| Title: |
Comparison of two T-cell assays to evaluate T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following vaccination in naïve and convalescent healthcare workers |
| Authors: |
Phillips, Eloise; Adele, Sandra; Malone, Tom; Deeks, Alexandra; Stafford, Lizzie; Dobson, Susan L; Amini, Ali; Skelly, Donal; Eyre, David; Jeffery, Katie; Conlon, Christopher P; Dold, Christina; Otter, Ashley; D’Arcangelo, Silvia; Turtle, Lance; Barnes, Eleanor; Chalk, Jeremy; Dunachie, Susanna; Duncan, Christopher; Klenerman, Paul; Matthews, Philippa; Payne, Rebecca; Richter, Alex; de Silva, Thushan; Rowland-Jones, Sarah; Wootton, Dan; Dunachie, Susanna J |
| Contributors: |
National Core Study: Immunity; UK Department of Health and Social Care; UKRI; Huo Family Foundation; National Institute for Health Research; Wellcome Clinical Research Training Fellowship; NIHR Global Research Professorship; NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer Programme in Oxford; Wellcome Trust; US Food and Drug Administration Medical Countermeasures Initiative; National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit; Emerging and Zoonotic Infections; Public Health England; Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford; University of Liverpool |
| Source: |
Clinical and Experimental Immunology ; volume 209, issue 1, page 90-98 ; ISSN 0009-9104 1365-2249 |
| Publisher Information: |
Oxford University Press (OUP) |
| Publication Year: |
2022 |
| Description: |
T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 following infection and vaccination are less characterized than antibody responses, due to a more complex experimental pathway. We measured T-cell responses in 108 healthcare workers (HCWs) using the commercialized Oxford Immunotec T-SPOT Discovery SARS-CoV-2 assay service (OI T-SPOT) and the PITCH ELISpot protocol established for academic research settings. Both assays detected T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike, membrane, and nucleocapsid proteins. Responses were significantly lower when reported by OI T-SPOT than by PITCH ELISpot. Four weeks after two doses of either Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 AZD1222 vaccine, the responder rate was 63% for OI T-SPOT Panels 1 + 2 (peptides representing SARS-CoV-2 spike protein excluding regions present in seasonal coronaviruses), 69% for OI T-SPOT Panel 14 (peptides representing the entire SARS-CoV-2 spike), and 94% for the PITCH ELISpot total spike. The two OI T-SPOT panels correlated strongly with each other showing that either readout quantifies spike-specific T-cell responses, although the correlation between the OI T-SPOT panels and the PITCH ELISpot total spike was moderate. The standardization, relative scalability, and longer interval between blood acquisition and processing are advantages of the commercial OI T-SPOT assay. However, the OI T-SPOT assay measures T-cell responses at a significantly lower magnitude compared to the PITCH ELISpot assay, detecting T-cell responses in a lower proportion of vaccinees. This has implications for the reporting of low-level T-cell responses that may be observed in patient populations and for the assessment of T-cell durability after vaccination. |
| Document Type: |
article in journal/newspaper |
| Language: |
English |
| DOI: |
10.1093/cei/uxac042 |
| DOI: |
10.1093/cei/uxac042/43875647/uxac042.pdf |
| Availability: |
https://doi.org/10.1093/cei/uxac042; https://academic.oup.com/cei/advance-article-pdf/doi/10.1093/cei/uxac042/43875647/uxac042.pdf; https://academic.oup.com/cei/article-pdf/209/1/90/45048791/uxac042.pdf |
| Rights: |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| Accession Number: |
edsbas.56256753 |
| Database: |
BASE |