Robust SARS-CoV-2-specific and heterologous immune responses after natural infection in elderly residents of Long-Term Care Facilities

SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses are higher in residents within LTCFs

Blood samples were collected from 276 staff and residents at England Long Term Care Facilities (LTCF) between June and November 2020, prior to the introduction of Covid-19 vaccination on 8th of December 2020 (Table 1). Baseline samples were collected between June and July with matched follow up samples at 2 and 4 months later. 163 donors were found to be SARS-CoV-2 seropositive based on N-antibody status and 113 were seronegative. The peak time point for primary SARS-CoV-2 infection within LTCF was April 2020 and as such these time points likely represent time points up to 7 months after primary infection.

Initial studies focused on assessment of SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral immunity in the 163 seropositive staff and residents. MSD technology was used to determine the magnitude of spike-specific, RBD-specific and nucleocapsid (N)-specific antibody responses and data were compared between four age quintiles: <40; 40-64; 65-85 and 85+ years of age (n=19, 67, 42 and 35 respectively). Serial analysis at 2 and 4 months after the initial collection allowed assessment of antibody waning during this period.

Spike-specific and RBD-specific antibody responses were both higher in LTCF residents aged 65+ years compared to younger donors with values that were 1.7-times and 2.1-times increased respectively (p=0.004 and p=<0.0001 respectively) (Fig 1a-d). Nucleocapsid-specific responses were also increased in the elderly donors aged 85+ years where they were 2.2-times higher than donors aged <65 years (p=0.04) (Fig 1e/f).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1: Elevated levels of SARS-CoV-2 Spike and Nucleocapsid-specific antibodies in LTCF residents

a) SARS-CoV-2 Spike-specific IgG response in relation to age within seropositive donors (n=163) (r=0.11, p=0.16). Dotted black line indicates cut-off.

b) Mean spike-specific antibody responses at baseline and 2 and 4 month follow up within 4 age groups, <40 (purple), 40-64 (blue), 65-85, (green) and >85 years (orange). Error bars indicate standard error. ^**= p <0.001.

c) SARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific IgG response in relation to age in seropositive donors (n=163) (r=0.11, p=0.17).

d) Mean RBD-specific antibody responses at baseline and 2 and 4 month follow up within 4 age groups, <40 (purple), 40-64 (blue), 65-85, (green) and >85 years (orange). Error bars indicate standard error. ^*= p<0.05, ^**= p 0.002, ^***= p=0.0006, ^****=p<0.0001.

e) SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid-specific IgG response in relation to age within seropositive donors (n=163) (r=0.19, p=0.01). Dotted black line indicates cut-off.

f) Mean nucleocapsid-specific antibody responses at baseline and 2 and 4 month follow up within 4 age groups, <40 (purple), 40-64 (blue), 65-85, (green) and >85 years (orange).. Error bars indicate standard error. ^*= p<0.05, ^***= p=<0.01.

g) Correlation between SARS-CoV-2 Spike and Nucleocapsid-specific antibody responses in all donors at 3 time points, baseline (red) (r= 0.26), 2 months after baseline (green) (r= 0.17) and 4 months after baseline (blue) (r=0.08) (n=115). The lines of best fit are shown.

The potential importance of antibody waning was next assessed in relation to donor age. Temporal assessment of antibody responses over four months showed that antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 spike and RBD were stable over time (Fig 1g). This is encouraging in relation to potential protection against reinfection and supports clinical assessment in relation to the capacity of natural immunity to prevent infection.

In contrast, relative waning of antibody responses against nucleocapsid protein was observed in all age groups during the 4 months of study. This was particularly marked in the older donors where mean titres fell by 39% during the 4-months of follow up (p=0.01) (Fig 1e-g). This pattern of enhanced antibody waning against nucleocapsid has been seen in other settings (9) and was reflected in the spike: nucleocapsid antibody ratio in donors aged >85+ years which decreased from 2.4-times at baseline to 1.6 times at 4 months of follow up (p=0.0003) (Fig 1f and supplementary table 1).

SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses demonstrate comparable and stable functional profile to SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern in staff and residents

In order to assess the functional capacity of antibodies elicited after natural infection across the life course we next investigated the capacity of antibodies from both staff and residents to inhibit the binding of soluble recombinant spike protein to ACE2. Importantly, in addition to the prototypic Wuhan sequence, recombinant spike protein from the viral Variants of Concern (VOC) B.1.1.7 (alpha), B.351 (beta) and P.1 (gamma) was also incorporated in the assay.

Immune sera were markedly impaired inability to inhibit spike-ACE2 binding for VOC compared to the parental Wuhan virus (34% SD 21.7%). This was particularly true for the B.351 (16.6%, p=<0.0001) and P.1 (15.4%, p=<0.0001) VOC whilst inhibition of B.1.1.7 variant binding (29.4%, p=0.78) was comparable to Wuhan in both assays (Fig 2a). Of note, we also observed that this profile of VOC spike inhibition was stable over 4 months of follow up which indicates that the functional activity of antibodies does not decline (Fig 2a). Furthermore, no differences were observed in relation to the pattern of spike-inhibition using serum samples from donors across all ages (data not shown).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2: Serological inhibition of spike-ACE2 interaction and direct antibody binding to Spike/RBD

a) Serological inhibition of spike binding to ACE2. Spike proteins were available from viral variants Wuhan (WH) (purple), B1.1.7 (blue), B.1.351 (green) and P.1 (orange). Sera were taken from donors after natural infection at baseline, 2 and 4 months after baseline sample. ^****=p<0.0001 (n=163).

b) Serological binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike from viral variants (Wuhan [WH] [purple], B1.1.7 [blue], B.1.351 [green] and P.1 [orange]) after natural infection at baseline. N.S = not significant (n=163).

c) Serological binding to SARS-CoV-2 RBD from viral variants (Wuhan [WH] [purple], B1.1.7 [blue], B1.351 [green] and P.1 [orange]) after natural infection at baseline. ^**** = p<0.0001 (n=163).

We next determined direct serum binding to spike proteins from VOC. Of interest, antibody binding to total spike protein was comparable against all four VOC indicating that the mutational changes within each VOC do not significantly change the total antibody-binding capacity of the spike protein (Fig 2b). However, serological neutralisation of virus binding to ACE2 is mediated primarily through binding to RBD and here binding was substantially reduced against both B.351 (842 AU/ml, p=<0.0001) and P.1 (1377 AU/ml, p=0.0003) compared to 5170 AU/ml against the Wuhan prototype (Fig 2c). This profile was in line with the pattern of Spike-ACE2 inhibition and again this pattern was both stable over time and across the age groups (data not shown).

These data show that the functional capacity of spike-specific antibodies elicited after natural infection is stable over at least four months and is independent of age in the LTCF setting.

Prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to boosting of antibody responses against beta coronaviruses

We next went on to assess how previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 impacted on the magnitude of the antibody response against other human coronaviruses. The MSD platform was used to assess binding to spike protein from the beta-coronaviruses SARS-CoV-1, HKU1 and OC43 as well as the alpha-coronaviruses 229E and NL63.

As anticipated, antibody binding to SARS-CoV-1 was very low in SARS-CoV-2-seronegative individuals but substantially increased within seropositive donors (10) due to substantial sequence homology between viruses. This was strongly enhanced in older donors reflecting the elevated SARS-CoV-2-specific response in this age group (r=0.16 p=0.03) (Fig 3A).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3: IgG antibody responses against beta-coronaviruses are increased in donors with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Comparison of antibody responses to coronaviruses in relation to age and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Seronegative donors are indicated by black dots (n=113) and seropositive donors (n=163) are indicated by red dots. Lines indicate line of best fit. Stability of responses over 4 months of follow up is shown within four age ranges; <40 (purple), 40-64 (blue), 65-85, (green) and >85 years (orange). Error bars indicate standard error.

a) SARS-1 Spike-specific antibody response in SARS-CoV-2 seropositive donors (r=0.16 p=0.03). Stability of response in age cohorts is shown on the right. *p=0.035 ^**p =0.0013 ^***p=0.0003.

b) HKU-1 Spike-specific antibody response. (Seropositive: r= 0.10, p=0.16; Seronegative: r=0.14, p =0.13). Stability of response in age cohorts is shown on the right: ^*p=0.01 ^**p= 0.008.

c) OC43 Spike-specific antibody response. (Seropositive: r= 0.11, p=0.15; Seronegative: r=0.17, p=0.06). Stability of response in age cohorts is shown on the right: seropositive ^* p=0.01; seronegative ^*p=<0.02.

d) 229E Spike-specific antibody response (Seropositive: r=0.23, p=0.003; Seronegative: r=0.13, p =0.16). Stability of response in age cohorts is shown on the right: seropositive p=0.02; seronegative ^*p=<0.03.

e) NL63 Spike-specific antibody response (Seropositive: r= 0.06, p=0.42; Seronegative r=0.19, p =0.03). Stability of response in age cohorts is shown on the right: seronegative ^*p=<0.02.

However, it was also noteworthy that enhanced antibody binding was observed against both of the endemic beta-coronaviruses in SARS-CoV-2 positive donors (OC43 55451 AU/ml vs 31539 AU/ml, p=<0.0001 and HKU1 16223 AU/ml vs 10083 AU/ml, p=0.0008) (Fig 3b/c). Of note, OC43-specific responses were also enhanced in seronegative older people (r=0.17 p =0.06), potentially reflecting the impact of recurrent priming from seasonal infection (Fig 3b/c).

Alpha-coronaviruses show less structural homology with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and this may underlie the finding of no increment in serological binding to spike protein in SARS-CoV-2 seropositive donors. However, the serological response to alpha-CoV was again increased in older people prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection (NL63: r=0.19 p =0.03) but this differential was lost following seroconversion (Fig 3d/e).

These findings show that serological responses against both alpha and beta-coronaviruses increase with age, potentially due to recurrent infections. However, cross-reactive antibody responses are increased following SARS-CoV-2 infection and this effect is both stronger in younger people and more marked for responses against the beta-coronaviruses. The relationship of these observations to clinical protection against individual coronaviruses is uncertain at present.

SARS-CoV-2 serostatus does not impair antibody responses against other respiratory viruses

Acute respiratory infections such as influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) represent a major and continuous challenge to the health of elderly individuals and annual vaccination against influenza is recommended in many countries. Protection against infection is believed to be mediated primarily through the action of humoral immunity and there is concern that SARS-CoV-2 serostatus may impact on the titre of heterologous immune responses. As such, we next assessed the strength of antibody responses against a range of influenza viral strains in relation to age and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus.

SARS-CoV-2 serostatus was not seen to have any influence on the titre of influenza or RSV-specific antibody responses across the different age groups (Fig 4). Relative antibody titres against influenza were broadly stable across the life course whilst the serological response against RSV increased with age.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 4: SARS-CoV-2 serostatus does not influence IgG responses to other respiratory viruses.

Comparison of IgG response against respiratory viruses in relation to age and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Red dots indicate positive donors (n=164) and black dots indicate negative donors (n=113). Statistical analysis below is shown for seropositive and seronegative donors respectively.

a) Influenza A/H7 Shanghai (r=0.06, p=0.40; r=0.03 p=0.72).

b) Influenza B/HA Brisbane (r=0.12, p=0.10; r=0.22 p=0.15).

c) Influenza A/H3 Hong (r=0.11, p=0.16; r=-0.02 p=0.77).

d) Influenza B/HA Phuket (r=0.18, p=0.81; r=-0.04 p=0.64).

e) Influenza A/H1 Michigan (r=0.10, p=0.18; r=-0.01 p=0.85).

f) RSV-F protein (r=0.18, p=0.02; r=-0.29 p=0.001).

These data provide reassurance that previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection does not impact detrimentally on the profile of immunity against heterologous respiratory viruses such as influenza or RSV.

SARS-CoV-2-specific cellular responses are comparable between staff and residents

Cellular immune responses are likely to play an important role in protection against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2. As such, IFN-γ ELISpot analysis was next used to determine T cell responses against both a peptide pool from spike protein and a combination of peptides from nucleocapsid, membrane and envelope protein (N/M/E). Analysis was performed in 80 donors and assessed in three age groups of <40, 40-64 and 65+ years.

The magnitude of the ELISpot response against spike peptides was comparable in donors at all ages and was also stable over the four months of follow up (Fig 5a-c). In contrast, cellular responses against the N/M/E pool were lower in donors aged under 40 years (36 SFU/10⁶) when compared to 40-64s (129 SFU/10⁶ p=0.02) and >65+ age groups (167 SFU/10⁶ p=0.005) (Fig 5d-f).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 5: SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses are observed across the lifecourse and demonstrate IFN-gamma, IL-2 and IL-10 production

a) Spike-specific cellular response in relation to age in seropositive donors (n=80) (r= 0.02 p= 0.82). Dotted black line indicates cut off for positive response.

b) Comparison of spike-specific cellular and antibody responses in seropositive donors (n=80) (r=0.32 p=0.003).

c) Mean spike-specific cellular responses within age categories <40 (purple), 40-64 (blue), and >65 years (green) at 0, 2 and 4 months. Error bars indicate standard error.

d) N/M/E-specific cellular response in relation to age in seropositive donors (n=80) (r= -0.03 p= 0.72). Dotted black line indicates cut off for positive response.

e) Comparison of N/M/E-specific cellular and antibody responses in seropositive donors (n=80) (r=0.35 p=0.001).

f) Mean N/M/E-specific cellular responses within age categories, <40 (purple), 40-64 (blue), and >65 years (green) at 0, 2 and 4 months. Error bars indicate standard error. ^* p=0.02 ^**p=0.005

g) IL-2 concentration in ELIspot supernatants in DMSO (blue), S1 (red) and N/M/E (green) peptide stimulated wells (n=48). ^****p=<0.0001

h) IL-10 concentration in ELIspot supernatants in DMSO (blue) S1 (red) and N/M/E (green) peptide simulated wells (n=48). ^**p=<0.002

To further assess the functional profile of SARS-CoV-2-specific cells we then measured the concentration of cytokines within ELIspot eluates using LEGENDplex technology. Markedly increased concentrations of IL-2 and IL10 were seen in both the spike and N/M/E-specific eluates compared to DMSO control (Fig 5g-h) (Spike: IL-2; 110 MFI/ml (control) vs 890 MFI/ml, p=<0.0001; IL-10: 220 MFI/ml (control) vs 330 MFI/ml, p=0.002); (N/M/E: IL2; 110 MFI/ml (control) vs 1000 MFI/ml, p=<0.0001; IL-10: 215 MFI/ml (control) vs 380 MFI/ml, p=0.0019).

SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ T cells are present at low frequency and show increasing expression of HLA-DR with age

Covid-19 elicits a robust T cell response, but it remains unclear how the phenotype of this response varies across the life course or how this may modulate the overall T cell repertoire. This is of particular note given the accumulation of effector T cells and enhanced inflammatory profile associated with ageing. As such, we next used 20-plex fluorometric analysis to determine expression of a range of memory, differentiation and activation markers across the global T cell repertoire both at baseline and at 4 months of follow up (n=65; supplementary table 2). tSNE analysis revealed a broadly comparable profile within the peripheral T and NK cell repertoire both at baseline and follow up (Figure 6a).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 6: Global and SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response within staff and residents in LTCF

a) t-SNE plots of global T and NK cell repertoire in younger and older donors in relation to SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Expression of CD4+, CD8,C D56+ and TCRγδ+ is shown to demonstrate major cell lineages. CD19 and CD14 cells were excluded from analysis. ∼20,000 PBMCs were identified using integrated and classification analysis and data from both baseline samples and +4 month samples is shown.

b) Quantification of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells based on percentage expression of both CD137+ and CD154+ on CD4+ cells after stimulation with N/M/E or spike (S) peptides. DMSO (D) is used as a negative control. Analysis is grouped into staff (<65) or residents (>65 years). Black line indicates the median. ^** p= >0.002 ^**** p= <0.0001.

c,d) Percentage expression of HLA-DR+ on CD137+CD154+CD4+ cells following stimulation with N/M/E (r=0.40 p=0.006; n=44) or spike peptides (r=0.36 p=0.03; n=33) in relation to age at baseline (c) and at 4 months (d).

Activation-induced marker (AIM) assessment was used to determine the magnitude and profile of the SARS-CoV-2-specific immune response following stimulation with viral peptide pools (n=44) (supplementary figure 1). The magnitude of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response was modest and comparable across age groups (fig 6b). In particular, within LTCF staff a median of 0.02% and 0.016% of CD4+ cells demonstrated specificity for N/M/E or spike respectively. Comparable values within the resident population were 0.018% and 0.008% respectively. (fig 6b), comparable with previous reports. Virus-specific CD8+ cells were not detected with this approach(11).

Expression of memory and differentiation markers on the virus-specific pool demonstrated a dominant CD27+CD28+CD127^low CD4+ effector phenotype (data not shown). Of note, expression of the activation marker HLA-DR increased substantially with age on both spike and N/M/E-specific CD4+ T cells (spike: r=0.36 p=0.03, N/M/E: r=0.40 p=0.006) (fig 6c/d). This profile was present at baseline and was further accentuated on the spike-specific pool at the four-month time point where a median of 75% of cells within residents expressed HLA-DR compared to 25% of cells with staff (n=28; p=0.02)(Figc-d). CD95 (Fas) expression was also similar between but did increase during follow up (supplementary figure 2). Expression of CD25, an additional marker of activation, did not show any such relationship with age (data not shown)

These data indicate that SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells comprise a small component of the peripheral T cell pool but virus-specific cells in older people show increased expression of HLA-DR suggesting chronic activation.

Serum inflammatory cytokine levels increase with age and are partially attenuated by SARS-CoV-2 infection

Acute primary infection with SARS-CoV-2 increases serum concentration of many inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6, TNF-α and IFN-γ. Sustained elevated levels of these proteins have been seen in a subgroup of patients with more prolonged disease and as such we next went on to assess systemic cytokine concentration in relation to SARS-CoV-2 serostatus across the life course.

MSD analysis was used to measure concentrations of IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-2 and IL-10 in plasma samples (Fig 7). Concentrations of the inflammatory cytokines IL-6, IFN-γ, IL-2 and TNF-α increased with age within SARS-CoV-2 seronegative donors and likely reflect the established profile of ‘inflammageing’(8). Of interest, within SARS-CoV-2 seropositive donors this association was lost for IFN-γ and IL-2, suggesting that previous SARS-CoV-2 infection may moderately suppress plasma concentrations in older people.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 7: SARS-CoV-2 serostatus may partially attenuate inflammageing

Comparison of plasma cytokine concentration in relation to age and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Black dots indicate seronegative donors (n=72) and red dots indicate seropositive donors (n=93). Statistical analysis assesses concentration in relation to age and is shown for seronegative and seropositive donors respectively.

a) IL-2 (r=0.41 p=0.0003; r=0.008; p=0.93).

b) IL-10 (r=0.20 p=0.08; r=0.11; p=0.28).

c) IFN-γ (r=0.46 p=<0.0001; r=0.18; p=0.07).

d) TNF-α (r=0.52 p=<0.0001; r=0.47; p=<0.0001).

e) IL-6 (r=0.67 p=<0.0001; r=0.59; p=<0.0001).

These findings indicate that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 does not lead to prolonged systemic inflammation and may even act to attenuate these levels in the longer term.

Sample Collection

The VIVALDI study (ISRCTN14447421) (ongoing) is a prospective cohort study, which was set up in May 2020 to investigate SARS-CoV-2 transmission, infection outcomes, and immunity in residents and staff in LTCFs in England that provide residential and/or nursing care for adults aged 65 years and over (https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-232/v2; (24)). Eligible LTCFs were identified by the Care Provider’s Senior Management Team, or by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network. Pseudonymised clinical (vaccination status, PCR test results) and demographic (age, sex, staff member versus resident) data were retrieved for staff and residents from participating LTCFs through national surveillance systems. All participants provided written informed consent for blood sample collection or if residents lacked the capacity to consent, a personal or nominated consultee was identified to act on their behalf.

Blood sampling was offered to participants at three-time points in June-July, August-September and October-November 2020. This time period was before the national vaccine rollout and therefore all data assess the immune response to natural infection alone. Anti-coagulated (EDTA) sample was sent to the University of Birmingham and serum tube to The Doctors Laboratory for anti-nucleocapsid IgG (N) testing. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the South Central - Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee, REC Ref: 20/SC/0238.

Data linkage

Abbott antibody test results were submitted to the COVID-19 datastore (https://data.england.nhs.uk/covid-19/) and linked to routinely held data on age, sex, LTCF, role (staff or resident) obtained through the national SARS-CoV-2 testing programme and to vaccination status (date and vaccine type) derived from the National Immunisations Management System (NIMS). These records were linked using a common identifier based on the individuals’ NHS number. Individual-level records were further linked to each LTCF using the unique Care Quality Commission location ID (CQC-ID), allocated by the Care Quality Commission who regulate all providers of health and social care in the UK.

Inclusion criteria

Both staff and residents were eligible for inclusion if it was possible to link them to a pseudo-identifier in the COVID-19 Datastore. Only those that had been infected in the first wave of the pandemic in the UK or those that had no evidence of being infected were included in this sub-cohort. Samples from LTCFs that had experienced outbreaks in the first wave were chosen for seropositive samples and LTCFs with no outbreaks were chosen for the seronegative samples. Participants who seroconverted during the 4-month period of follow up were not included in the analysis. Due to limited PCR testing in the first wave of the pandemic, it was not possible to determine the date of primary infection with SARS-CoV-2. 21st April 2020 was the peak of the first wave for SARS-CoV-2 infection within LTCFs. Past infection with SARS-CoV-2 was defined based on results of Abbott antibody and MSD quantitative test using thresholds and methods outlined below.

Sample Preparation

Samples were processed within 24 hours of reception at the University of Birmingham. Blood was spun at 300g for 5 minutes. Plasma was removed and spun at 500g for 10 minutes prior to storage at -80°C. The remaining blood was separated using a SepMate (Stemcell) density centrifugation tube. The resulting PBMC layer was washed twice with RPMI and frozen in freezing media (10% DMSO 90% FBS).

Serological analysis of SARS-CoV-2-specific immune response

Quantitative IgG antibody titres were measured against trimeric Spike (S) protein. Multiplex MSD Assays were performed as per manufacturer instructions (Lot number K0081681). Briefly, 96-well plates were blocked. Following washing, samples were diluted at 1:5000 in diluent and added to the wells with the reference standard and internal controls. After incubation, plates were washed and anti-IgG detection antibodies were added. Plates were washed and were immediately read using a MESO TM QuickPlex SQ 120 system. Data was generated by Methodological Mind software and analysed with MSD Discovery Workbench (v4.0) software. Presented data were adjusted for any sample dilutions

For assessment of serological response against the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid, blood samples were tested for the presence of IgG antibodies specific for nucleocapsid (N) protein using the Abbott ARCHITECT system (Abbott, Maidenhead, UK), a semi-quantitative chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. The assay was kindly performed by The Doctors Laboratory (London, UK). An index value cut-off of 0.8 was used to classify samples as antibody-positive (≥ 0.8)(25, 26).

Quantitative inhibition of ACE-2 binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike

Quantitative inhibition of ACE-2 binding to trimeric SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein from variants of concern were measured using the MSD V-PLEX COVID-19 ACE2 Neutralization Kit (SARS-CoV-2 Plate 7) following manufacturer’s instructions (Lot number K0081681). Briefly, 96-well plates were blocked. Following washing, samples diluted 1:10 in the diluent, as well as reference standards, were added to the plate. After incubation, SULFO-TAG Human ACE-2 Protein detection protein was added to the plate and incubated for 1 hour. Plates were washed prior to reading immediately using a MESO ™ QuickPlex SQ 120 system. Data was generated by Methodological Mind software and analysed with MSD Discovery Workbench (v4.0) software. Presented data were adjusted for any sample dilutions.

Quantification of SARS-CoV-2-specific cellular responses by ELISpot analysis

Pepmix pools containing 15-mer peptides overlapping by 10aa from either SARS-CoV-2 Spike S1 or S2, Nucleocapsid, Envelope and Membrane protein domains were purchased from Alta Biosciences (University of Birmingham, UK). T cell responses of post-vaccination samples to the above peptide mixes were determined using a Human IFN-γ ELISpot PRO kit (Mabtech, Sweden). Isolated PBMC were thawed and rested overnight prior to assay in R10 (RPMI + 10% FBS + Pen/Strep). 2-3×10□ PBMC were stimulated in duplicate with peptide mixes at 1ug/ml per peptide, anti-CD3 and CEFX cell stimulation mix (JPT) as a positive control, or DMSO as a negative control for 16-18 hours. Supernatants were harvested and stored at -80°C. Following the development of plates per the manufacturer’s instructions, the plates were read using the BioSys Bioreader 5000. Mean spot counts in DMSO treated negative control wells were deducted from the means to generate normalised spot counts for all other treated wells. Cut off values were previously determined (Zuo, et al. 2020).

Cytokine concentrations within ELISpot supernatants were assayed using a LEGENDplex™ Human Th Panel (BioLegend) according to manufacturer’s instructions. Data was analysed using the LEGENDplex™ Data Analysis Software Suite (BioLegend).

Assessment of plasma cytokine levels

Multiplex assays to quantitatively measure levels of ten different cytokines (IFN-γ, IL-1β, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12p70, IL-13 and TNF-□) within plasma were performed using the MSD V-PLEX Proinflammatory Panel 1 (human) kit according to manufacturer’s instructions (Lot number K0081665). Briefly, 96-well plates were washed prior to addition of serum diluted 1:4 in diluent and calibrators. Following incubation, plates were washed and detection antibodies were added. Plates were washed and read immediately using a MESO ™ QuickPlex SQ 120 system. Data was generated by Methodological Mind software and analysed with MSD Discovery Workbench (v4.0) software. Presented data was adjusted for any sample dilutions.

Cell surface staining

Cryopreserved PBMC were thawed and rested for at least 6 hours in filtered R10. 10⁶+ cells were then stimulated with a combined SARS-CoV-2 Spike S1 and S2 peptide pool or a Nucleocapsid, Envelope and Membrane protein peptide pool at final concentration of 1μg/ml per peptide, or DMSO for an unstimulated control. Purified anti-CD40 antibody was added to the cell suspension at final concentration 1μg/ml. Cells were incubated at 37°C overnight for 16 hours. Following stimulation, cells were washed (PBS+5% BSA+1% EDTA), Brilliant Stain Buffer (BD) was added and cells were surface stained at 4°C for 30 minutes (supplementary table 2). Cells were washed and run on a BD Symphony A3 flow cytometer (BD Biosciences) and analysis was carried out using FlowJo v10.7.1 and Cytobank 2021.

Statistical analysis

All data were checked for normality using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. For comparative analysis of 2 groups a Mann Whitney test was applied. Comparative analysis with 3 or more groups a Kruskal-Wallis test was used and for multiple comparisons uncorrected Dunn’s test was used for non parametric data. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients were calculated and tested for correlations. Data analysis was performed in Graph Pad Prism V.9.1.0 (216).