RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Calibration of Two Validated SARS-CoV-2 Pseudovirus Neutralization Assays for COVID-19 Vaccine Evaluation
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.09.09.21263049
DO 10.1101/2021.09.09.21263049
A1 Huang, Yunda
A1 Borisov, Oleg
A1 Kee, Jia Jin
A1 Carpp, Lindsay N.
A1 Wrin, Terri
A1 Cai, Suqin
A1 Sarzotti-Kelsoe, Marcella
A1 McDanal, Charlene
A1 Eaton, Amanda
A1 Pajon, Rolando
A1 Hural, John
A1 Posavad, Christine M.
A1 Gill, Katherine
A1 Karuna, Shelly
A1 Corey, Lawrence
A1 McElrath, M. Juliana
A1 Gilbert, Peter B.
A1 Petropoulos, Christos J.
A1 Montefiori, David C.
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/14/2021.09.09.21263049.abstract
AB Vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) are key biomarkers considered to be associated with vaccine efficacy. In United States Government-sponsored phase 3 efficacy trials of COVID-19 vaccines, nAbs are measured by two different validated pseudovirus-based SARS-CoV-2 neutralization assays, with each trial using one of the two assays. Here we describe and compare the nAb titers obtained in the two assays. We observe that one assay consistently yielded higher nAb titers than the other when both assays were performed on the World Health Organization’s anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin International Standard, COVID-19 convalescent sera, and mRNA-1273 vaccinee sera. To overcome the challenge this difference in readout poses in comparing/combining data from the two assays, we evaluate three calibration approaches and show that readouts from the two assays can be calibrated to a common scale. These results may aid decision-making based on data from these assays for the evaluation and licensure of new or adapted COVID-19 vaccines.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialNCT04283461, NCT04403880Funding StatementThis research has been funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health (UM1AI068635, UM1AI068614, and UM1AI068618). This research has also been funded in whole / part by a federal contract from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health: Collaborative Influenza Vaccine Innovation Centers (CIVICs) Component A: Vaccine Center (Contract Number: 75N93019C00050). The mRNA-1273 phase 1 study was sponsored and primarily funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD; in part with federal funds from the NIAID under grant awards UM1AI148373, to Kaiser Washington; 5 UM1AI148576, UM1AI148684, and NIH P51 OD011132, to Emory University; NIH AID AI149644, and contract award HHSN272201500002C, to Emmes. The study was conducted in collaboration with ModernaTX and funding for the manufacture of mRNA-1273 phase 1 material was provided by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The work described here was approved by the Duke University Health System Institutional Review Board (Duke University) through protocol IDs Pro00093087 and Pro00105358.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAccess to patient-level data and supporting clinical documents by qualified external researchers is available upon request and subject to review.