Anti-RBD immunoglobulin levels and their predictive value for SARS-CoV-2 neutralization.

IF 3.7 2区 生物学 Q2 MICROBIOLOGY
Sabine Lichtenegger, Sissy Therese Sonnleitner, Sabine Saiger, Andrea Zauner, Melina Hardt, Barbara Kleinhappl, Gabriel E Wagner, Ivo Steinmetz
{"title":"Anti-RBD immunoglobulin levels and their predictive value for SARS-CoV-2 neutralization.","authors":"Sabine Lichtenegger, Sissy Therese Sonnleitner, Sabine Saiger, Andrea Zauner, Melina Hardt, Barbara Kleinhappl, Gabriel E Wagner, Ivo Steinmetz","doi":"10.1128/spectrum.02148-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A large number of studies have demonstrated that anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD)-binding antibody titers correlate with SARS-CoV-2 neutralization and protection from the disease. Unlike live virus neutralization assays, antibody-binding assays are easier to perform, require lower biosafety levels, and have therefore served as a substitute for virus neutralization assays throughout the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Although anti-RBD antibodies are usually neutralizing, there is evidence that they can also be non-neutralizing. Moreover, different immunization regimens can vary in the induction of SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies. In this study, we hypothesized that sera from individuals with different immunization and infection histories, but with the same amount of anti-RBD total immunoglobulin, differ in their neutralizing potency. A total of 27 sera from SARS-CoV-2 convalescent, vaccinated individuals, and 27 vaccinated-only individuals were investigated by using a widely used antibody-binding assay (Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) and a live virus neutralization assay. As expected, anti-RBD immunoglobulin units correlated with virus neutralization capacity within the vaccine and hybrid immunized group. However, sera from both groups with matched anti-RBD units varied significantly in their neutralization potential. In detail, our data indicate a significantly higher neutralization potency of hybrid immunity compared to vaccinated-only sera with similar anti-RBD immunoglobulin levels. Our study highlights the need for cautious interpretation of quantitative antibody data from anti-RBD ELISAs, especially when comparing differently immunized groups. In other words, very similar anti-RBD levels can show very different functional activity. This finding has implications for determining possible future correlates of protection.</p><p><strong>Importance: </strong>Throughout the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, neutralizing antibody levels have been central to predict a protective immune response. Anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) correlate with neutralization assays and are due to the integration of simple performance with timely results used as surrogate assays. However, previous studies determining correlation used homogeneous cohorts. We reevaluated the correlation of a frequently used anti-RBD ELISA and a live virus neutralization assay using a heterogeneous cohort consisting of a vaccinated group without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and a vaccinated convalescent group. The neutralizing capacity of sera with matched anti-RBD units significantly differed between groups, decreasing the correlation of the assays. Our findings highlight the necessity of considering the immunization context when interpreting serological tests and suggest that different immunization groups may require distinct protective thresholds. Considering the immunization history, we can develop more accurate predictions of immunity not only for SARS-CoV-2 but also for future challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":18670,"journal":{"name":"Microbiology spectrum","volume":" ","pages":"e0214824"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microbiology spectrum","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02148-24","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A large number of studies have demonstrated that anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD)-binding antibody titers correlate with SARS-CoV-2 neutralization and protection from the disease. Unlike live virus neutralization assays, antibody-binding assays are easier to perform, require lower biosafety levels, and have therefore served as a substitute for virus neutralization assays throughout the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Although anti-RBD antibodies are usually neutralizing, there is evidence that they can also be non-neutralizing. Moreover, different immunization regimens can vary in the induction of SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies. In this study, we hypothesized that sera from individuals with different immunization and infection histories, but with the same amount of anti-RBD total immunoglobulin, differ in their neutralizing potency. A total of 27 sera from SARS-CoV-2 convalescent, vaccinated individuals, and 27 vaccinated-only individuals were investigated by using a widely used antibody-binding assay (Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) and a live virus neutralization assay. As expected, anti-RBD immunoglobulin units correlated with virus neutralization capacity within the vaccine and hybrid immunized group. However, sera from both groups with matched anti-RBD units varied significantly in their neutralization potential. In detail, our data indicate a significantly higher neutralization potency of hybrid immunity compared to vaccinated-only sera with similar anti-RBD immunoglobulin levels. Our study highlights the need for cautious interpretation of quantitative antibody data from anti-RBD ELISAs, especially when comparing differently immunized groups. In other words, very similar anti-RBD levels can show very different functional activity. This finding has implications for determining possible future correlates of protection.

Importance: Throughout the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, neutralizing antibody levels have been central to predict a protective immune response. Anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) correlate with neutralization assays and are due to the integration of simple performance with timely results used as surrogate assays. However, previous studies determining correlation used homogeneous cohorts. We reevaluated the correlation of a frequently used anti-RBD ELISA and a live virus neutralization assay using a heterogeneous cohort consisting of a vaccinated group without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and a vaccinated convalescent group. The neutralizing capacity of sera with matched anti-RBD units significantly differed between groups, decreasing the correlation of the assays. Our findings highlight the necessity of considering the immunization context when interpreting serological tests and suggest that different immunization groups may require distinct protective thresholds. Considering the immunization history, we can develop more accurate predictions of immunity not only for SARS-CoV-2 but also for future challenges.

抗rbd免疫球蛋白水平及其对SARS-CoV-2中和的预测价值
大量研究表明,抗受体结合域(anti-receptor binding domain, RBD)结合抗体滴度与SARS-CoV-2中和和预防疾病相关。与活病毒中和试验不同,抗体结合试验更容易操作,对生物安全水平的要求更低,因此在整个SARS-CoV-2大流行期间,抗体结合试验一直是病毒中和试验的替代品。虽然抗rbd抗体通常是中和性的,但有证据表明它们也可以是非中和性的。此外,不同的免疫方案在诱导sars - cov -2中和抗体方面可能有所不同。在这项研究中,我们假设来自不同免疫和感染史的个体的血清,但具有相同数量的抗rbd总免疫球蛋白,其中和效力不同。采用广泛应用的抗体结合试验(Elecsys anti- sars - cov - 2s酶联免疫吸附试验[ELISA])和活病毒中和试验,对来自SARS-CoV-2恢复期、接种者和仅接种者的27份血清进行了调查。正如预期的那样,在疫苗和混合免疫组中,抗rbd免疫球蛋白单位与病毒中和能力相关。然而,两组具有匹配抗rbd单位的血清在中和电位上有显著差异。详细地说,我们的数据表明,与具有相似抗rbd免疫球蛋白水平的仅接种疫苗的血清相比,杂交免疫的中和效力显着更高。我们的研究强调了谨慎解释来自抗rbd elisa的定量抗体数据的必要性,特别是在比较不同免疫组时。换句话说,非常相似的抗rbd水平可以显示出非常不同的功能活性。这一发现对确定未来可能的保护相关因素具有启示意义。重要性:在整个SARS-CoV-2大流行期间,中和抗体水平一直是预测保护性免疫反应的核心。抗受体结合域(RBD)酶联免疫吸附测定(elisa)与中和测定相关,并且由于将简单的性能与作为替代测定的及时结果相结合。然而,先前的研究使用同质队列来确定相关性。我们重新评估了常用的抗rbd ELISA和活病毒中和试验的相关性,采用异质队列,包括未感染过SARS-CoV-2的接种组和接种过疫苗的恢复期组。具有匹配抗rbd单位的血清的中和能力在两组之间存在显著差异,降低了检测的相关性。我们的研究结果强调了在解释血清学测试时考虑免疫背景的必要性,并表明不同的免疫组可能需要不同的保护阈值。考虑到免疫史,我们不仅可以对SARS-CoV-2的免疫进行更准确的预测,还可以对未来的挑战进行更准确的预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Microbiology spectrum
Microbiology spectrum Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Genetics
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
1800
期刊介绍: Microbiology Spectrum publishes commissioned review articles on topics in microbiology representing ten content areas: Archaea; Food Microbiology; Bacterial Genetics, Cell Biology, and Physiology; Clinical Microbiology; Environmental Microbiology and Ecology; Eukaryotic Microbes; Genomics, Computational, and Synthetic Microbiology; Immunology; Pathogenesis; and Virology. Reviews are interrelated, with each review linking to other related content. A large board of Microbiology Spectrum editors aids in the development of topics for potential reviews and in the identification of an editor, or editors, who shepherd each collection.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信