The potency of antibody neutralization in cell culture has been used as the key criterion for selection of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for clinical development. As other aspects may also influence the degree of protection in vivo, we compared the efficacy of two neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (TRES6 and 4C12) targeting different epitopes of the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 in a prophylactic setting in rhesus monkeys. All four animals treated with TRES6 had reduced viral loads in the upper respiratory tract 2 days after naso-oropharyngeal challenge with the Alpha SARS-CoV-2 variant. Starting 2 days after challenge, mutations conferring resistance to TRES6 were dominant in two of the rhesus monkeys, with both animals failing to maintain reduced viral loads. Consistent with its lower serum neutralization titer at the day of challenge, prophylaxis with 4C12 tended to suppress viral load at day 2 less efficiently than TRES6. However, a week after challenge, mean viral loads in the lower respiratory tract in 4C12-treated animals were lower than in the TRES6 group and no mutations conferring resistance to 4C12 could be detected in viral isolates from nasal or throat swabs. Thus, genetic barrier to resistance seems to be a critical parameter for the efficacy of prophylaxis with monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, comparison of antibody concentrations in respiratory secretions to those in serum shows reduced distribution of the 4C12 antibody into respiratory secretions and a delay in the appearance of antibodies in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid compared to their appearance in secretions of the upper respiratory tract.IMPORTANCEMonoclonal antibodies are a powerful tool for the prophylaxis and treatment of acute viral infections. Hence, they were one of the first therapeutic agents licensed for the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Oftentimes, the main criterion for the selection of antibodies for clinical development is their potency of neutralization in cell culture. By comparing two antibodies targeting the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, we now observed that the antibody that neutralized SARS-CoV-2 more efficiently in cell culture suppressed viral load in challenged rhesus monkeys to a lesser extent. Extraordinary rapid emergence of mutants of the challenge virus, which had lost their sensitivity to the antibody, was identified as the major reason for the reduced efficacy of the antibody in rhesus monkeys. Therefore, the viral genetic barrier to resistance to antibodies also affects their efficacy.

Understanding the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is crucial to comprehending disease progression and the significance of vaccine and therapeutic development. The emergence of highly contagious variants poses a significant challenge to humoral immunity, underscoring the necessity of grasping the intricacies of specific antibodies. This review emphasizes the pivotal role of antibodies in shaping immune responses and their implications for diagnosing, preventing, and treating SARS-CoV-2 infection. It delves into the kinetics and characteristics of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 and explores current antibody-based diagnostics, discussing their strengths, clinical utility, and limitations. Furthermore, we underscore the therapeutic potential of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, discussing various antibody-based therapies such as monoclonal antibodies, polyclonal antibodies, anti-cytokines, convalescent plasma, and hyperimmunoglobulin-based therapies. Moreover, we offer insights into antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, emphasizing the significance of neutralizing antibodies in order to confer immunity to SARS-CoV-2, along with emerging variants of concern (VOCs) and circulating Omicron subvariants. We also highlight challenges in the field, such as the risks of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and shed light on the challenges associated with the original antigenic sin (OAS) effect and long COVID. Overall, this review intends to provide valuable insights, which are crucial to advancing sensitive diagnostic tools, identifying efficient antibody-based therapeutics, and developing effective vaccines to combat the evolving threat of SARS-CoV-2 variants on a global scale.

UNASSIGNED: Virologic determinants of seroconversion to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were defined in a post hoc analysis of prospectively studied vaccine- and infection-naïve individuals at high risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
UNASSIGNED: This phase 3 COVID-19 prevention trial (NCT04452318) with casirivimab and imdevimab was conducted in July 2020-February 2021, before widespread vaccine availability. Placebo-treated participants who were uninfected (SARS-CoV-2 quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction [RT-qPCR] negative) and seronegative were assessed weekly for 28 days (efficacy assessment period [EAP]) for COVID-19 symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-qPCR of nasopharyngeal swab samples and for serostatus by antinucleocapsid immunoglobulin (Ig) G. Regression-based modeling, including causal mediation analysis, estimated the effects of viral load on seroconversion.
UNASSIGNED: Of 157/1069 (14.7%) uninfected and seronegative (for antispike IgG, antispike IgA, and antinucleocapsid IgG) participants who became infected during the EAP, 105 (65%) seroconverted. The mean (SD) maximum viral load of seroconverters was 7.23 (1.68) log10 copies/mL vs 4.8 (2.2) log10 copies/mL in those who remained seronegative; viral loads of ∼6.0 log10 copies/mL better predicted seroconversion. The mean of the maximum viral load was 7.11 log10 copies/mL in symptomatic participants vs 5.58 log10 copies/mL in asymptomatic participants. The mean duration of detectable viral load was longer in seroconverted vs seronegative participants: 3.24 vs 1.63 weeks.
UNASSIGNED: Maximum SARS-CoV-2 viral load is a major driver of seroconversion and symptomatic COVID-19, with high viral loads (∼6.0 log10 copies/mL) better predicting seroconversion. Serology underestimates infection rates, incidence, and prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The epidemic of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 and its variants of concern (VOCs) has been ongoing for over 3 years. Antibody therapies encompassing convalescent plasma, hyperimmunoglobulin, and neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) applied in passive immunotherapy have yielded positive outcomes and played a crucial role in the early COVID-19 treatment. In this review, the development path, action mechanism, clinical research results, challenges, and safety profile associated with the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma, hyperimmunoglobulin, and mAbs were summarized. In addition, the prospects of applying antibody therapy against VOCs was assessed, offering insights into the coping strategies for facing new infectious disease outbreaks.

Patients with septic shock caused by Staphylococcus aureus have mortality rates exceeding 50%, despite appropriate antibiotic therapy. Our objectives were to establish a rabbit model of S. aureus septic shock and to determine whether a novel immunotherapy can prevent or halt its natural disease progression.
Anesthetized rabbits were ventilated with lung-protective low-tidal volume, instrumented for advanced hemodynamic monitoring, and characterized for longitudinal changes in acute myocardial dysfunction by echocardiography and sepsis-associated biomarkers after S. aureus intravenous challenge. To demonstrate the potential utility of this hyperdynamic septic shock model for preclinical drug development, rabbits were randomized for prophylaxis with anti-Hla/Luk/ClfA monoclonal antibody combination that neutralizes alpha-hemolysin (Hla), the bicomponent pore-forming leukocidins (Luk) including Panton-Valentine leukocidin, leukocidin ED, and gamma-hemolysin, and clumping factor A (ClfA), or an irrelevant isotype-matched control IgG (c-IgG), and then challenged with S. aureus.
Rabbits challenged with S. aureus, but not those with saline, developed a hyperdynamic state of septic shock characterized by elevated cardiac output (CO), increased stroke volume (SV) and reduced systemic vascular resistance (SVR), which was followed by a lethal hypodynamic state characterized by rapid decline in mean arterial pressure (MAP), increased central venous pressure, reduced CO, reduced SV, elevated SVR, and reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction, thereby reproducing the hallmark clinical features of human staphylococcal septic shock. In this model, rabbits pretreated with anti-Hla/Luk/ClfA mAb combination had 69% reduction in mortality when compared to those pretreated with c-IgG (P<0.001). USA300-induced acute circulatory failure-defined as >70% decreased in MAP from pre-infection baseline-occurred in only 20% (2/10) of rabbits pretreated with anti-Hla/Luk/ClfA mAb combination compared to 100% (9/9) of those pretreated with c-IgG. Prophylaxis with anti-Hla/Luk/ClfA mAb combination halted progression to lethal hypodynamic shock, as evidenced by significant protection against the development of hyperlactatemia, hypocapnia, hyperkalemia, leukopenia, neutropenia, monocytopenia, lymphopenia, as well as biomarkers associated with acute myocardial injury.
These results demonstrate the potential utility of a mechanically ventilated rabbit model that reproduced hallmark clinical features of hyperdynamic septic shock and the translational potential of immunotherapy targeting S. aureus virulence factors for the prevention of staphylococcal septic shock.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has reached a turning point. The non-pharmaceutical interventions for preventing COVID-19 are lifting. Vaccination uptake is increasing in general, but this strategy is continuously challenged by the rapid evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Of note, the Omicron subvariants spread globally for at least one year, and the most recently developed subvariants show strong immune evasion to preexisting immunity, either from previous infection, vaccination or both. Therefore, early and appropriate antiviral agents to treat patients at risk for severe COVID-19 or death is crucial to decrease morbidities and mortalities, to restore the healthcare capacities and to facilitate a return to the new normal. Current antiviral therapy for COVID-19 consist of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and direct antiviral agents. Each agent has been proved for early ambulatory treatment of COIVD-19, but suffer from variable effectiveness and limitations due to patients\' comorbidities, drug properties, or antiviral resistance. Besides, some specific mAbs are indicated for prophylaxis of COVID-19 before or after close contact with confirmed COVID-19 patients. This review article summarizes the evidence and unmet needs of the currently available antiviral agents for management of COVID-19 in the context of the Omicron subvariants.

One of the most pressing challenges associated with SARS-CoV-2 treatment is the emergence of new variants that may be more transmissible, cause more severe disease, or be resistant to current treatments and vaccines. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has led to a global pandemic, resulting in millions of deaths worldwide. Various strategies have been employed to combat the virus, including neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), CRISPR/Cas13, and antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs). While vaccines and small molecules have proven to be an effective means of preventing severe COVID-19 and reducing transmission rates, the emergence of new virus variants poses a challenge to their effectiveness. Monoclonal antibodies have shown promise in treating early-stage COVID-19, but their effectiveness is limited in severe cases and the emergence of new variants may reduce their binding affinity. CRISPR/Cas13 has shown potential in targeting essential viral genes, but its efficiency, specificity, and delivery to the site of infection are major limitations. ASOs have also been shown to be effective in targeting viral RNA, but they face similar challenges to CRISPR/Cas13 in terms of delivery and potential off-target effects. In conclusion, a combination of these strategies may provide a more effective means of combating SARS-CoV-2, and future research should focus on improving their efficiency, specificity, and delivery to the site of infection. It is evident that the continued research and development of these alternative therapies will be essential in the ongoing fight against SARS-CoV-2 and its potential future variants.

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) had received emergency use authorization for mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or for prophylaxis against COVID-19, including casirivimab plus imdevimab (C+I), bamlanivimab plus etesevimab (B+E), tixagevimab plus cilgavimab (T+CG), and sotrovimab (S) and bebtelovimab (BEB). This systematic review was done to assess the efficacy and safety of the same. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and FDA fact sheets were searched for the studies published between January 2021 and May 2022, and appropriate search terms related to the mentioned mAbs were used for data collection. Review included original research including randomized clinical trials and observational studies published or preprints. Studies included in the review had compared with placebo or standard of care or no treatment or mAbs with each other and also of various doses. Data extraction was done and reviewed the same for both efficacy and safety. Total of 20 studies were included in this review. The rate of hospitalization within 30 days showed ∼2% in comparison to ∼7% with placebo. Significant reduction in viral load was more observed with combination mAbs. Combination therapy showed faster virological cure against the Gamma variant. With C + I as postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), 29.0% of asymptomatic participants developed symptomatic COVID-19. Pre-exposure prophylaxis with T+CG reduced the incidence of infection by 77%. Infusion-related reaction was the most common adverse event (AE). The neutralizing mAbs reduced hospitalization in mild-to-moderate patients with infusion-related reactions as common AE. The response was better in the seronegative patients. Most of these studies were conducted in unvaccinated individuals and against Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants.

The H9N2 avian influenza virus (AIV) remains a serious threat to the global poultry industry and public health. The hemagglutinin (HA) protein is an essential protective antigen of AIVs and a major target of neutralizing antibodies and vaccines. Therefore, in this study, we used rice-derived HA protein as an immunogen to generate monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and screened them using an immunoperoxidase monolayer assay and indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Eight mAbs reacted well with the recombinant H9N2 AIV and HA protein, four of which exhibited potent inhibitory activity against hemagglutination, while three showed remarkable neutralization capacities. Western blotting confirmed that two mAbs bound to the HA protein. Linear epitopes were identified using the mAbs; a novel linear epitope, 480HKCDDQCM487, was identified. Structural analysis revealed that the novel linear epitope is located at the C-terminus of HA2 near the disulfide bond-linked HA1 and HA2. Alignment of the amino acid sequences showed that the epitope was highly conserved among multiple H9N2 AIV strains. The results of this study provide novel insights for refining vaccine and diagnostic strategies and expand our understanding of the immune response against AIV.

COVID-19 continues to be a relevant issue among patients with haematological malignancies (HM). Vaccines are frequently not effective in subjects on active treatment. In this multicentre retrospective study of Gruppo Italiano Malattie EMatologiche dell\'Adulto (GIMEMA), we collected data from 91 paucisymptomatic HM patients treated with anti-spike neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (nMoAbs) to determine time to viral clearance, referencing it to the expected value of 28 days from an historical group of untreated paucisymptomatic patients. Secondary endpoints included rate of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, COVID-19 related death and safety. SARS-CoV-2 molecular swab negativity was obtained in 86 patients (95%), with a median time of 18 days (IQR 13-26; p < 0.0001). We did not find significant variations according to age, diagnosis, treatment type, vaccination status or nMoAbs type. Rate of hospitalization due to COVID-19 progression was 12% (11/91), with 2 patients (2.2%) requiring ICU admission. With a median follow-up of 2.33 months, the overall mortality was 5.5% (5/91), with 3 deaths due to COVID-19. Side effects were rare and self-limiting. Our data suggest that nMoAbs can limit the detrimental effect of immunosuppressive treatments on COVID-19 clinical progression and time to viral clearance. The original trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04932967.