Comprehensive serologic profile and specificity of maternal and neonatal cord blood SARS-CoV-2 antibodies

  1. Rupsa C. Boelig
  2. Sidhartha Chaudhury
  3. Zubair H. Aghai
  4. Emily A. Oliver
  5. Francesca Mancuso
  6. Vincenzo Berghella
  7. Elke S. Bergmann-Leitner

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.xagr.2021.100046
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.06.21267328: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: This study was approved by Thomas Jefferson University Institutional Review Board as minimal risk, and each participant provided written consent.
    Consent: This study was approved by Thomas Jefferson University Institutional Review Board as minimal risk, and each participant provided written consent.
    Sex as a biological variableCohort Selection: This is a prospective cohort of pregnant patients consented for collection of samples at delivery, including maternal blood on admission and cord blood at delivery as part of an ongoing delivery cohort biorepository.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    The detection antibody, SULFO-TAG either with anti-human IgG (or anti-human IgM antibody (was diluted to 2 μg/ml in Diluent 100 (MSD) and added to the wells and incubated at RT for 1h on a plate shaker.
    anti-human IgG
    suggested: (RevMAb Biosciences Cat# 31-1019-MK, RRID:AB_2783627)
    anti-human IgM
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Additional serological outcomes included: correlation between epitope levels, relation between antibody epitopes and latency to delivery Statistical Analysis: Statistical analysis conducted using SPSS v.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)
    Figures were generated using the stats, ggplot2, and corrplot packages in R.
    ggplot2
    suggested: (ggplot2, RRID:SCR_014601)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    The limited positive serology reported (65-70% of PCR+ mothers) demonstrates the limitations of examining isolated antibody epitopes, and specifically of RBD only epitope. SARS CoV-2 Immunity: While prior studies have focused on SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, we evaluated a range of epitopes. Our results demonstrated high sensitivity of our platform with detection of spike (full length)- IgM and IgG in ∼90% of documented PCR infection. We found that, as in non-pregnant patients, high levels of N-IgG and IgM titers in those with a history of COVID-1923. Studies in non-pregnant individuals identified IgM peaks in N and S epitopes in second week of infection24. We found that maternal nucleocapsid antibodies demonstrated the highest specificity for documented COVID-19 infection and were highly expressed in both maternal and cordblood samples. Nucleocapsid proteins of many coronaviruses are highly immunogenic and highly expressed during acute infection25. While the focus of vaccine and monoclonal antibody therapeutics have been on spike antigen, these results, consistent with other studies in non-pregnant adults, highlights the potential import of N-antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 immunity and target for therapy. Finally, similar to the reports cited above18,19,22, we found a high degree of correlation and a linear fit with a slope of 1.0, between maternal and cordblood IgG with cordblood IgG concentrations, indicating highly efficient transfer of CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Finally, in examining s...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.12.06.21267328 on medRxiv