4.7 Article

The challenge of avidity determination in SARS-CoV-2 serology

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
卷 93, 期 5, 页码 3092-3104

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.26863

关键词

avidity; nucleoprotein; receptor‐ binding domain; protective immunity; SARS‐ CoV‐ 2; seasonal coronavirus

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Serological responses towards SARS-CoV-2 proteins show incomplete avidity maturation, but can still help define infection stages. Responses to seasonal coronaviruses do not generally impact SARS-CoV-2 serology, and avidity determination can differentiate between them.
The serological responses towards severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleoprotein, receptor-binding domain (RBD), and spike protein S1 are characterized by incomplete avidity maturation. Analysis with varying concentrations of urea allows to determine distinct differences in avidity maturation, though the total process remains at an unusually low level. Despite incomplete avidity maturation, this approach allows to define early and late stages of infection. It therefore can compensate for the recently described irregular kinetic patterns of immunoglobulin M and immunoglobulin G (IgG) directed towards SARS-CoV-2 antigens. The serological responses towards seasonal coronaviruses neither have a negative nor positive impact on SARS-CoV-2 serology in general. Avidity determination in combination with measurement of antibody titers and complexity of the immune response allows to clearly differentiate between IgG responses towards seasonal coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2. Cross-reactions seem to occur with very low probability. They can be recognized by their pattern of response and through differential treatment with urea. As high avidity has been shown to be essential in several virus systems for the protective effect of neutralizing antibodies, it should be clarified whether high avidity of IgG directed towards RBD indicates protective immunity. If this is the case, monitoring of avidity should be part of the optimization of vaccination programs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据