Search

The ongoing evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has led to a move to update vaccine antigens in 2022 and 2023. These updated antigens were chosen and approved based largely on in vitro neutralisation titres against recent SARS-CoV-2 variants. However, unavoidable delays in vaccine manufacture and distribution meant that the updated booster vaccine was no longer well-matched to the circulating SARS-CoV-2 variant by the time of its deployment. Understanding whether the updating of booster vaccine antigens improves immune responses to subsequent SARS-CoV-2 circulating variants is a major priority in justifying future vaccine updates. Here we analyse all available data on the immunogenicity of variants containing SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and their ability to neutralise later circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants. We find that updated booster antigens give a 1.4-fold [95% CI: 1.07-1.82] greater increase in neutralising antibody levels when compared with a historical vaccine immunogen. We then use this to predict the relative protection that can be expected from an updated vaccine even when the circulating variant has evolved away from the updated vaccine immunogen. These findings help inform the rollout of future booster vaccination programmes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Lymphopenia is a common feature of acute COVID-19 and is associated with increased disease severity and 30-day mortality. Here we aim to define the demographic and clinical characteristics that correlate with lymphopenia in COVID-19 and determine if lymphopenia is an independent predictor of poor clinical outcome. We analysed the ENTER-COVID (Epidemiology of hospitalized in-patient admissions following planned introduction of Epidemic SARS-CoV-2 to highly vaccinated COVID-19 naïve population) dataset of adults (N = 811) admitted for COVID-19 treatment in South Australia in a retrospective registry study, categorizing them as (a) lymphopenic (lymphocyte count < 1 × 10 9 /L) or (b) non-lymphopenic at hospital admission. Comorbidities and laboratory parameters were compared between groups. Multiple regression analysis was performed using a linear or logistic model. Intensive care unit (ICU) patients and non-survivors exhibited lower median lymphocyte counts than non-ICU patients and survivors respectively. Univariate analysis revealed that low lymphocyte counts associated with hypertension and correlated with haemoglobin, platelet count and negatively correlated with urea, creatinine, bilirubin, and aspartate aminotransferase (AST). Multivariate analysis identified age, male, haemoglobin, platelet count, diabetes, creatinine, bilirubin, alanine transaminase, c-reactive protein (CRP) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) as independent predictors of poor clinical outcome in COVID-19, while lymphopenia did not emerge as a significant predictor., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Surrogates of antiviral efficacy are needed for COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the relationship between the virological effect of treatment and clinical efficacy as measured by progression to severe disease in outpatients treated for mild-to-moderate COVID-19., Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Scopus, and medRxiv from database inception to Aug 16, 2023, for randomised placebo-controlled trials that tested virus-directed treatments (ie, any monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma, or antivirals) in non-hospitalised individuals with COVID-19. We only included studies that reported both clinical outcomes (ie, rate of disease progression to hospitalisation or death) and virological outcomes (ie, viral load within the first 7 days of treatment). We extracted summary data from eligible reports, with discrepancies resolved through discussion. We used an established meta-regression model with random effects to assess the association between clinical efficacy and virological treatment effect, and calculated I 2 to quantify residual study heterogeneity., Findings: We identified 1718 unique studies, of which 22 (with a total of 16 684 participants) met the inclusion criteria, and were in primarily unvaccinated individuals. Risk of bias was assessed as low in 19 of 22 studies for clinical outcomes, whereas for virological outcomes, a high risk of bias was assessed in 11 studies, some risk in ten studies, and a low risk in one study. The unadjusted relative risk of disease progression for each extra log 10 copies per mL reduction in viral load in treated compared with placebo groups was 0·12 (95% CI 0·04-0·34; p<0·0001) on day 3, 0·20 (0·08-0·50; p=0·0006) on day 5, and 0·53 (0·30-0·94; p=0·030) on day 7. The residual heterogeneity in our meta-regression was estimated as low (I 2 =0% [0-53] on day 3, 0% [0-71] on day 5, and 0% [0-43] on day 7)., Interpretation: Despite the aggregation of studies with differing designs, and evidence of risk of bias in some virological outcomes, this review provides evidence that treatment-induced acceleration of viral clearance within the first 5 days after treatment is a potential surrogate of clinical efficacy to prevent hospitalisation with COVID-19. This work supports the use of viral clearance as an early phase clinical trial endpoint of therapeutic efficacy., Funding: Australian Government Department of Health, Medical Research Future Fund, and Australian National Health and Medical Research Council., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MNP declares receiving provision of drugs for clinical trials from CSL Behring, Takeda, Grifols, Emergent Biosciences, and Gilead. DSK has received access to unpublished data via collaboration with employees of Merck & Co for research purposes on an unrelated pharmaceutical product. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Randomised controlled trials of passive antibodies as treatment and prophylaxis for COVID-19 have reported variable efficacy. However, the determinants of efficacy have not been identified. We aimed to assess how the dose and timing of administration affect treatment outcome., Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we extracted data from published studies of passive antibody treatment from Jan 1, 2019, to Jan 31, 2023, that were identified by searching multiple databases, including MEDLINE, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We included only randomised controlled trials of passive antibody administration for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. To compare administered antibody dose between different treatments, we used data on in-vitro neutralisation titres to normalise dose by antibody potency. We used mixed-effects regression and model fitting to analyse the relationship between timing, dose and efficacy., Findings: We found 58 randomised controlled trials that investigated passive antibody therapies for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19. Earlier clinical stage at treatment initiation was highly predictive of the efficacy of both monoclonal antibodies (p<0·0001) and convalescent plasma therapy (p=0·030) in preventing progression to subsequent stages, with either prophylaxis or treatment in outpatients showing the greatest effects. For the treatment of outpatients with COVID-19, we found a significant association between the dose administered and efficacy in preventing hospitalisation (relative risk 0·77; p<0·0001). Using this relationship, we predicted that no approved monoclonal antibody was expected to provide more than 30% efficacy against some omicron (B.1.1.529) subvariants, such as BQ.1.1., Interpretation: Early administration before hospitalisation and sufficient doses of passive antibody therapy are crucial to achieving high efficacy in preventing clinical progression. The relationship between dose and efficacy provides a framework for the rational assessment of future passive antibody prophylaxis and treatment strategies for COVID-19., Funding: The Australian Government Department of Health, Medical Research Future Fund, National Health and Medical Research Council, the University of New South Wales, Monash University, Haematology Society of Australia and New Zealand, Leukaemia Foundation, and the Victorian Government., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MNP declares receiving provision of drug for clinical trials from CSL Behring, Takeda, Grifols, Emergent Biosciences, and Gilead. ZKM and EMW declare research funding from CSL Behring to Monash University for work outside this project. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The ability for vaccines to protect against infectious diseases varies among individuals, but computational models employed to inform policy typically do not account for this variation. Here we examine this issue: we implement a model of vaccine efficacy developed in the context of SARS-CoV-2 in order to evaluate the general implications of modelling correlates of protection on the individual level. Due to high levels of variation in immune response, the distributions of individual-level protection emerging from this model tend to be highly dispersed, and are often bimodal. We describe the specification of the model, provide an intuitive parameterisation, and comment on its general robustness. We show that the model can be viewed as an intermediate between the typical approaches that consider the mode of vaccine action to be either "all-or-nothing" or "leaky". Our view based on this analysis is that individual variation in correlates of protection is an important consideration that may be crucial to designing and implementing models for estimating population-level impacts of vaccination programs., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Cameron Zachreson reports financial support was provided by Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. Nicholas Geard reports financial support was provided by Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. Allen Cheng reports financial support was provided by Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. Joshua Szanyi reports a relationship with Moderna Inc that includes: funding grants. Co-author Allen Cheng is a member of Australian government advisory committees; the views in this paper may not necessarily reflect those of the Australian government., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Understanding mucosal antibody responses from SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination is crucial to develop strategies for longer term immunity, especially against emerging viral variants. We profiled serial paired mucosal and plasma antibodies from COVID-19 vaccinated only vaccinees (vaccinated, uninfected), COVID-19-recovered vaccinees (recovered, vaccinated), and individuals with breakthrough Delta or Omicron BA.2 infections (vaccinated, infected). Saliva from COVID-19-recovered vaccinees displayed improved antibody-neutralizing activity, Fcγ receptor (FcγR) engagement, and IgA levels compared with COVID-19-uninfected vaccinees. Furthermore, repeated mRNA vaccination boosted SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG2 and IgG4 responses in both mucosa biofluids (saliva and tears) and plasma; however, these rises only negatively correlated with FcγR engagement in plasma. IgG and FcγR engagement, but not IgA, responses to breakthrough COVID-19 variants were dampened and narrowed by increased preexisting vaccine-induced immunity against the ancestral strain. Salivary antibodies delayed initiation following breakthrough COVID-19 infection, especially Omicron BA.2, but rose rapidly thereafter. Importantly, salivary antibody FcγR engagements were enhanced following breakthrough infections. Our data highlight how preexisting immunity shapes mucosal SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses and has implications for long-term protection from COVID-19.

Multiple monoclonal antibodies have been shown to be effective for both prophylaxis and therapy for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here we aggregate data from randomized controlled trials assessing the use of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in preventing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. We use data on the in vivo concentration of mAb and the associated protection from COVID-19 over time to model the dose-response relationship of mAb for prophylaxis. We estimate that 50% protection from COVID-19 is achieved with a mAb concentration of 96-fold of the in vitro IC50 (95% CI: 32-285). This relationship provides a tool for predicting the prophylactic efficacy of new mAb and against SARS-CoV-2 variants. Finally, we compare the relationship between neutralization titer and protection from COVID-19 after either mAb treatment or vaccination. We find no significant difference between the 50% protective titer for mAb and vaccination, although sample sizes limited the power to detect a difference., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) breakthrough infection of vaccinated individuals is increasingly common with the circulation of highly immune evasive and transmissible Omicron variants. Here, we report the dynamics and durability of recalled spike-specific humoral immunity following Omicron BA.1 or BA.2 breakthrough infection, with longitudinal sampling up to 8 months after infection. Both BA.1 and BA.2 infections robustly boosted neutralization activity against the infecting strain while expanding breadth against BA.4, although neutralization activity was substantially reduced for the more recent XBB and BQ.1.1 strains. Cross-reactive memory B cells against both ancestral and Omicron spike were predominantly expanded by infection, with limited recruitment of de novo Omicron-specific B cells or antibodies. Modeling of neutralization titers predicts that protection from symptomatic reinfection against antigenically similar strains will be durable but is undermined by new emerging strains with further neutralization escape.

Vaccine protection from symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection has been shown to be strongly correlated with neutralising antibody titres; however, this has not yet been demonstrated for severe COVID-19. To explore whether this relationship also holds for severe COVID-19, we performed a systematic search for studies reporting on protection against different SARS-CoV-2 clinical endpoints and extracted data from 15 studies. Since matched neutralising antibody titres were not available, we used the vaccine regimen, time since vaccination and variant of concern to predict corresponding neutralising antibody titres. We then compared the observed vaccine effectiveness reported in these studies to the protection predicted by a previously published model of the relationship between neutralising antibody titre and vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19. We find that predicted neutralising antibody titres are strongly correlated with observed vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic (Spearman [Formula: see text] = 0.95, p < 0.001) and severe (Spearman [Formula: see text] = 0.72, p < 0.001 for both) COVID-19 and that the loss of neutralising antibodies over time and to new variants are strongly predictive of observed vaccine protection against severe COVID-19., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Booster vaccination for the prevention of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is required to overcome loss of protection due to waning immunity and the spread of novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants. Studies have assessed the ability of existing ancestral-based vaccines as well as novel variant-modified vaccine regimens to boost immunity to different variants, and a crucial question is to assess the relative benefits of these different approaches. Here we aggregate data on neutralization titers from 14 reports (three published papers, eight preprints, two press releases and notes of one advisory committee meeting) comparing booster vaccination with the current ancestral-based vaccines or variant-modified vaccines. Using these data, we compare the immunogenicity of different vaccination regimens and predict the relative protection of booster vaccines under different scenarios. We predict that boosting with ancestral vaccines can markedly enhance protection against both symptomatic and severe disease from SARS-CoV-2 variant viruses, although variant-modified vaccines may provide additional protection, even if not matched to the circulating variants. This work provides an evidence-based framework to inform choices on future SARS-CoV-2 vaccine regimens., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Several studies have shown that neutralizing antibody levels correlate with immune protection from COVID-19 and have estimated the relationship between neutralizing antibodies and protection. However, results of these studies vary in terms of estimates of the level of neutralizing antibodies required for protection. By normalizing antibody titers, we found that study results converge on a consistent relationship between antibody levels and protection from COVID-19. This finding can be useful for planning future vaccine use, determining population immunity, and reducing the global effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The vaccine candidate CVnCoV (CUREVAC) showed surprisingly low efficacy in a recent phase 3 trial compared with other messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines. Here we show that the low efficacy follows from the dose used and the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants and is predicted by the neutralizing antibody response induced by the vaccine., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 protects from infection and improves clinical outcomes in breakthrough infections, likely reflecting residual vaccine-elicited immunity and recall of immunological memory. Here, we define the early kinetics of spike-specific humoral and cellular immunity after vaccination of seropositive individuals and after Delta or Omicron breakthrough infection in vaccinated individuals. Early longitudinal sampling revealed the timing and magnitude of recall, with the phenotypic activation of B cells preceding an increase in neutralizing antibody titers. While vaccination of seropositive individuals resulted in robust recall of humoral and T cell immunity, recall of vaccine-elicited responses was delayed and variable in magnitude during breakthrough infections and depended on the infecting variant of concern. While the delayed kinetics of immune recall provides a potential mechanism for the lack of early control of viral replication, the recall of antibodies coincided with viral clearance and likely underpins the protective effects of vaccination against severe COVID-19., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Genetically distinct variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have emerged since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Over this period, we developed a rapid platform (R-20) for viral isolation and characterization using primary remnant diagnostic swabs. This, combined with quarantine testing and genomics surveillance, enabled the rapid isolation and characterization of all major SARS-CoV-2 variants circulating in Australia in 2021. Our platform facilitated viral variant isolation, rapid resolution of variant fitness using nasopharyngeal swabs and ranking of evasion of neutralizing antibodies. In late 2021, variant of concern Omicron (B1.1.529) emerged. Using our platform, we detected and characterized SARS-CoV-2 VOC Omicron. We show that Omicron effectively evades neutralization antibodies and has a different entry route that is TMPRSS2-independent. Our low-cost platform is available to all and can detect all variants of SARS-CoV-2 studied so far, with the main limitation being that our platform still requires appropriate biocontainment., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

The rapid development of multiple vaccines providing strong protection from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been a major achievement. There is now compelling evidence for the role of neutralizing antibodies in protective immunity. T cells may play a role in resolution of primary SARS-CoV-2 infection, and there is a widely expressed view that T cell-mediated immunity also plays an important role in vaccine-mediated protection. Here we discuss the role of vaccine-induced T cells in two distinct stages of infection: firstly, in protection from acquisition of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection following exposure; secondly, if infection does occur, the potential for T cells to reduce the risk of developing severe COVID-19. We describe several lines of evidence that argue against a direct impact of vaccine-induced memory T cells in preventing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, the contribution of T cell immunity in reducing the severity of infection, particularly in infection with SARS-CoV-2 variants, remains to be determined. A detailed understanding of the role of T cells in COVID-19 is critical for next-generation vaccine design and development. Here we discuss the challenges in determining a causal relationship between vaccine-induced T cell immunity and protection from COVID-19 and propose an approach to gather the necessary evidence to clarify any role for vaccine-induced T cell memory in protection from severe COVID-19., (© 2022. Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Several SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern have been identified that partly escape serum neutralisation elicited by current vaccines. Studies have also shown that vaccines demonstrate reduced protection against symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 variants. We explored whether in-vitro neutralisation titres remain predictive of vaccine protection from infection with SARS-CoV-2 variants., Methods: In this meta-analysis, we analysed published data from 24 identified studies on in-vitro neutralisation and clinical protection to understand the loss of neutralisation to existing SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. We integrated the results of this analysis into our existing statistical model relating in-vitro neutralisation to protection (parameterised on data from ancestral virus infection) to estimate vaccine efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 variants. We also analysed data on boosting of vaccine responses and use the model to predict the impact of booster vaccination on protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants., Findings: The neutralising activity against the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 was highly predictive of neutralisation of variants of concern. Decreases in neutralisation titre to the alpha (1·6-fold), beta (8·8-fold), gamma (3·5-fold), and delta (3·9-fold) variants (compared to the ancestral virus) were not significantly different between different vaccines. Neutralisation remained strongly correlated with protection from symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern ( r S =0·81, p=0·0005) and the existing model remained predictive of vaccine efficacy against variants of concern once decreases in neutralisation to the variants of concern were incorporated. Modelling of predicted vaccine efficacy against variants over time suggested that protection against symptomatic infection might decrease below 50% within the first year after vaccination for some vaccines. Boosting of previously infected individuals with existing vaccines (which target ancestral virus) is predicted to provide a higher degree of protection from infection with variants of concern than primary vaccination schedules alone., Interpretation: In-vitro neutralisation titres remain a correlate of protection from SARS-CoV-2 variants and modelling of the effects of waning immunity predicts a loss of protection to the variants after vaccination. However, booster vaccination with current vaccines should enable higher neutralisation to SARS-CoV-2 variants than is achieved with primary vaccination, which is predicted to provide robust protection from severe infection outcomes with the current SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, at least in the medium term., Funding: The National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), the Medical Research Future Fund (Australia), and the Victorian Government., Competing Interests: DSK is elected executive committee member of the New South Wales branch of the Australian and New Zealand Industrial and Applied Mathematics society. MPD is senior editor for eLife, for which he receives an annual retainer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.)

Predictive models of immune protection from COVID-19 are urgently needed to identify correlates of protection to assist in the future deployment of vaccines. To address this, we analyzed the relationship between in vitro neutralization levels and the observed protection from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection using data from seven current vaccines and from convalescent cohorts. We estimated the neutralization level for 50% protection against detectable SARS-CoV-2 infection to be 20.2% of the mean convalescent level (95% confidence interval (CI) = 14.4-28.4%). The estimated neutralization level required for 50% protection from severe infection was significantly lower (3% of the mean convalescent level; 95% CI = 0.7-13%, P = 0.0004). Modeling of the decay of the neutralization titer over the first 250 d after immunization predicts that a significant loss in protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection will occur, although protection from severe disease should be largely retained. Neutralization titers against some SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern are reduced compared with the vaccine strain, and our model predicts the relationship between neutralization and efficacy against viral variants. Here, we show that neutralization level is highly predictive of immune protection, and provide an evidence-based model of SARS-CoV-2 immune protection that will assist in developing vaccine strategies to control the future trajectory of the pandemic., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

The capacity of antibodies to engage with immune cells via the Fc region is important in preventing and controlling many infectious diseases. The evolution of such antibodies during convalescence from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is largely unknown. We develop assays to measure Fc-dependent antibody functions against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike (S)-expressing cells in serial samples from subjects primarily with mild-moderate COVID-19 up to 149 days post-infection. We find that S-specific antibodies capable of engaging Fcγ receptors decay over time, with S-specific antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) and antibody-dependent phagocytosis (ADP) activity within plasma declining accordingly. Although there is significant decay in ADCC and ADP activity, they remain readily detectable in almost all subjects at the last time point studied (94%) in contrast with neutralization activity (70%). Although it remains unclear the degree to which Fc effector functions contribute to protection against SARS-CoV-2 re-infection, our results indicate that antibodies with Fc effector functions persist longer than neutralizing antibodies., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2021 The Author(s).)

Immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is central to long-term control of the current pandemic. Despite our rapidly advancing knowledge of immune memory to SARS-CoV-2, understanding how these responses translate into protection against reinfection at both the individual and population levels remains a major challenge. An ideal outcome following infection or after vaccination would be a highly protective and durable immunity that allows for the establishment of high levels of population immunity. However, current studies suggest a decay of neutralizing antibody responses in convalescent patients, and documented cases of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection are increasing. Understanding the dynamics of memory responses to SARS-CoV-2 and the mechanisms of immune control are crucial for the rational design and deployment of vaccines and for understanding the possible future trajectories of the pandemic. Here, we summarize our current understanding of immune responses to and immune control of SARS-CoV-2 and the implications for prevention of reinfection.

Neutralizing antibodies are important for immunity against SARS-CoV-2 and as therapeutics for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Here, we identified high-affinity nanobodies from alpacas immunized with coronavirus spike and receptor-binding domains (RBD) that disrupted RBD engagement with the human receptor angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and potently neutralized SARS-CoV-2. Epitope mapping, X-ray crystallography, and cryo-electron microscopy revealed two distinct antigenic sites and showed two neutralizing nanobodies from different epitope classes bound simultaneously to the spike trimer. Nanobody-Fc fusions of the four most potent nanobodies blocked ACE2 engagement with RBD variants present in human populations and potently neutralized both wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and the N501Y D614G variant at concentrations as low as 0.1 nM. Prophylactic administration of either single nanobody-Fc or as mixtures reduced viral loads by up to 10 4 -fold in mice infected with the N501Y D614G SARS-CoV-2 virus. These results suggest a role for nanobody-Fc fusions as prophylactic agents against SARS-CoV-2., Competing Interests: Competing interest statement: P.P., A.A., and W.-H.T. are inventors on a provisional patent covering the nanobodies described in this manuscript., (Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.)

The durability of infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 immunity has major implications for reinfection and vaccine development. Here, we show a comprehensive profile of antibody, B cell and T cell dynamics over time in a cohort of patients who have recovered from mild-moderate COVID-19. Binding and neutralising antibody responses, together with individual serum clonotypes, decay over the first 4 months post-infection. A similar decline in Spike-specific CD4 + and circulating T follicular helper frequencies occurs. By contrast, S-specific IgG + memory B cells consistently accumulate over time, eventually comprising a substantial fraction of circulating the memory B cell pool. Modelling of the concomitant immune kinetics predicts maintenance of serological neutralising activity above a titre of 1:40 in 50% of convalescent participants to 74 days, although there is probably additive protection from B cell and T cell immunity. This study indicates that SARS-CoV-2 immunity after infection might be transiently protective at a population level. Therefore, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines might require greater immunogenicity and durability than natural infection to drive long-term protection.

The rapid scale-up of research on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spawned a large number of potential vaccines and immunotherapies, accompanied by a commensurately large number of in vitro assays and in vivo models to measure their effectiveness. These assays broadly have the same end-goal - to predict the clinical efficacy of prophylactic and therapeutic interventions in humans. However, the apparent potency of different interventions can vary considerably between assays and animal models, leading to very different predictions of clinical efficacy. Complete harmonization of experimental methods may be intractable at the current pace of research. However, here we analyse a selection of existing assays for measuring antibody-mediated virus neutralization and animal models of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and provide a framework for comparing results between studies and reconciling observed differences in the effects of interventions. Finally, we propose how we might optimize these assays for better comparison of results from in vitro and animal studies to accelerate progress.