/
Laboratory Serology for SARS
Laboratory Serology for SARS

Laboratory Serology for SARS - PDF document

roberts
roberts . @roberts
Follow
1 views | Public

Laboratory Serology for SARS - Description

CoV 2 Patricia Slev PhD DABCC Section Chief Immunology ARUP Laboratories Associate Professor University of Utah School of Medicine patriciaslevaruplabcom 1 DISCLOSURES P Slev None OBJEC ID: 961183 Download Pdf

Tags :

sars antibody days cov antibody sars cov days antibodies 2020 response neutralizing infection covid tests onset post igg test

Please download the presentation from below link :


Download Pdf - The PPT/PDF document "Laboratory Serology for SARS" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Presentation on theme: "Laboratory Serology for SARS"β€” Presentation transcript

Laboratory Serology for SARS - CoV - 2 Patricia Slev, PhD, D(ABCC) Section Chief, Immunology, ARUP Laboratories Associate Professor, University of Utah School of Medicine patricia.slev@aruplab.com 1 DISCLOSURES P Slev None OBJECTIVES 1. Describe what is known about antibody response to SARS - CoV - 2 infection 2. Understand the role of neutralizing antibodies in SARS - CoV - 2 infection 3. Understand the advantages and limitations of current serology assays for SARS - CoV - 2 4. Describe serology testing as related to vaccines Temporal Consideration

s for Diagnosis Sethuraman. JAMA. 2020;323:2249. Reproduced with permission from JAMA. 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.8259. Copyright©(2020) American Medical Association. All rights reserved. slide credit: clinicaloptions.com Wk - 2 Wk - 1 Wk 1 Wk 2 Wk 3 Wk 4 Wk 5 Wk 6 Symptom onset Detection unlikely PCR – Likely positive PCR – Likely negative Antibody detection Nasopharyngeal swab PCR Virus isolation from respiratory tract Bronchoalveolar lavage/sputum PCR Stool PCR IgM antibody IgG antibody After symptom onset Before symptom onset SARS - Co

V - 2 exposure Increasing probability of detection COVID - 19 Incubation: Infection to Illness Onset β–ͺ Among 10 confirmed NCIP cases in Wuhan, Hubei province, China [1] β€’ Mean incubation: 5.2 days (95% CI: 4.1 - 7.0) β–ͺ Among 181 confirmed SARS - CoV - 2 infections occurring outside of Hubei province [2] β€’ Median incubation: 5.1 days (95% CI: 4.5 - 5.8) β€’ Symptom onset by Day 11.5 of infection in 97.5% of persons 1. Li. NEJM. 2020;382:1199. 2. Lauer. Ann Intern Med. 2020;172:577. clinicaloptions.com Estimated Incubation Period Distributi

on [1] 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0 Relative Frequency Days From Infection to Symptom Onset 21 0 7 14 New virus = no pre - existing antibodies or immunity We are still learning about our immune response to SARS - CoV - 2 β–ͺ Many develop Abs ~1 - 2 weeks after symptoms β–ͺ �95% of patients are Ab positive after 2 weeks β–ͺ IgM and IgG develop almost simultaneously β–ͺ IgM declines more rapidly than IgG, may only detectable for a few weeks post onset β–ͺ IgG remains positive for weeks to months post onset Timing of Antibody Develo

pment Q1 – Does antibody response vary with disease severity? Antibody Response in COVID - 19: Acute Phase vs Early - Convalescent Phase Antibodies in Acute Phase COVID - 19 IgG Levels 8 Wks After Discharge From Hospital Long. Nat Med. 2020;26:1200. clinicaloptions.com Asymptomatic Symptomatic Log 2 Antibody Level 10 8 6 2 0 4 IgM (n = 37) IgM (n = 37) IgG (n = 37) IgG (n = 37) P = .005 P = .069 Log 2 Antibody Level 10 8 6 2 0 4 IgG (n = 37) IgG (n = 37) P = .002 Asymptomatic Symptomatic Q2 – What is the longevity of antibodies post natural i

nfection? Antibody Kinetics β–ͺ Following acute infection, antibodies naturally decline overtime for most viral infections β–ͺ Long QX et.al study by 8 weeks: β€’ ~40% of asymptomatic vs ~13% of symptomatic patients are seronegative Long et. al. Nature Med. Antibody Response to SARS - CoV - 2 in Iceland Gudbjartsson . NEJM. 2020;382:2302. New * Anti - N and anti - S1 - RBD tests 1797 recovered COVID - 19 pts tested over 4 months Total antibodies increased over first 2 months and then plateau Antibody Response in qPCR Positive Cases Days Sinc

e SARS - CoV - 2 Diagnosis Proportion With Both Pan - Ig Tests Positive (95% CI) Hospitalized Recovered 125 0 25 50 75 100 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 Q3 – What about protective immunity and neutralizing antibodies? Neutralizing Binding – Complement Activation Binding – Opsinzation https://www.mblbio.com/bio/g/support/method/antibody - role.html Role of Neutralizing Antibodies in Protective Immunity β–ͺ Antibodies can be binding or neutralizing β€’ Binding Abs β€’ Indicate robustness of immune response β€’ Anti - viral activity through i

nteraction with other components of immune system β€’ No information about functionality β€’ Neutralizing Abs ( nAbs ) β€’ Independently block viral binding/entry β€’ Key markers of protective immunity β€’ Functionality β€˜level’ of immune response β–ͺ nAbs target epitopes of the Spike protein β€’ Contains RBD for binding host cell ACE2 and fusion of viral/cellular membranes β€’ NAbs primarily target RBD β–ͺ Commercial tests do not distinguish b/w nAbs and non - nAbs slide credit - Dr. Theel Jiang S, et. al. Trends Immuno . DOI: https ://d

oi.org/10.1016/j.it.2020.03.007 P .01 Measuring Virus Neutralization Without High Containment Facilities β–ͺ Neutralization can be measured multiple ways β–ͺ Classical methods use live or pseudotyped virus and determine the serum dilution that inhibits virus growth [1,2] β–ͺ The surrogate viral neutralization test (sVNT) is a simpler method that assesses binding to ACE2 [1,2] clinicaloptions.com *Included 71 mild cases, 17 moderate cases, and 3 severe cases. † Included patients with seasonal coronavirus infections or other acute infections

(e.g. dengue, CMV, or EBV). ‑ Serum from a random cohort of patients in Australia obtained in 2018. P .0001 P .0001 Patients with SARS - CoV - 2 (n = 91)* Patients with other acute infections † (n =36) Pre - pandemic controls ‑ (n = 56) ≀ 7 8 - 21 � 21 Days Post - Symptom Onset Other Acute Infections Controls Inhibition (%) [2] 100 80 60 40 20 0 - 20 1. Tan. Nat Biotechnol. 2020;38:1073. 2. Bond. J Infect Dis. 2020;222:1280. 20% inhibition What do we know about nAbs and immunity to other CoVs ? β–ͺ Common CoVs (volunteer stu

dies) : β€’ IgG peaks ~2 wks post infection and decline over ~ 1 year β€’ Re - challenge at 1 yr : β€’ 66% shed virus, none developed colds β€’ Protective antibody levels thought to drop off at ~2 yrs β–ͺ SARS: β€’ Abs max out ~3 - 5 months post infection β€’ Decline to undetectable by 3 - 6 yrs β–ͺ MERS: β€’ Neutralizing antibodies remain detectable for at least ~3 yrs β–ͺ The unknown: β€’ What level of nAbs are protective and for how long? slide credit - Dr. Theel SARS Wu LP, et. al. EID . 2007;13(10):1562 - 1564 Tang F, et. al. J Immu

no . 2011;186(12);7264 - 7268 Bao L, et. al. bioRxiv:https ://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.13.990226 Volunteers infected with 229E Neutralizing Antibodies to SARS - CoV - 2 β–ͺ Plasma collected from recovered patients with COVID - 19 who had mild symptoms (N = 175) β–ͺ Neutralizing antibody titers* varied β–ͺ Neutralizing and spike - binding antibodies emerged concurrently between 10 - 15 days following disease onset clinicaloptions.com Wu. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;189:10. SARS - CoV - 2 NAb Titers (ID50) Disease Duration (Days) *Assessed via pseudotyped

, lentiviral vector - based assay. NAb Titers Value (N = 175) Titer range, ID50 40 to 21,567 Patients with undetectable level, % 6 Patients with detectable level, % β–ͺ ID50: 500 (very low) β–ͺ ID50: 500 - 999 (medium low) β–ͺ ID50: 1000 - 2500 (medium high) β–ͺ ID50: � 2500 (high) 30 17 39 14 Patient No. 165 157 151 143 125 122 87 72 60 26 13 8192 4096 2048 1024 512 256 128 64 32 16 2 4 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 2 0 2 2 Neutralizing Antibody Response in SARS - CoV - 2 Infection β–ͺ 269 sequential serum samples collected at 2 London Hospit

als from 65 patients diagnosed with SARS - CoV - 2 by RT - PCR β–ͺ Persons with more severe disease had a greater magnitude of neutralizing antibody response β€’ Days to peak neutralization did not differ by disease severity Seow. Nat Microbiol. 2020;[Epub]. P .0001 P = .674 Neutralizing Antibody Titer and Days to Neutralization Post Onset of Symptoms ID 50 (log) Days POS to Peak Neutralization Slide credit: clinicaloptions.com 10 2 0 - 3 10 3 10 4 10 5 4 - 5 Severity Group 0 0 - 3 20 40 60 4 - 5 Severity Group Kinetics of Neutralizing Anti

body Reponses in SARS - CoV - 2 Infection β–ͺ Average time to detectable neutralization = 14.3 days POS (range: 3 - 59) β–ͺ Average time to peak neutralization = 23.1 days POS (range: 1 - 66) β–ͺ Patients with low neutralizing Ab response (ID 50 100 - 300) return to baseline or undetectable at approximately 50 days β–ͺ Patients with robust neutralizing Ab responses maintain ti�ters 1000 even after initial decline Days Post Onset of Symptoms ID 50 for Neutralization (log) Neutralizing Antibody Changes Against Pseudo - Typed Virus B

lack = disease severity 0 - 3 Red = disease severity 4 - 5 Seow. Nat Microbiol. 2020;[Epub]. 10 2 0 10 3 10 4 10 5 20 10 1 40 60 80 100 Stability of Antibody Response Following COVID - 19 Recovery β–ͺ Antibody responses were assessed in individuals screened at Mount Sinai Health System in NYC (N = 19,752) β€’ Screened patients either had confirmed SARS - CoV - 2 infection by RT - PCR or suspected disease β€’ Additional samples collected through voluntary employee screening β€’ 5% of cases required emergency department evaluation or hospitalizat

ion β€’ 121 individuals donated blood samples at 2 intervals (~ 30 days post symptom onset and a mean of 82 days post symptom onset) clinicaloptions.com Wajnberg. Science. December 4, 2020. β‰₯ 1:2880 38.68% (n = 7641) Neutralization ID 50 Neutralization* by ELISA Titer *Microneutralization assay. Binding IgG Antibodies to Spike Protein Reciprocal Titer 1:960 31.75% (n=6272) 1:80 2.56% (n =505) 1:160 4.77% (n=943) 1:320 22.23% (n =4391) P = .0002 GMT 642 GMT 670 2880 960 320 16 0 80 40 Spearman r = 0.87 P .0001 ELISA endpoint titer 10000 1000 1

00 10 1 Q1 - Does antibody response vary with disease severity? Severity of SARS - CoV - 2 infection does affect magnitude of antibody response Q2 - What is the longevity of antibodies post natural infection ? IgG antibodies can be detected several months post - infection (8 months) IgG antibodies do decline over months Q3 - What about neutralizing antibodies? Symptomatic individuals generally develop nAb titer but it is highly variable Potential Immune Correlates of Protection to SARS - CoV - 2 Infection clinicaloptions.com Cox. Nat Rev Imm

unol. 2020;20:581. Days/Weeks Weeks/Months Months/Years SARS - Cov - 2 Infection Innate Immune Response Adaptive Immunity Immune Memory to SARS - CoV - 2 Memory T - cell Memory B - cell Plasma cell B cell DC activation and uptake of viral antigens Cytokine production Regulation of inflammation Killing of infected cells Induction of antibodies T H CTL T FH T re g New Summary: Duration of T - Cell Reponses to SARS - CoV - 2 β–ͺ 100% of individuals with prior severe COVID - 19 and 87% with prior mild COVID - 19 demonstrated SARS - CoV - 2 – speci

fic memory T - cell responses in convalescent phase (25 - 58 days after disease onset) [1] β–ͺ SARS - CoV - 2 – specific CD4+ and CD8+ T - cell recall responses were present in 41% of seronegative individuals, including individuals in the convalescent phase with a history of mild COVID - 19 (3/31), exposed family members (9/28), and healthy individuals (5/31) [1] β–ͺ In another study, spike - specific memory CD4+ and CD8+ T - cells were maintained ~ 3 mos following symptom onset in patients with mild SARS - CoV - 2 (N = 15) [2] 1. Sekine. Cell.

2020;[Epub]. 2. Rodda. MedRxiv. 2020;[Preprint]. Note: this study has not been peer reviewed. clinicaloptions.com New https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554776/ β–ͺ Format Lateral Flow Assays (LFAs) Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assays Chemiluminescent Immunoassays β–ͺ Specimen Type Serum, plasma Finger stick/venous whole blood (LFAs) β–ͺ Type of Antibody Detected β€’ IgM β€’ IgG β€’ IgA β€’ Total Abs β–ͺ SARS - CoV - 2 Protein Used in the test Spike protein – Subunit 1 and/or 2 (S1/S2) Receptor Binding domain (RBD) Nucleocapsid CDC COVID - 19 Gu

idelines (May 23, 2020): - No advantage testing for IgG, IgM & IgG or Total - Testing for IgA not recommended! Different SARS - CoV - 2 Antibody Test Designs SARS - CoV - 2 Antibody Tests clinicaloptions.com 1. Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Serology - based tests for COVID - 19. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/resources/COVID - 19/serology/Serology - based - tests - for - COVID - 19.html 2. Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration. https://www.tga.gov.au/covid - 19 - test - kits - included - artg - legal - supply - Australia T

ype of Test* [1] Time to Results [1] Sensitivity [1] Specificity [1] What It Tells Us [1] What It Cannot Tell Us [1] Approved for Diagnostic Use [1,2] Rapid diagnostic test (RDT) 10 - 30 mins 87.9% to 99.0% 95.6% to 100% Presence of antiviral antibodies (qualitative) Antibody titer, neutralizing activity US (FDA EUA), EU, China, Australia Enzyme - linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) 2 - 5 hrs 13.9% (0 - 10 days) to 100% (β‰₯ 21 days) 99% to 100% Presence and level of antiviral antibodies (quantitative) Neutralizing activity US (FDA EU

A), Australia Neutralization assay 3 - 5 days 90% Not stated Presence of antibodies that can inhibit virus growth (ex vivo) May miss antibodies to viral proteins not involved in replication Singapore Chemiluminescent immunoassay 1 - 2 hrs 65.5% (0 - 6 days) to 100% (β‰₯ 14 days) 93.0% to 99.8% Presence and level of antiviral antibodies (quantitative) Neutralizing activity US (FDA EUA) *Some additional tests have been approved that do not fit these categories or are proprietary. Initially, the Food and Drug Administration did not require

emergency use authorization (EUA) for SARS - CoV - 2 serologic tests because : β–ͺ Antibody tests were not meant to be diagnostic β–ͺ Intended to be used to answer the question of prevalence β–ͺ Intended to limit antibody testing to CLIA - certified high - complexity labs β–ͺ Indicated that this policy would be re - visited SARS - CoV - 2 Serologic Test Regulations in US: Where We Started FDA GUIDANCE FOR SARS - COV - 2 SEROLOGIC TESTS March 2020 – Notify FDA May 4 th , 2020 new guidance : β–ͺ Manufacturers must submit validation data for EUA

w/in 10 days from the date of FDA notification β–ͺ FDA has provided specific performance threshold requirements β–ͺ Serology EUA template available ( manufacturer, laboratory) β–ͺ Umbrella Route – independent evaluation through NIH’s National Cancer Institute (NCI ) β–ͺ Sensitivity 30 samples days, 8 - 14 days, � 15 days (post - PCR pos ) A cceptance criteria – 90% PPA β–ͺ Specificity 75 samples Pre - pandemic s amples A cceptance criteria – 95% PPA SARS - COV - 2 Serology Test Performance Thresholds Assay Performance Chara

cteristics https://www.fda.gov/medical - devices/emergency - situations - medical - devices/eua - authorized - serology - test - performance SARS - CoV - 2 Antibody Tests Adjusted Seroprevalence Estimate (%) 0 5 10 20 30 50 70 1 10 0 SARS - CoV - 2 Serology in Epidemiology β–ͺ Serology tests with high but specificity may lead to false - positive results when used in areas with low incidence β€’ Example: A test with 96% specificity and 90% sensitivity used in an area where 5% of population has been infected β†’ 54% of positive results would indicat

e true infection clinicaloptions.com Bryant. Sci Immunol. 2020;5:eabc6347. Positive Predictive Value (%) True Seroprevalence (%) True Seroprevalence (%) 100 20 10 5 1 0 30 50 70 Likely range of current true seroprevalence 0 5 10 20 30 50 70 1 10 0 100 20 10 5 1 0 30 50 70 Adjusted seroprevalence = 1 when true seroprevalence � 1 - sensitivity Adjusted seroprevalence = true seroprevalence Adjusted seroprevalence = 0 when true seroprevalence 1 - specificity 90% sensitivity/99% specificity 80% sensitivity/98% specificity 65% sensitivity/95% s

pecificity β–ͺ Positive and negative predictive values are dependent on test performance characteristics and disease prevalence β–ͺ In regions with low COVID - 19 prevalence, the risk of a false positive result by serologic tests, even with excellent specificity, is higher COVID19 Positive COVID19 Negative Test Positive Test Negative Total: 1000 Prevalence: 1% Sensitivity: 98% Specificity: 99% 10 990 9 980 10 1 PPV: 47% COVID19 Positive COVID19 Negative Test Positive Test Negative Total: 1000 Prevalence: 5% Sensitivity: 98% Specificity: 99%

50 950 49 940 10 1 PPV: 83% CDC recommendation to increase assay PPV: 1. Utilize assays with at least 99.5% specificity 2. Use orthogonal, 2 - assay testing algorithm 3. Only screen high - risk/high - prevalence regions The Issue of Disease Prevalence on Performance of SARS - CoV - 2 Antibody Tests Deeks. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;6:CD013652. Lee. Front Immunol. 2020;11:879. Carter. ACS Cent Sci. 2020;6:591. Slide credit: clinicaloptions.com Updated SARS - CoV - 2 Antibody Tests Indications Past infection/Exposure Surveillance for SARS - CoV

- 2 infection Screening & identification of convalescent plasma donors (CCP) Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS - C) Individuals presenting late in disease course (PCR negative but symptoms consistent with SARS - CoV - 2 infections) Potentially evaluate response to vaccine Considerations False negatives - low sensitivity in the 7 days post symptom onset - in individuals with mild or asymptomatic disease False positives - due to cross - reactivity with other viruses - in low prevalence populations β–ͺ Currently: many EUA authorized

commercially available serologic tests for SARS - CoV - 2 β€’ Some did not receive or submit for EUA β€’ Some had EUA revoked β–ͺ No antibody tests are approved for at - home collection or at - home testing β–ͺ assays approved as semi - quant β–ͺ CLIA waived rapid tests β–ͺ One assay for CCP qualification β–ͺ One neutralizing antibody assay SARS - CoV - 2 Antibody Assays Vaccines Manufacturer Type Administration Immune Response Pfizer BNT162b2 Spike mRNA in LNPs i.m . boost at 21 days nAb and cellular response Moderna mRNA - 1273 Spike mRNA in

LNPs i.m . boost at 28 days nAb and Th1 response AstraZeneca ChADOx1/AZD1222 Inactivated chimpanzee Adv expressing spike i.m . boost at 28 days nAb and Th1 response mRNA Vaccines Against SARS - CoV - 2 Vaccine Description Phase (Total N) Case Count, n Primary Endpoint: Prevention of Symptomatic COVID - 19 Additional Analyses Reported BNT162b2 (Pfizer) [1] Vaccinations on Day 1 and Day 21 in persons β‰₯ 12 yrs of age with nucleoside - modified mRNA (modRNA) encoding the membrane - bound full - length spike protein II/III (43,661)* 170 (f

inal) 95% 7 days after second dose ( P .0001) β–ͺ � 94% efficacy in adults � 65 yrs of age β–ͺ 9/10 severe cases occurred in placebo group mRNA - 1273 (Moderna) [2 - 4] Vaccinations on Day 1 and Day 29 in persons β‰₯ 18 yrs of age with mRNA encoding a prefusion stabilized spike protein III (30,000) † 95 (interim) 94.5% 14 days after second dose ( P .0001) β–ͺ 11/11 severe cases occurred in placebo group *41,135 had received second dose as of November 13, 2020. 42% of volunteers had diverse ethnic backgrounds; 41% were

56 - 85 yrs o f age. † Includes more than 7000 persons � 65 yrs of age and more than 5000 65 yrs of age with high - risk chronic diseases, such as diab etes, severe obesity, and cardiac disease. 37% of volunteers from racial and ethnic minorities. clinicaloptions.com 1. https://www.pfizer.com/news/press - release/press - release - detail/pfizer - and - biontech - conclude - phase - 3 - study - covid - 19 - vaccine. Press release only, not peer reviewed. 2. https://investors.modernatx.com/news - releases/news - release - details/modernas - c

ovid - 19 - vaccine - candidate - meets - its - primary - efficacy. Press release only, not peer reviewed. 3. https://investors.modernatx.com/news - releases/news - release - details/modernas - covid - 19 - vaccine - candidate - meets - its - primary - efficacy. Press release only, not peer reviewed. 4. NCT04470427. β–ͺ Primary endpoint in mRNA vaccine trials was symptomatic illness, therefore viral shedding and transmission potential is not known β–ͺ Duration of vaccine immunity unknown β–ͺ Long - term safety data is needed for new technology β–ͺ Ef

ficacy established in healthy 18 – 65 β–ͺ No efficacy established in children (16) and pregnant women β–ͺ Efficacy is not established in subpopulations β–ͺ SARS - CoV - 2 mutations and viral escape immune selection pressure due to mass vaccination is unknown Vaccine Considerations Vaccines & Serology β–ͺ Vaccines target development of antibodies against spike & RBD because these are the targets for neutralizing antibodies β–ͺ Testing with a serology assay that uses a spike target can detect antibodies developed in response to current vaccines β–

ͺ However, anti - spike antibodies also develop in response to natural infection β–ͺ Antibodies against nucleocapsid are only detected in individuals that have been infected β–ͺ Currently, there are no recommendations for serology testing as a follow - up to vaccination Summary β–ͺ Antibody Kinetics IgM & IgG antibodies develop in response to SARS - CoV - 2 infection Disease severity likely affects magnitude of antibody response Antibody declines over time, 3 - 4 months Antibody decline may not mean lack of protection – memory B - cells prese

nt Neutralizing antibodies are detectable in the majority of symptomatic patients but titer and duration vary β–ͺ Antibody Testing Utility epidemiologic & seroprevalence studies supporting diagnosis of COVID - 19 and related syndromes (MIS - C) vaccine efficacy identifying & manufacturing COVID - 19 convalescent plasma (CCP) Summary β–ͺ Antibody Testing – What and When Antibody tests are not useful for diagnosis, lack sensitivity Useful for assessing exposure if used after at least 14 days post symptom onset (not clear for how long) S tandalone

IgM assays not currently recommended IgA assays not currently recommended No clear advantage to testing for one antibody class over another, although assays that detect IgM may increase sensitivity for detection of acute cases Use an assay with high specificity � 99.5%, orthogonal approach, or only test individuals with high probability of exposure No current recommendation for vaccine qualification or follow - up Post vaccine testing should be performed 2 weeks post last dose Serology testing using a nucleocapsid target can be useful in d