DataSheet_3_Disease Severity, Fever, Age, and Sex Correlate With SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody Responses.xlsx (351.87 kB)

DataSheet_3_Disease Severity, Fever, Age, and Sex Correlate With SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody Responses.xlsx

Download (351.87 kB)
posted on 2021-01-29, 04:15 authored by Stephan Schlickeiser, Tatjana Schwarz, Sophie Steiner, Kirsten Wittke, Nabeel Al Besher, Oliver Meyer, Ulrich Kalus, Axel Pruß, Florian Kurth, Thomas Zoller, Martin Witzenrath, Leif Erik Sander, Marcel A. Müller, Carmen Scheibenbogen, Hans-Dieter Volk, Christian Drosten, Victor M. Corman, Leif G. Hanitsch

Clinical trials on the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma remain inconclusive. While data on safety is increasingly available, evidence for efficacy is still sparse. Subgroup analyses hint to a dose-response relationship between convalescent plasma neutralizing antibody levels and mortality. In particular, patients with primary and secondary antibody deficiency might benefit from this approach. However, testing of neutralizing antibodies is limited to specialized biosafety level 3 laboratories and is a time- and labor-intense procedure. In this single center study of 206 COVID-19 convalescent patients, clinical data, results of commercially available ELISA testing of SARS-CoV-2 spike-IgG and –IgA, and levels of neutralizing antibodies, determined by plaque reduction neutralization testing (PRNT), were analyzed. At a medium time point of 58 days after symptom onset, only 12.6% of potential plasma donors showed high levels of neutralizing antibodies (PRNT50 ≥ 1:320). Multivariable proportional odds logistic regression analysis revealed need for hospitalization due to COVID-19 (odds ratio 6.87; p-value 0.0004) and fever (odds ratio 3.00; p-value 0.0001) as leading factors affecting levels of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody titers in convalescent plasma donors. Using penalized estimation, a predictive proportional odds logistic regression model including the most important variables hospitalization, fever, age, sex, and anosmia or dysgeusia was developed. The predictive discrimination for PRNT50 ≥ 1:320 was reasonably good with AUC: 0.86 (with 95% CI: 0.79–0.92). Combining clinical and ELISA-based pre-screening, assessment of neutralizing antibodies could be spared in 75% of potential donors with a maximal loss of 10% of true positives (PRNT50 ≥ 1:320).