Transplant, UK; and Oslo University Hospital, Norway. All patient donors gave informed consent for the use of their plasma or serum, and samples were anonymized. For material provided by ISARIC4C, ethical approval was given by the South Central-Oxford C Research Ethics Committee in England (reference 13/SC/0149), and by the Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (reference 20/SS/0028). The study was registered at https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN66726260. The NIBSC Human Material Advisory Committee (project 16/005MP) approved this project. The authors 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 outside the research group or have been sufficiently anonymized and so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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 and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
