SARS-CoV-2 vaccination-induced protection against infection is likely to be affected by functional antibody features. To understand the kinetics of antibody responses in healthy individuals after primary series and third vaccine doses, sera from the recipients of the two licensed SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were assessed for circulating anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG levels and avidity for up to 6 months post-primary series and 9 months after the third dose. Following primary series vaccination, anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG levels declined from months 1 to 6, while avidity increased through month 6, irrespective of the vaccine received. The third dose of either vaccine increased anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG levels and avidity and appeared to enhance antibody level persistence—generating a slower rate of decline in the 3 months following the third dose compared to the decline seen after the primary series alone. The third dose of both vaccines induced significant avidity increases 1 month after vaccination compared to the avidity response 6 months post-primary series vaccination (p ≤ 0.001). A significant difference in avidity responses between the two vaccines was observed 6 months post-third dose, where the BNT162b2 recipients had higher antibody avidity levels compared to the mRNA-1273 recipients (p = 0.020).

Several assays are used to measure type-specific serological responses to human papillomavirus (HPV), including the bead-based glutathione S-transferase (GST)-L1 multiplex serology assay and virus-like particle (VLP)-based ELISA. We evaluated the high-throughput GST-L1, which is increasingly used in epidemiologic research, as a measure of cumulative HPV infection and future immune protection among HPV-unvaccinated women. We tested enrollment sera from participants in the control arm of the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (n = 488) for HPV16 and HPV18 using GST-L1, VLP-ELISA, and two assays that measure neutralizing antibodies (cLIA and SEAP-NA). With statistical adjustment for sampling, we compared GST-L1 serostatus to established HPV seropositivity correlates and incident cervical HPV infection using odds ratios. We further compared GST-L1 to VLP-ELISA using pair-wise agreement statistics and by defining alternate assay cutoffs. Odds of HPV16 GST-L1 seropositivity increased with enrollment age (OR = 1.20 per year, 95%CI 1.03-1.40) and lifetime number of sexual partners (OR = 2.06 per partner, 95%CI 1.49-2.83), with similar results for HPV18. GST-L1 seropositivity did not indicate protection from incident infection over 4 years of follow-up (HPV16 adjusted OR = 1.72, 95%CI 0.95-3.13; HPV18 adjusted OR = 0.38, 95%CI 0.12-1.23). Seroprevalence by GST-L1 (HPV16 and HPV18, respectively) was 5.0% and 5.2%, compared to 19.4% and 23.8% by VLP-ELISA, giving positive agreement of 39.2% and 20.8%. Lowering GST-L1 seropositivity cutoffs improved GST-L1/VLP-ELISA positive agreement to 68.6% (HPV16) and 61.5% (HPV18). Our data support GST-L1 as a marker of cumulative HPV infection, but not immune protection. At lower seropositivity cutoffs, GST-L1 better approximates VLP-ELISA.

Background: Different assays, including the competitive Luminex immunoassay (cLIA), secreted alkaline phosphatase neutralization assay (SEAP-NA), and virus-like particle-based ELISA, are commonly used to measure antibody responses after human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. Direct assay comparisons aid interpretation of immunogenicity data evaluated by different assays. Methods: We compared cLIA to SEAP-NA and ELISA among 51 HPV16/18-vaccinated women enrolled in the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial. We tested replicate serum samples collected at months 0, 1, and 12 by HPV16/18 cLIA, SEAP-NA, and ELISA. For a subset (N=10), we further tested month 24 and 36 samples. We calculated seroprevalence estimates and Spearman rank correlation coefficients comparing cLIA to SEAP-NA and ELISA. Results: After one vaccine dose, seroprevalence by SEAP-NA and ELISA was 100% (both HPV16 and HPV18), and by cLIA was 96% (95% CI 87%-100%) for HPV16 and 71% (95% CI 56%-83%) for HPV18. Seroprevalence was 100% by all assays after 3 doses. Correlation between assays was high after one vaccine dose (cLIA/SEAP-NA ρ=0.91 (HPV16) and ρ=0.86 (HPV18); cLIA/ELISA ρ=0.84 (HPV16) and ρ=0.74 (HPV18); all p<0.001) and remained high through month 36. Ratios of mean antibody levels to seropositivity cutoffs at month 36 were lower for cLIA than for SEAP-NA or ELISA, particularly for HPV18 (HPV18 ratio for cLIA 1.9, SEAP-NA 3.5, ELISA 3.4). Conclusion: Though correlation between cLIA and SEAP-NA/ELISA is high and stable after vaccination, the assays differ in scale and sensitivity, with notable differences after 1 vaccine dose and for HPV18. Our results demonstrate that comparisons of antibody responses to HPV vaccination measured by different assays are approximate, and must consider biological and technical differences between assays.

COVID-19 has highlighted challenges in the measurement quality and comparability of serological binding and neutralization assays. Due to many different assay formats and reagents, these measurements are known to be highly variable with large uncertainties. The development of the WHO international standard (WHO IS) and other pool standards have facilitated assay comparability through normalization to a common material but does not provide assay harmonization nor uncertainty quantification. In this paper, we present the results from an interlaboratory study that led to the development of (1) a novel hierarchy of data analyses based on the thermodynamics of antibody binding and (2) a modeling framework that quantifies the probability of neutralization potential for a given binding measurement. Importantly, we introduced a precise, mathematical definition of harmonization that separates the sources of quantitative uncertainties, some of which can be corrected to enable, for the first time, assay comparability. Both the theory and experimental data confirmed that mAbs and WHO IS performed identically as a primary standard for establishing traceability and bridging across different assay platforms. The metrological anchoring of complex serological binding and neuralization assays and fast turn-around production of an mAb reference control can enable the unprecedented comparability and traceability of serological binding assay results for new variants of SARS-CoV-2 and immune responses to other viruses.