scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Philip Sullivan

Bio: Philip Sullivan is an academic researcher from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. The author has contributed to research in topics: Serology & Drug resistance. The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 3 publications receiving 96 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The diagnostic accuracy of five commercially available EIAs (Abbott, Euroimmun, EDI, ImmunoDiagnostics, and Roche) for detection of IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) was evaluated.
Abstract: Accurate serological assays to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are needed to characterize the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and identify potential candidates for COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donation. This study compared the performance of commercial enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and neutralizing antibodies (nAb). The diagnostic accuracy of five commercially available EIAs (Abbott, Euroimmun, EDI, ImmunoDiagnostics, and Roche) to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated from cross-sectional samples of potential CCP donors that had prior molecular confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=214) and pre-pandemic emergency department patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=1,099). Of the 214 potential CCP donors, all were sampled >14 days since symptom onset and only a minority had been hospitalized due to COVID-19 (n=16 [7.5%]); 140 potential CCP donors were tested by all five EIAs and a microneutralization assay. When performed according to the manufacturers' protocol to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, the sensitivity of each EIA ranged from 76.4% to 93.9%, and the specificity of each EIA ranged from 87.0% to 99.6%. Using a nAb titer cutoff of ≥160 as the reference positive test (n=140 CCP donors), the empirical area under receiver operating curve of each EIA ranged from 0.66 (Roche) to 0.90 (Euroimmun). Commercial EIAs with high diagnostic accuracy to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies did not necessarily have high diagnostic accuracy to detect high nAbs. Some but not all commercial EIAs may be useful in the identification of individuals with high nAbs in convalescent individuals.

164 citations

Posted ContentDOI
02 Sep 2020-medRxiv
TL;DR: Some but not all commercial EIAs may be useful in the identification of individuals with high nAbs in convalescent individuals, but did not necessarily have high diagnostic accuracy to detect high nabs.
Abstract: Accurate serological assays to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are needed to characterize the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and identify potential candidates for COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donation. This study compared the performance of commercial enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and neutralizing antibodies (nAb). The diagnostic accuracy of five commercially available EIAs (Abbott, Euroimmun, EDI, ImmunoDiagnostics, and Roche) to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated from cross-sectional samples of potential CCP donors that had prior molecular confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection for sensitivity (n=214) and pre-pandemic emergency department patients for specificity (n=1,102). Of the 214 potential CCP donors, all were sampled >14 days since symptom onset and only a minority had been hospitalized due to COVID-19 (n=16 [7.5%]); 140 potential CCP donors were tested by all five EIAs and a microneutralization assay. When performed according to the manufacturers' protocol to detect IgG or total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, the sensitivity of each EIA ranged from 76.4% to 93.9%, and the specificity of each EIA ranged from 87.0% to 99.6%. Using a nAb titer cutoff of ≥160 as the reference positive test (n=140 CCP donors), the empirical area under receiver operating curve of each EIA ranged from 0.66 (Roche) to 0.90 (Euroimmun). Commercial EIAs with high diagnostic accuracy to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies did not necessarily have high diagnostic accuracy to detect high nAbs. Some but not all commercial EIAs may be useful in the identification of individuals with high nAbs in convalescent individuals.

55 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Almost all incident HIV infections occurred in the setting of unquantifiable or low drug concentrations, and CAB resistance was not detected.
Abstract: BACKGROUND HIV Prevention Trials Network 084 demonstrated that long-acting injectable cabotegravir (CAB) was superior to daily oral tenofovir (TFV) disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) for preventing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in sub-Saharan African women. This report describes HIV infections that occurred in the trial before unblinding. METHODS Testing was performed using HIV diagnostic assays, viral load testing, a single-copy RNA assay, and HIV genotyping. Plasma CAB, plasma TFV, and intraerythrocytic TFV-diphosphate concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. RESULTS Forty HIV infections were identified (CAB arm, 1 baseline infection, 3 incident infections; TDF/FTC arm, 36 incident infections). The incident infections in the CAB arm included 2 with no recent drug exposure and no CAB injections and 1 with delayed injections; in 35 of 36 cases in the TDF/FTC arm, drug concentrations indicated low or no adherence. None of the cases had CAB resistance. Nine women in the TDF/FTC arm had nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor resistance; 1 had the nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor resistance mutation, M184V. CONCLUSIONS Almost all incident HIV infections occurred in the setting of unquantifiable or low drug concentrations. CAB resistance was not detected. Transmitted nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor resistance was common; 1 woman may have acquired nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor resistance from study drug exposure.

24 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The performance of HIV assays and algorithms used to determine HIV status and identify incident HIV infections in HPTN 071 were evaluated, and the impact of errors on HIV incidence estimates were assessed.
Abstract: Introduction The HPTN 071 (PopART) trial evaluated the impact of an HIV combination prevention package that included "universal testing and treatment" on HIV incidence in 21 communities in Zambia and South Africa during 2013-2018. The primary study endpoint was based on the results of laboratory-based HIV testing for> 48,000 participants who were followed for up to three years. This report evaluated the performance of HIV assays and algorithms used to determine HIV status and identify incident HIV infections in HPTN 071, and assessed the impact of errors on HIV incidence estimates. Methods HIV status was determined using a streamlined, algorithmic approach. A single HIV screening test was performed at centralized laboratories in Zambia and South Africa (all participants, all visits). Additional testing was performed at the HPTN Laboratory Center using antigen/antibody screening tests, a discriminatory test and an HIV RNA test. This testing was performed to investigate cases with discordant test results and confirm incident HIV infections. Results HIV testing identified 978 seroconverter cases. This included 28 cases where the participant had acute HIV infection at the first HIV-positive visit. Investigations of cases with discordant test results identified cases where there was a participant or sample error (mixups). Seroreverter cases (errors where status changed from HIV infected to HIV uninfected, 0.4% of all cases) were excluded from the primary endpoint analysis. Statistical analysis demonstrated that exclusion of those cases improved the accuracy of HIV incidence estimates. Conclusions This report demonstrates that the streamlined, algorithmic approach effectively identified HIV infections in this large cluster-randomized trial. Longitudinal HIV testing (all participants, all visits) and quality control testing provided useful data on the frequency of errors and provided more accurate data for HIV incidence estimates.

4 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jun 2021-JAMA
TL;DR: In this article, the antibody response following the second dose of SARS-CoV2 mRNA vaccine in recipients of solid organ transplants was measured using a follow-up study.
Abstract: This follow-up study measures the antibody response following the second dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine in recipients of solid organ transplants.

745 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
04 May 2021-JAMA
TL;DR: In this article, the authors quantified antispike protein antibody responses to first-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines in solid organ transplant recipients to better understand the immunogenicity of the vaccines in immunocompromised individuals.
Abstract: This study quantifies antispike protein antibody responses to first-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines in solid organ transplant recipients to better understand the immunogenicity of the vaccines in immunocompromised individuals.

413 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and found no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups.

383 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Modelling demonstrated a coordinated and dynamic immune response characterized by a decrease in inflammation, increase in neutralizing antibody titer, and differentiation of a specific CD8+ T cell response.
Abstract: Characterization of the T cell response in individuals who recover from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is critical to understanding its contribution to protective immunity. A multiplexed peptide-MHC tetramer approach was used to screen 408 SARS-CoV-2 candidate epitopes for CD8+ T cell recognition in a cross-sectional sample of 30 coronavirus disease 2019 convalescent individuals. T cells were evaluated using a 28-marker phenotypic panel, and findings were modelled against time from diagnosis and from humoral and inflammatory responses. There were 132 SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cell responses detected across 6 different HLAs, corresponding to 52 unique epitope reactivities. CD8+ T cell responses were detected in almost all convalescent individuals and were directed against several structural and nonstructural target epitopes from the entire SARS-CoV-2 proteome. A unique phenotype for SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells was observed that was distinct from other common virus-specific T cells detected in the same cross-sectional sample and characterized by early differentiation kinetics. Modelling demonstrated a coordinated and dynamic immune response characterized by a decrease in inflammation, increase in neutralizing antibody titer, and differentiation of a specific CD8+ T cell response. Overall, T cells exhibited distinct differentiation into stem cell and transitional memory states (subsets), which may be key to developing durable protection.

178 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors reviewed the latest knowledge on humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection, along with the benefits and limitations of currently available commercial and laboratory-based serological assays.
Abstract: In December 2019, the novel betacoronavirus Severe Acute Respiratory Disease Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first detected in Wuhan, China. SARS-CoV-2 has since become a pandemic virus resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths and deep socioeconomic implications worldwide. In recent months, efforts have been directed towards detecting, tracking, and better understanding human humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. It has become critical to develop robust and reliable serological assays to characterize the abundance, neutralization efficiency, and duration of antibodies in virus-exposed individuals. Here we review the latest knowledge on humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection, along with the benefits and limitations of currently available commercial and laboratory-based serological assays. We also highlight important serological considerations, such as antibody expression levels, stability and neutralization dynamics, as well as cross-reactivity and possible immunological back-boosting by seasonal coronaviruses. The ability to accurately detect, measure and characterize the various antibodies specific to SARS-CoV-2 is necessary for vaccine development, manage risk and exposure for healthcare and at-risk workers, and for monitoring reinfections with genetic variants and new strains of the virus. Having a thorough understanding of the benefits and cautions of standardized serological testing at a community level remains critically important in the design and implementation of future vaccination campaigns, epidemiological models of immunity, and public health measures that rely heavily on up-to-date knowledge of transmission dynamics.

157 citations