Differences in Antibody Kinetics and Functionality Between Severe and Mild Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infections

  1. Ger Rijkers
  2. Jean-Luc Murk
  3. Bas Wintermans
  4. Bieke van Looy
  5. Marcel van den Berge
  6. Jacobien Veenemans
  7. Joep Stohr
  8. Chantal Reusken
  9. Pieter van der Pol
  10. Johan Reimerink

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

We determined and compared the humoral immune response in patients with severe (hospitalized) and mild (nonhospitalized) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients with severe disease (n = 38) develop a robust antibody response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), including immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin A antibodies. The geometric mean 50% virus neutralization titer is 1:240. SARS-CoV-2 infection was found in hospital personnel (n = 24), who developed mild symptoms necessitating leave of absence and self-isolation, but not hospitalization; 75% developed antibodies, but with low/absent virus neutralization (60% with titers <1:20). While severe COVID-19 patients develop a strong antibody response, mild SARS-CoV-2 infections induce a modest antibody response. Long-term monitoring will show whether these responses predict protection against future infections.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1093/infdis/jiaa463
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.09.20122036: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgA antibodies were determined by ELISA using the beta version of the EUROIMMUN immunoassay kit (EUROIMMUN Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG, https://www.euroimmun.com) according to the manufacturer’s protocol [8,9].
    IgA
    suggested: None
    Corona virus microarray: Sera were tested for the presence of IgG antibodies reactive with the four common human coronaviruses hCoV-OC43, hCoV-HKU1, hCoV-NL63 and hCoV-229E S1 subunit antigens in a protein microarray essentially as described before [10].
    hCoV-HKU1
    suggested: None
    hCoV-NL63
    suggested: None
    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    African green monkey (Vero-E6) cells were added in a concentration of 2 × 104 cells per well and incubated for three days at 35°C in an incubator with 5% CO2.
    Vero-E6
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    All analyses were done in Excel with the data analysis toolpack.
    Excel
    suggested: None

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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.

    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 10.1101/2020.06.09.20122036v1 on medRxiv