Changes in SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels after component preparation of COVID-19 convalescent plasma

doi:10.20199/j.issn.1672-2302.2025.05.009

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To investigate the impact of plasma component preparation on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody levels the convalescent plasma from patients recovering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) for reference to optimize the preparation method for convalescent plasma. Methods A total of 129 aliquots of blood samples donated by COVID-19 convalescents were randomly collected on January 19, 2023, and measured for the total positive rates of antibodies against IgM and IgG of SARS-CoV-2. Then each of the samples was processed into fresh plasma, cryoprecipitate-poor plasma, and virus-inactivated plasma (designated as Fresh Group, Cryoprecipitate-Poor Group, and Inactivated Group, respectively). The total positive rates of antibodies against IgM and IgG of SARS-CoV-2 were determined in the samples in the three groups after dilution at 1∶160, and the antibody level S/Co value was calculated. Subsequently, the IgG-positive samples from the Fresh Group (after1∶160 dilution) and their corresponding samples in the Cryoprecipitate-Poor Group and Inactivated Group were further diluted to serial dilutions at 1∶160, 1∶320, 1∶640, 1∶1 280, and 1∶2 560, respectively. The S/Co values of IgG antibodies in the three groups (after1∶160 dilution) were compared under different dilution conditions. Results The total positive rates of antibodies against IgM and IgG of SARS-CoV-2 in the 129 samples were 6.98% (9/129) and 97.67% (126/129), respectively. The total IgG positive rates at 1∶160 dilution were 93.02% (120/129) in the Fresh Group, 87.60% (113/129) in the Cryoprecipitate-Poor Group, and 83.72% (108/129) in the Inactivated Group. The IgG S/Co value of the Fresh Group [8.14 (4.45, 12.24)] was higher than that of the Cryoprecipitate-Poor Group [5.92 (3.09, 10.14)], and the IgG S/Co value of the Cryoprecipitate-Poor Group was higher than that of the Inactivated Group [4.29 (1.73, 7.25)]. The differences were significant among the three groups (Z= -9.86, -9.76, -5.97, respectively; all P<0.017). In each maximum dilution gradient group, the S/Co values of IgG antibodies (after 1:160 dilution) in the fresh group samples were significantly higher than those in the Cryoprecipitate-Poor Group and the Inactivated Group. Additionally, in the maximum dilution gradient groups of 1∶320, 1∶640 and 1∶1 280, there were statistically significant differences among the three groups of samples (all P<0.017). Conclusion The preparation process may obviously affect the IgG antibody level in the convalescent plasma from COVID-19 survivors, for which it is recommended to further optimize the plasma preparation process to maximize the retention of IgG antibody activity, thereby ensuring the quality of plasma for clinical application.

Key words: SARS-CoV-2, Convalescent plasma, Component preparation, Antibody

CLC Number:

R373.1

LIU Yang, YAN Bing, AI Jun, BAO Jingjing, ZHANG Libo, FU Qiang, ZHANG Chun, CHEN Yun, WANG Yong. Changes in SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels after component preparation of COVID-19 convalescent plasma[J]. Journal of Tropical Diseases and Parasitology, 2025, 23(5): 301-305.

Figures/Tables 2

References 24

[1]	邱艳, 王雪珩, 吴涛. 新发传染病康复者血浆疗法应用现状及研究进展[J]. 临床输血与检验, 2020, 22(5):449-454. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-2587.2020.05.001
[2]	Cheng Y, Wong R, Soo YOY, et al. Use of convalescent plasma therapy in SARS patients in Hong Kong[J]. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2005, 24(1):44-46. doi: 10.1007/s10096-004-1271-9 URL
[3]	Hung IF, To KK, Lee CK, et al. Convalescent plasma treatment reduced mortality in patients with severe pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 virus infection[J]. Clin Infect Dis, 2011, 52(4):447-456. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciq106 pmid: 21248066
[4]	国家卫生健康委员会. 新型冠状病毒感染重症病例诊疗方案(试行第四版)[EB/OL]. (2023-01-13)[2025-02-05]. http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2023-01/14/content_5736879.html.
[5]	国家卫生健康委员会. 新型冠状病毒感染诊疗方案(试行第十版)[EB/OL]. (2023-01-05)[2025-02-05]. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2023-01/06/content_5735343.html.
[6]	涂雄文, 全斌, 程玉生, 等. 重型新型冠状病毒肺炎患者临床特征及诊治分析[J]. 热带病与寄生虫学, 2020, 18(3):176-179.
[7]	林国跃, 段丽, 秦莹, 等. COVID-19康复者恢复期血浆治疗COVID-19患者体内抗体变化和核酸清除研究[J]. 新发传染病电子杂志, 2023, 8(1):8-13. doi: 10.19871/j.cnki.xfcrbzz.2023.01.002
[8]	邵明, 杨乾坤, 李建斌, 等. 新型冠状病毒肺炎患者输注康复者恢复期血浆前后实验室指标的变化[J]. 郑州大学学报(医学版), 2021, 56(3):412-417.
[9]	Duan K, Liu BD, Li CS, et al. Effectiveness of convalescent plasma therapy in severe COVID-19 patients[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2020, 117(17):9490-9496. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2004168117 pmid: 32253318
[10]	国家卫生健康委员会. 新冠肺炎康复者恢复期血浆临床治疗方案(试行第三版)[EB/OL]. (2021-10-22)[2025-02-05]. http://www.nhc.gov.cn/yzygj/s7658/202110/5d5ec01df5d54dbe9980434967225322.shtml.
[11]	谢毓滨, 邹彬彬, 陈东, 等. 新冠恢复期血浆拟捐献者健康评估及抗体水平分析[J]. 临床输血与检验, 2020, 22(4): 343-348.
[12]	郑雪, 包安裕, 瞿珍, 等. 新型冠状病毒肺炎康复者恢复期血浆制备过程对SARS-CoV-2 IgG抗体滴度的影响[J]. 华中科技大学学报(医学版), 2020, 49(6): 721-723.
[13]	易星, 袁晓华, 白林, 等. 我国38家采供血机构新冠肺炎康复者恢复期血浆采集制备供应实践经验[J]. 临床输血与检验, 2022, 24(3):285-291. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-2587.2022.03.003
[14]	国家卫生健康委员会. 血站技术操作规程(2019 版)[EB/OL]. (2019-04-28)[2025-02-05]. http://www.nhc.gov.cn/cms-search/xxgk/getManuscriptXxgk.htmid=bdd4f4ccd15c4201bfb6d9e7492d7fab.
[15]	Zhou W, Xu XM, Chang ZG, et al. The dynamic changes of serum IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19[J]. J Med Virol, 2021, 93(2):924-933. doi: 10.1002/jmv.v93.2 URL
[16]	宋云, 毋碧聪, 卢世栋, 等. 新型冠状病毒肺炎患者血清IgM和IgG抗体动态变化分析[J]. 中华微生物学和免疫学杂志, 2021, 41(6):417-422.
[17]	Zhang YJ, Zeng G, Pan HX, et al. Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in healthy adults aged 18-59 years: a randomised,double-blind,placebo-controlled,phase 1/2 clinical trial[J]. Lancet Infect Dis, 2021, 21(2):181-192. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30843-4 URL
[18]	Xia SL, Zhang YT, Wang YX, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine,BBIBP-CorV: a randomised,double-blind,placebo-controlled,phase 1/2 trial[J]. Lancet Infect Dis, 2021, 21(1):39-51. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30831-8 URL
[19]	周燕. 广州市一起新型冠状病毒Delta变异株暴发疫情的传播特征和防控效果评估研究[D]. 广州: 南方医科大学, 2022.
[20]	Yan RH, Zhang YY, Li YN, et al. Structural basis for the recognition of SARS-CoV-2 by full-length human ACE2[J]. Science, 2020, 367(6485):1444-1448. doi: 10.1126/science.abb2762 pmid: 32132184
[21]	He JH, Tao HY, Yan YM, et al. Molecular mechanism of evolution and human infection with SARS-CoV-2[J]. Viruses, 2020, 12(4):428. doi: 10.3390/v12040428 URL
[22]	刘晓洋, 李小阳. 去冷沉淀血浆和普通冰冻血浆的质量对比分析[J]. 临床输血与检验, 2012, 14(2):158-160.
[23]	马平, 周锡鹏, 张艳宇, 等. 亚甲蓝/光化学灭活病毒法对血浆中抗体活性的影响[J]. 军事医学科学院院刊, 2004, 28(6):544-545,564.
[24]	Libster R, Pérez Marc G, Wappner R, et al. Early high-titer plasma therapy to prevent severe Covid-19 in older adults[J]. N Engl J Med, 2021, 384(7):NEJMoa2033700.

组别	例数（例）	IgG抗体-160水平（S/Co值）	Z值	P值
新鲜组	129	8.14（4.45，12.24）	-9.86^a	<0.001
去冷沉淀组	129	5.92（3.09，10.14）	-5.97^b	<0.001
灭活组	129	4.29（1.73，7.25）	-9.76^c	<0.001

最大稀释倍数	组别	例数（例）	IgG抗体-160水平（S/Co值）	t值	P值
1∶160	新鲜组	39	3.30±1.36	8.82^a	<0.001
	去冷沉淀组	39	1.97±1.17	2.05^b	0.047
	灭活组	39	1.58±1.02	10.89^c	<0.001
1∶320	新鲜组	34	7.45±1.31	8.32^a	<0.001
	去冷沉淀组	34	4.99±1.76	3.83^b	0.001
	灭活组	34	3.52±1.83	13.89^c	<0.001
1∶640	新鲜组	18	10.93±0.66	6.75^a	<0.001
	去冷沉淀组	18	7.98±1.84	5.60^b	<0.001
	灭活组	18	5.26±2.43	9.76^c	<0.001
1∶1 280	新鲜组	11	13.24±0.58	5.43^a	<0.001
	去冷沉淀组	11	9.37±2.13	3.79^b	0.004
	灭活组	11	7.09±1.05	17.43^c	<0.001
1∶2 560	新鲜组	18	16.95±1.52	5.49^a	<0.001
	去冷沉淀组	18	13.52±2.99	2.26^b	0.038
	灭活组	18	11.78±3.05	8.74^c	<0.001