In a randomized clinical trial of 86 hospitalized COVID-19 patients comparing standard care to treatment with 300mL convalescent plasma containing high titers of neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, no overall clinical benefit was observed. Using a comprehensive translational approach, we unravel the virological and immunological responses following treatment to disentangle which COVID-19 patients may benefit and should be the focus of future studies. Convalescent plasma is safe, does not improve survival, has no effect on the disease course, nor does plasma enhance viral clearance in the respiratory tract, influence SARS-CoV-2 antibody development or serum proinflammatory cytokines levels. Here, we show that the vast majority of patients already had potent neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at hospital admission and with comparable titers to carefully selected plasma donors. This resulted in the decision to terminate the trial prematurely. Treatment with convalescent plasma should be studied early in the disease course or at least preceding autologous humoral response development.

Quantitative or qualitative differences in immunity may drive clinical severity in COVID-19. Although longitudinal studies to record the course of immunological changes are ample, they do not necessarily predict clinical progression at the time of hospital admission. Here we show, by a machine learning approach using serum pro-inflammatory, anti-inflammatory and anti-viral cytokine and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody measurements as input data, that COVID-19 patients cluster into three distinct immune phenotype groups. These immune-types, determined by unsupervised hierarchical clustering that is agnostic to severity, predict clinical course. The identified immune-types do not associate with disease duration at hospital admittance, but rather reflect variations in the nature and kinetics of individual patient’s immune response. Thus, our work provides an immune-type based scheme to stratify COVID-19 patients at hospital admittance into high and low risk clinical categories with distinct cytokine and antibody profiles that may guide personalized therapy.

An innovative approach to eliminate HIV-1-infected cells emerging out of latency, the major hurdle to HIV-1 cure, is to pharmacologically reactivate viral expression and concomitantly trigger intracellular pro-apoptotic pathways in order to selectively induce cell death (ICD) of infected cells, without reliance on the extracellular immune system. In this work, we demonstrate the effect of DDX3 inhibitors on selectively inducing cell death in latent HIV-1-infected cell lines, primary CD4+ T cells and in CD4+ T cells from cART-suppressed people living with HIV-1 (PLWHIV). We used single-cell FISH-Flow technology to characterise the contribution of viral RNA to inducing cell death. The pharmacological targeting of DDX3 induced HIV-1 RNA expression, resulting in phosphorylation of IRF3 and upregulation of IFNβ. DDX3 inhibition also resulted in the downregulation of BIRC5, critical to cell survival during HIV-1 infection, and selectively induced apoptosis in viral RNA-expressing CD4+ T cells but not bystander cells. DDX3 inhibitor treatment of CD4+ T cells from PLWHIV resulted in an approximately 50% reduction of the inducible latent HIV-1 reservoir by quantitation of HIV-1 RNA, by FISH-Flow, RT-qPCR and TILDA. This study provides proof of concept for pharmacological reversal of latency coupled to induction of apoptosis towards the elimination of the inducible reservoir.

Understanding the clinical potency of latency-reversing agents (LRAs) on the HIV-1 reservoir is useful to deploy future strategies. This systematic review evaluated the effects of LRAs in human intervention studies. A literature search was performed using medical databases focusing on studies with adults living with HIV-1 receiving LRAs. Eligibility criteria required participants from prospective clinical studies, a studied compound hypothesised as LRA, and reactivation or tolerability assessments. Relevant demographical data, LRA reactivation capacity, reservoir size, and adverse events were extracted. A study quality assessment with analysis of bias was performed by RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. The primary endpoints were HIV-1 reservoir reactivation after LRA treatment quantified by cell-associated unspliced HIV-1 RNA, and LRA tolerability defined by adverse events. Secondary outcomes were reservoir size and the effect of LRAs on analytical treatment interruption (ATI) duration. After excluding duplicates, 5182 publications were screened. In total 45 publications fulfilled eligibility criteria including 26 intervention studies and 16 randomised trials. The risk of bias was evaluated as high. Chromatin modulators were the main investigated LRA class in 24 studies. Participants were mostly males (90.1%). Where reported, HIV-1 subtype B was most frequently observed. Reactivation after LRA treatment occurred in 78% of studies and was observed with nearly all chromatin modulators. When measured, reactivation mostly occurred within 24 h after treatment initiation. Combination LRA strategies have been infrequently studied and were without synergistic reactivation. Adverse events, where reported, were mostly low grade, yet occurred frequently. Seven studies had individuals who discontinued LRAs for related adverse events. The reservoir size was assessed by HIV-1 DNA in 80% of studies. A small decrease in reservoir was observed in three studies on immune checkpoint inhibitors and the histone deacetylase inhibitors romidepsin and chidamide. No clear effect of LRAs on ATI duration was observed. This systematic review provides a summary of the reactivation of LRAs used in current clinical trials whilst highlighting the importance of pharmacovigilance. Highly heterogeneous study designs and underrepresentation of relevant patient groups are to be considered when interpreting these results. The observed reactivation did not lead to cure or a significant reduction in the size of the reservoir. Finding more effective LRAs by including well-designed studies are needed to define the required reactivation level to reduce the HIV-1 reservoir.

Background: Vaccines can be less immunogenic in people living with HIV (PLWH), but for SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations this is unknown. In this study we set out to investigate, for the vaccines currently approved in the Netherlands, the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations in PLWH. Methods and findings: We conducted a prospective cohort study to examine the immunogenicity of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1-S, and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines in adult PLWH without prior COVID-19, and compared to HIV-negative controls. The primary endpoint was the anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG response after mRNA vaccination. Secondary endpoints included the serological response after vector vaccination, anti-SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response, and reactogenicity. Between 14 February and 7 September 2021, 1,154 PLWH (median age 53 [IQR 44–60] years, 85.5% male) and 440 controls (median age 43 [IQR 33–53] years, 28.6% male) were included in the final analysis. Of the PLWH, 884 received BNT162b2, 100 received mRNA-1273, 150 received ChAdOx1-S, and 20 received Ad26.COV2.S. In the group of PLWH, 99% were on antiretroviral therapy, 97.7% were virally suppressed, and the median CD4+ T-cell count was 710 cells/μL (IQR 520–913). Of the controls, 247 received mRNA-1273, 94 received BNT162b2, 26 received ChAdOx1-S, and 73 received Ad26.COV2.S. After mRNA vaccination, geometric mean antibody concentration was 1,418 BAU/mL in PLWH (95% CI 1322–1523), and after adjustment for age, sex, and vaccine type, HIV status remained associated with a decreased response (0.607, 95% CI 0.508–0.725, p < 0.001). All controls receiving an mRNA vaccine had an adequate response, defined as >300 BAU/mL, whilst in PLWH this response rate was 93.6%. In PLWH vaccinated with mRNA-based vaccines, higher antibody responses were predicted by CD4+ T-cell count 250–500 cells/μL (2.845, 95% CI 1.876–4.314, p < 0.001) or >500 cells/μL (2.936, 95% CI 1.961–4.394, p < 0.001), whilst a viral load > 50 copies/mL was associated with a reduced response (0.454, 95% CI 0.286–0.720, p = 0.001). Increased IFN-γ, CD4+ T-cell, and CD8+ T-cell responses were observed after stimulation with SARS-CoV-2 spike peptides in ELISpot and activation-induced marker assays, comparable to controls. Reactogenicity was generally mild, without vaccine-related serious adverse events. Due to the control of vaccine provision by the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, there were some differences between vaccine groups in the age, sex, and CD4+ T-cell counts of recipients. Conclusions: After vaccination with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were reduced in PLWH compared to HIV-negative controls. To reach and maintain the same serological responses as HIV-negative controls, additional vaccinations are probably required. Trial registration: The trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NL9214). https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/9214.