RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Determinants of passive antibody effectiveness in SARS-CoV-2 infection
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.03.21.22272672
DO 10.1101/2022.03.21.22272672
A1 Eva Stadler
A1 Khai Li Chai
A1 Timothy E Schlub
A1 Deborah Cromer
A1 Mark N Polizzotto
A1 Stephen J Kent
A1 Nicole Skoetz
A1 Lise Estcourt
A1 Zoe K McQuilten
A1 Erica M Wood
A1 David S Khoury
A1 Miles P Davenport
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/22/2022.03.21.22272672.abstract
AB Neutralising antibodies are an important correlate of protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Multiple studies have investigated the effectiveness of passively administered antibodies (either monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin) in preventing acquisition of or improving the outcome of infection. Comparing the results between studies is challenging due to different study characteristics including disease stage, trial enrolment and outcome criteria, and different product factors, including administration of polyclonal or monoclonal antibody, and antibody targets and doses. Here we integrate data from 37 randomised controlled trials to investigate how the timing and dose of passive antibodies predicts protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection. We find that both prophylactic and early therapeutic administration (to symptomatic ambulant subjects) have significant efficacy in preventing infection or progression to hospitalisation respectively. However, we find that effectiveness of passive antibody therapy in preventing clinical progression is significantly reduced with administration at later clinical stages (p<0.0001). To compare the dose-response relationship between different treatments, we normalise the administered antibody dose to the predicted neutralisation titre (after dilution) compared to the mean titre observed in early convalescent subjects. We use a logistic model to analyse the dose-response curve of passive antibody administration in preventing progression from symptomatic infection to hospitalisation. We estimate a maximal protection from progression to hospitalisation of 70.2% (95% CI: 62.1 – 78.3%). The dose required to achieve 50% of the maximal effect (EC-50) for prevention of progression to hospitalisation was 0.19-fold (95% CI: 0.087 – 0.395) of the mean early convalescent titre. This suggests that for current monoclonal antibody regimes, doses between 7- and >1000-fold lower than currently used could still achieve around 90% of the current effectiveness (depending on the variant) and allow much more widespread use at lower cost. For convalescent plasma, most current doses are lower than required for high levels of protection. This work provides a framework for the rational design of future passive antibody prophylaxis and treatment strategies for COVID-19.Competing Interest StatementMNP declares receiving provision of drug for clinical trials from CSL Behring, Takeda, Grifols, Emergent Biosciences, and Gilead.Funding StatementThis work is supported by an Australian government Medical Research Future Fund awards GNT2002073 and MRF2005544 (to MPD, SJK), MRF2005760 (to MPD), an NHMRC program grant GNT1149990 (SJK and MPD), and the Victorian Government (SJK). DSK and SJK are supported by NHMRC fellowships. DC, MPD, ZKM and EMW are supported by NHMRC Investigator grants and ZKM and EMW by an NHMRC Synergy grant (1189490). KLC is supported by PhD scholarships from Monash University, the Haematology Society of Australia and New Zealand and the Leukaemia Foundation. The funding source had no role in the writing of the manuscript or the decision to submit it for publication, nor in data collection, analysis, or interpretation; or any aspect pertinent to the study. Authors had full access to data in the study, and they accept responsibility to submit for publication. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study involves only openly available human data, which can be obtained from the publication sources cited within the manuscript.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data and code will be made available on GitHub upon publication.