#MSCOVID19: T-cells and anti-CD20 therapy

Barts-MS rose-tinted-odometer: ★★★

I have hypothesised that the reason pwMS on anti-CD20 therapy are at greater risk of getting COVID-19 and severe COVID-19 is not about the now, but the past. There is really no reason why a pwMS on anti-CD20 therapy is at increased risk of getting exposed to SARS-CoV-2 compared to pwMS on other DMTs, be it injectables, oral tablets or other infusion therapies. However, people on anti-CD20 therapies are likely to have blunted cross-reactive immune responses to community-acquired coronaviruses. This cross-reactive immunity is protective and reduces your chances of getting symptomatic or severe COVID-19, in other words in the figure below, cross-reactive immunity shifts the population to the left and being on an anti-CD20 therapy prevents this immunity from developing and shifts the curve to the right. I hope this makes sense. 

In the study below on healthcare workers, SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive antibodies elicited by past common community-acquired coronavirus infections were not associated with protection; however, the duration of symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 infections was significantly reduced in individuals with higher antibody titers, i.e. less severe infection. 

As antibody titers decline over time after common coronavirus infections, individuals with higher anti-coronavirus antibody titers are more likely to be recently infected with community-acquired common coronaviruses compared to individuals with lower antibody titers. Therefore recent community-acquired coronavirus infections are likely to prevent or reduce the severity of COVID-19 in line with my hypothesis above. What is different is that this protection is unlikely to be purely antibody-mediated, but rather T-cell responses are likely to be responsible for this protection. 

What is the relevance of these findings? I suspect that anti-CD20 therapies also blunt protective T-cell responses; possibly by reducing the efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 antigen presentation to T-cells. Based on this study and what happens to people on anti-CD20 who get COVID-19 I would not be surprised if T-cell COVID-19 vaccine responses on anti-CD20 therapies are blunted, similar to antibody responses. The good news is that we won’t have to wait too long for this data to emerge. 

Please note, although interesting, this data does not change my current advice, i.e. #StayCalm and #GetVaccinatedASAP

Gouma et al. Sero-monitoring of health care workers reveals complex relationships between common coronavirus antibodies and SARS-CoV-2 severity. MedRxIV 2021 https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.12.21255324

Recent common coronavirus (CCV) infections are associated with reduced COVID-19 severity upon SARS-CoV-2 infection, however the immunological mechanisms involved are unknown. We completed serological assays using samples collected from health care workers to identify antibody types associated with SARS-CoV-2 protection and COVID-19 severity. Rare SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive antibodies elicited by past CCV infections were not associated with protection; however, the duration of symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 infections was significantly reduced in individuals with higher common betacoronavirus (βCoV) antibody titers. Since antibody titers decline over time after CCV infections, individuals in our cohort with higher βCoV antibody titers were more likely recently infected with common βCoVs compared to individuals with lower antibody titers. Therefore, our data suggest that recent βCoV infections potentially limit the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infections through mechanisms that do not involve cross-reactive antibodies. Our data are consistent with the emerging hypothesis that cellular immune responses elicited by recent common βCoV infections transiently reduce disease severity following SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Conflicts of Interest

Preventive Neurology

Twitter

LinkedIn

Medium

General Disclaimer: Please note that the opinions expressed here are those of Professor Giovannoni and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry nor Barts Health NHS Trust.

#MSCOVID19: Fundraising

Two months ago we floated the concept of doing a UK-wide seroprevalence study in UK residents with MS to see how many had seroconverted to become anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody positive and to see if there are differences in seroconversion rates between people on different DMTs. 

The motivation was based on a prediction that people with MS on ocrelizumab would have lower titres of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres, be more likely to be seronegative despite a history of COVID-19 and less likely to have neutralizing anti-spike protein RBD (receptor binding domain) antibodies compared to patients on other DMTs.

It looks like we may be correct; some early case reports suggest pwMS on ocrelizumab may not seroconvert. 

In addition to the cross-sectional analysis, we proposed following the seronegative pwMS over time to study how the COVID-19 pandemic evolves and monitor the development of herd immunity. 

We have designed the study and in parallel, to applying for funding we got the study approved by our University and Ethics committee. We thought we had the funding approved, but at the last minute due to a funding crisis, our funder said no. We are now sitting with a dilemma; an approved study with no funding. So we are having to revert to plan B; crowdfunding

Forms response chart. Question title: Do you think it is worth doing a national COVID-19/coronavrius seroprevalence study?. Number of responses: 88 responses.

When we did our survey you all agreed that crowdfunding would be one potential solution to our funding crisis. However, we can’t simply ask you to donate money. We have to put our money where our mouths are. So I have decided to come out of marathon running retirement to raise money for this study that will be managed by Dr Ruth Dobson and Dr Angray Kang. 

I have signed up for the virtual New York City Marathon in the medal-winning category. My aim is to complete a 26.2-mile run in London between October 17 and November 1. I will be joining runners from around the globe to make this the world’s largest virtual marathon. The question is does my right hip have enough cartilage left in it for me to complete the run? 

In addition, to me attempting to complete a marathon with a failing hip I am gently prodding other members of Bart-MS to do something as well. I may have one taker already, but more on this later. 

Our objective is to raise £25,000 to cover the costs of posting out blood spots to study participants. As this study is time sensitive we need to raise the money ASAP.

If you want to help us raise the funds please do not hesitate to contact us. 

Barts-MS JustGiving Fund Raising Site

Prof G with his virtual New York City Marathon bib on. Does he have what it takes to complete 26.2 miles?

CoI: multiple

#MSCOVID19 transient antibody responses

The MS community is panicking because a handful of pwMS on anti-CD20 therapy don’t seem to make antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2. The implications are that these patients are susceptible to reinfection. We can’t be sure of this as lasting long-term antiviral immunity may rely more on T-cell responses, in particular CD8+-T-cell responses, than antibody responses. Let’s hope this is the case. 

The study below done in London shows that even in people from the general population with confirmed virus-positive COVID-19 rapidly lose their neutralizing antibody response to the virus. Are we surprised? No this is well described with both SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses. 

What does this mean for the pandemic? It means that vaccine responses may need to be tracked with other immunological techniques outside of easy-to-develop and easy-to-do standard antibody assays. In short, we may not be able to rely on anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies to assess the effectiveness of a vaccine. 

The monitoring of  T-cell responses to viruses and other organisms is not trivial when you need to do it at scale. We will need to develop so-called T-cell proliferative-type response assay at speed. What this means is that we need to be able to measure if T-cells response to coronavirus antigens by dividing or activating themselves and producing cytokines. The latter is the easiest test to scale-up and is the method that is currently used in the Quantferon assay for latent or active TB. 

The challenges posed by SARS-CoV-2 for the world community is quite extraordinary and one has to wonder why coronavirus research funding was not continued and ramped-up after the SARS-CoV-1 epidemic in 2002-2003. Black swan events can be predicted; it is all about odds. I was pleasantly surprised to read the World Bank in 2017 had set the risk of a coronavirus pandemic in the next decade at 5.9%. They thought that the odds of a coronavirus pandemic was more than a 1 in 20 and this is only one of the risks that underpinned their catastrophic pandemic bonds issue; i.e. an insurance policy for low-income countries to deal with a catastrophic event. If the World Bank had the foresight to do this why didn’t politicians in high-income countries respond in a similar fashion? There will be many questions to answer when the dust settles post-COVID-19. I sincerely hope a few political heads roll. We need to take a hard look at whether or not market solutions are really the answer to dealing with existential threats and we need to stop bashing scientists and academics? If we as a society spend billions on academic/intellectual infrastructure we need to maximise its use.

Seow et al. Longitudinal evaluation and decline of antibody responses in SARS-CoV-2 infection. MedRxIV doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.09.20148429

Antibody (Ab) responses to SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in most infected individuals 10-15 days following the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. However, due to the recent emergence of this virus in the human population, it is not yet known how long these Ab responses will be maintained or whether they will provide protection from re-infection. Using sequential serum samples collected up to 94 days post-onset of symptoms (POS) from 65 RT-qPCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, we show seroconversion in >95% of cases and neutralizing antibody (nAb) responses when sampled beyond 8 days POS. We demonstrate that the magnitude of the nAb response is dependent upon the disease severity, but this does not affect the kinetics of the nAb response. Declining nAb titres were observed during the follow-up period. Whilst some individuals with high peak ID50 (>10,000) maintained titres >1,000 at >60 days POS, some with lower peak ID50 had titres approaching baseline within the follow-up period. A similar decline in nAb titres was also observed in a cohort of seropositive healthcare workers from Guy′s and St Thomas′ Hospitals. We suggest that this transient nAb response is a feature shared by both a SARS-CoV-2 infection that causes low disease severity and the circulating seasonal coronaviruses that are associated with common colds. This study has important implications when considering widespread serological testing, Ab protection against re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 and the durability of vaccine protection.

CoI: nil in relation to this post