Search

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in late 2019 and has since caused a global pandemic resulting in millions of cases and deaths. Diagnostic tools and serological assays are critical for controlling the outbreak, especially assays designed to quantitate neutralizing antibody levels, considered the best correlate of protection. As vaccines become increasingly available, it is important to identify reliable methods for measuring neutralizing antibody responses that correlate with authentic virus neutralization but can be performed outside biosafety level 3 (BSL3) laboratories. While many neutralizing assays using pseudotyped virus have been developed, there have been few studies comparing the different assays to each other as surrogates for authentic virus neutralization. Here, we characterized three enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and three pseudotyped vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) neutralization assays and assessed their concordance with authentic virus neutralization. The most accurate assays for predicting authentic virus neutralization were luciferase- and secreted embryonic alkaline phosphatase (SEAP)-expressing pseudotyped virus neutralizations, followed by green fluorescent protein (GFP)-expressing pseudotyped virus neutralization, and then the ELISAs. IMPORTANCE The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Prior infection or vaccination can be detected by the presence of antibodies in the blood. Antibodies in the blood are also considered to be protective against future infections from the same virus. The "gold standard" assay for detecting protective antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 is neutralization of authentic SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, this assay can only be performed under highly restrictive biocontainment conditions. We therefore characterized six antibody-detecting assays for their correlation with authentic virus neutralization. The significance of our research is in outlining the advantages and disadvantages of the different assays and identifying the optimal surrogate assay for authentic virus neutralization. This will allow for more accurate assessments of protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 following infection and vaccination.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is ongoing and has shown the community that flexible methods for rapidly identifying and screening candidate antivirals are needed. Assessing virus-neutralizing activity of human serum to monitor population immunity and response to infection and vaccination is key to pandemic control. We developed a virus neutralization platform strategy that relies only on bioinformatic and genetic information of the virus of interest. The platform uses viral envelope glycoprotein cDNAs to set up an assay that mimics multicycle infection but is safe and, therefore, amenable to biosafety level 2 (BSL2) conditions for viruses that require BSL3 facilities (e.g., SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2). As a complement to this platform, we present a new cell-based immunofluorescent (CBI) assay that uses SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S)-expressing cells to accurately measure the neutralization potential of human sera and is readily adaptable to variants of concern. These methods should be useful additions to the tools for assessing antiviral immunity, whether acquired via natural infection or vaccines. IMPORTANCE Assays for rapid biosafety level 2 (BSL2) evaluation of neutralizing properties of antibodies acquired via natural infection or through vaccination is urgently needed. Here, we propose a combinatorial approach in which sera are screened for SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S) binding using a cell-based immunofluorescent (CBI) assay, and positive samples are further evaluated in a pseudotyped viral multicycle infection-mimicking protocol under BSL2 conditions.

Evaluation of potential immunity against the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus that emerged in 2019 (SARS-CoV-2) is essential for health, as well as social and economic recovery. Generation of antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 (seroconversion) may inform on acquired immunity from prior exposure, and antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor binding domain (S-RBD) are speculated to neutralize virus infection. Some serology assays rely solely on SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein (N-protein) as the antibody detection antigen; however, whether such immune responses correlate with S-RBD response and COVID-19 immunity remains unknown. Here, we generated a quantitative serological ELISA using recombinant S-RBD and N-protein for the detection of circulating antibodies in 138 serial serum samples from 30 reverse transcription PCR-confirmed, SARS-CoV-2-hospitalized patients, as well as 464 healthy and non-COVID-19 serum samples that were collected between June 2017 and June 2020. Quantitative detection of IgG antibodies against the 2 different viral proteins showed a moderate correlation. Antibodies against N-protein were detected at a rate of 3.6% in healthy and non-COVID-19 sera collected during the pandemic in 2020, whereas 1.9% of these sera were positive for S-RBD. Approximately 86% of individuals positive for S-RBD-binding antibodies exhibited neutralizing capacity, but only 74% of N-protein-positive individuals exhibited neutralizing capacity. Collectively, our studies show that detection of N-protein-binding antibodies does not always correlate with presence of S-RBD-neutralizing antibodies and caution against the extensive use of N-protein-based serology testing for determination of potential COVID-19 immunity.

Delayed and weak virus neutralizing antibody (nAb) responses represent a hallmark correlating not only with the establishment of persistent infection but also with unsuccessful vaccine development. Using a reverse genetic approach, we evaluated possible underlying mechanisms in 2 widely studied viral infection models. Swapping the glycoproteins (GPs) of lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV, naturally persisting, noncytolytic, inefficient nAb inducer) and vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV, nonpersisting, cytolytic, potent nAb inducer) transferred the only target of nAb's from either virus to the other. We analyzed the nAb response to each of the 2 recombinant and parent viruses in infected mice and found that nAb kinetics were solely determined by the viral surface GP and not by the virus backbone. Moreover, the slowly and poorly nAb-triggering LCMV virion was a potent immunogenic matrix for the more antigenic VSV-GP. These findings indicate that the viral GP determines nAb kinetics largely independently of the specific viral infection context. They further suggest that structural features of viral GPs or coevolutionary adaptation of the virus's GP to the host's naive B cell repertoire, or both, may critically limit nAb kinetics and improvement of vaccine efficacy.