Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR

Potential Treatment Options for COVID-19: A Comprehensive Review of Global Pharmacological Development Efforts

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), first reported in China during December of 2019, is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Infection later spread very rapidly around the globe with over 8,708,008 cases reported, including more than 461,715 deaths reported across at least 216 countries by June 20, 2020. It was declared as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020. With the rapidly increasing number of positive cases and deaths, there is a dire need for effective treatment. An urgent unmet need led to the planning and opening of multiple drug development trials for treatment and vaccine development. In this article, we have compiled comprehensive data on many candidate drugs such as remdesivir, favipiravir, ribavirin, umifenovir, arbidol, lopinavir, ritonavir, baricitinib, hydroxychloroquine, nitazoxanide, azithromycin, baloxavir, oseltamivir, losartan, and tocilizumab. We have tabulated available data on various clinical trials testing various aspects of COVID-19 therapeutics.

Betacoronavirus Genomes: How Genomic Information has been Used to Deal with Past Outbreaks and the COVID-19 Pandemic

In the 21st century, three highly pathogenic betacoronaviruses have emerged, with an alarming rate of human morbidity and case fatality. Genomic information has been widely used to understand the pathogenesis, animal origin and mode of transmission of coronaviruses in the aftermath of the 2002-2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and 2012 Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) outbreaks. Furthermore, genome sequencing and bioinformatic analysis have had an unprecedented relevance in the battle against the 2019-2020 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the newest and most devastating outbreak caused by a coronavirus in the history of mankind. Here, we review how genomic information has been used to tackle outbreaks caused by emerging, highly pathogenic, betacoronavirus strains, emphasizing on SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. We focus on shared genomic features of the betacoronaviruses and the application of genomic information to phylogenetic analysis, molecular epidemiology and the design of diagnostic systems, potential drugs and vaccine candidates.

Prominent changes in blood coagulation of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection

Background As the number of patients increases, there is a growing understanding of the form of pneumonia sustained by the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), which has caused an outbreak in China. Up to now, clinical features and treatment of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 have been reported in detail. However, the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 and coagulation has been scarcely addressed. Our aim is to investigate the blood coagulation function of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods In our study, 94 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were admitted in Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. We prospectively collect blood coagulation data in these patients and in 40 healthy controls during the same period. Results Antithrombin values in patients were lower than that in the control group (p < 0.001). The values of D-dimer, fibrin/fibrinogen degradation products (FDP), and fibrinogen (FIB) in all SARS-CoV-2 cases were substantially higher than those in healthy controls. Moreover, D-dimer and FDP values in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection were higher than those in patients with milder forms. Compared with healthy controls, prothrombin time activity (PT-act) was lower in SARS-CoV-2 patients. Thrombin time in critical SARS-CoV-2 patients was also shorter than that in controls. Conclusions The coagulation function in patients with SARS-CoV-2 is significantly deranged compared with healthy people, but monitoring D-dimer and FDP values may be helpful for the early identification of severe cases.

Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and resulting COVID-19 pandemic present important diagnostic challenges. Several diagnostic strategies are available to identify current infection, rule out infection, identify people in need of care escalation, or to test for past infection and immune response. Serology tests to detect the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 aim to identify previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and may help to confirm the presence of current infection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of antibody tests to determine if a person presenting in the community or in primary or secondary care has SARS-CoV-2 infection, or has previously had SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the accuracy of antibody tests for use in seroprevalence surveys.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook electronic searches in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the COVID-19 Living Evidence Database from the University of Bern, which is updated daily with published articles from PubMed and Embase and with preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv. In addition, we checked repositories of COVID-19 publications. We did not apply any language restrictions. We conducted searches for this review iteration up to 27 April 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated antibody tests (including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, chemiluminescence immunoassays, and lateral flow assays) in people suspected of current or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, or where tests were used to screen for infection. We also included studies of people either known to have, or not to have SARS-CoV-2 infection. We included all reference standards to define the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tests (RT-PCR) and clinical diagnostic criteria).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed possible bias and applicability of the studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. We extracted 2x2 contingency table data and present sensitivity and specificity for each antibody (or combination of antibodies) using paired forest plots. We pooled data using random-effects logistic regression where appropriate, stratifying by time since post-symptom onset. We tabulated available data by test manufacturer. We have presented uncertainty in estimates of sensitivity and specificity using 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 57 publications reporting on a total of 54 study cohorts with 15,976 samples, of which 8526 were from cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Studies were conducted in Asia (n = 38), Europe (n = 15), and the USA and China (n = 1). We identified data from 25 commercial tests and numerous in-house assays, a small fraction of the 279 antibody assays listed by the Foundation for Innovative Diagnostics. More than half (n = 28) of the studies included were only available as preprints. We had concerns about risk of bias and applicability. Common issues were use of multi-group designs (n = 29), inclusion of only COVID-19 cases (n = 19), lack of blinding of the index test (n = 49) and reference standard (n = 29), differential verification (n = 22), and the lack of clarity about participant numbers, characteristics and study exclusions (n = 47). Most studies (n = 44) only included people hospitalised due to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection. There were no studies exclusively in asymptomatic participants. Two-thirds of the studies (n = 33) defined COVID-19 cases based on RT-PCR results alone, ignoring the potential for false-negative RT-PCR results. We observed evidence of selective publication of study findings through omission of the identity of tests (n = 5). We observed substantial heterogeneity in sensitivities of IgA, IgM and IgG antibodies, or combinations thereof, for results aggregated across different time periods post-symptom onset (range 0% to 100% for all target antibodies). We thus based the main results of the review on the 38 studies that stratified results by time since symptom onset. The numbers of individuals contributing data within each study each week are small and are usually not based on tracking the same groups of patients over time. Pooled results for IgG, IgM, IgA, total antibodies and IgG/IgM all showed low sensitivity during the first week since onset of symptoms (all less than 30.1%), rising in the second week and reaching their highest values in the third week. The combination of IgG/IgM had a sensitivity of 30.1% (95% CI 21.4 to 40.7) for 1 to 7 days, 72.2% (95% CI 63.5 to 79.5) for 8 to 14 days, 91.4% (95% CI 87.0 to 94.4) for 15 to 21 days. Estimates of accuracy beyond three weeks are based on smaller sample sizes and fewer studies. For 21 to 35 days, pooled sensitivities for IgG/IgM were 96.0% (95% CI 90.6 to 98.3). There are insufficient studies to estimate sensitivity of tests beyond 35 days post-symptom onset. Summary specificities (provided in 35 studies) exceeded 98% for all target antibodies with confidence intervals no more than 2 percentage points wide. False-positive results were more common where COVID-19 had been suspected and ruled out, but numbers were small and the difference was within the range expected by chance. Assuming a prevalence of 50%, a value considered possible in healthcare workers who have suffered respiratory symptoms, we would anticipate that 43 (28 to 65) would be missed and 7 (3 to 14) would be falsely positive in 1000 people undergoing IgG/IgM testing at days 15 to 21 post-symptom onset. At a prevalence of 20%, a likely value in surveys in high-risk settings, 17 (11 to 26) would be missed per 1000 people tested and 10 (5 to 22) would be falsely positive. At a lower prevalence of 5%, a likely value in national surveys, 4 (3 to 7) would be missed per 1000 tested, and 12 (6 to 27) would be falsely positive. Analyses showed small differences in sensitivity between assay type, but methodological concerns and sparse data prevent comparisons between test brands.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of antibody tests is too low in the first week since symptom onset to have a primary role for the diagnosis of COVID-19, but they may still have a role complementing other testing in individuals presenting later, when RT-PCR tests are negative, or are not done. Antibody tests are likely to have a useful role for detecting previous SARS-CoV-2 infection if used 15 or more days after the onset of symptoms. However, the duration of antibody rises is currently unknown, and we found very little data beyond 35 days post-symptom onset. We are therefore uncertain about the utility of these tests for seroprevalence surveys for public health management purposes. Concerns about high risk of bias and applicability make it likely that the accuracy of tests when used in clinical care will be lower than reported in the included studies. Sensitivity has mainly been evaluated in hospitalised patients, so it is unclear whether the tests are able to detect lower antibody levels likely seen with milder and asymptomatic COVID-19 disease. The design, execution and reporting of studies of the accuracy of COVID-19 tests requires considerable improvement. Studies must report data on sensitivity disaggregated by time since onset of symptoms. COVID-19-positive cases who are RT-PCR-negative should be included as well as those confirmed RT-PCR, in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) and China National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China (CDC) case definitions. We were only able to obtain data from a small proportion of available tests, and action is needed to ensure that all results of test evaluations are available in the public domain to prevent selective reporting. This is a fast-moving field and we plan ongoing updates of this living systematic review.

Diagnostic strategies for SARS-CoV-2 infection and interpretation of microbiological results

BACKGROUND

To face the current COVID-19 pandemic, diagnostic tools are essential. It is recommended to use real-time RT-PCR for RNA viruses in order (a) to perform a rapid and accurate diagnostic, (b) to guide patient care and management and (c) to guide epidemiological strategies. Further studies are warranted to define the role of serological diagnosis and a possible correlation between serological response and prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to guide clinical microbiologists in the use of these diagnostic tests and clinicians in the interpretation of their results.

SOURCES

A search of literature was performed through PubMed and Google Scholar using the keywords SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnosis, SARS-CoV-2 immune response, SARS-CoV-2 serology/antibody testing, coronavirus diagnosis.

CONTENT

The present review discusses performances, limitations and use of current and future diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2.

IMPLICATIONS

Real-time RT-PCR remains the reference method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. On the other hand, notwithstanding its varying sensitivity according to the time of infection, serology represents a valid asset (a) to try to solve possible discrepancies between a highly suggestive clinical and radiological presentation and negative RT-PCR, (b) to solve discrepancies between different PCR assays and (c) for epidemiological purposes.

Development and Evaluation of a duo SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR Assay Combining Two Assays Approved by the World Health Organization Targeting the Envelope and the RNA-Dependant RNA Polymerase (RdRp) Coding Regions

The recent emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) worldwide has highlighted the importance of reliable and rapid diagnostic testing to prevent and control virus circulation. Dozens of monoplex in-house RT-qPCR assays are already available; however, the development of dual-target assays is suited to avoid false-negative results caused by polymorphisms or point mutations, that can compromise the accuracy of diagnostic and screening tests. In this study, two mono-target assays recommended by WHO (E-Sarbeco (enveloppe gene, Charite University, Berlin, Germany) and RdRp-IP4 (RdRp, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France)) were selected and combined in a unique robust test; the resulting duo SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR assay was compared to the two parental monoplex tests. The duo SARS-CoV-2 assay performed equally, or better, in terms of sensitivity, specificity, linearity and signal intensity. We demonstrated that combining two single systems into a dual-target assay (with or without an MS2-based internal control) did not impair performances, providing a potent tool adapted for routine molecular diagnosis in clinical microbiology laboratories.

Laboratory management for SARS-CoV-2 detection: a user-friendly combination of the heat treatment approach and rt-Real-time PCR testing

The RNA purification is the gold standard for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in swab samples, but it is dependent on the availability of chemical reagents. In this study, we evaluated the heat treatment method without RNA extraction as a reliable option to nucleic acid purification.

Predictors of severe or lethal COVID-19, including Angiotensin Converting Enzyme inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers, in a sample of infected Italian citizens

Aims

This retrospective case-control study was aimed at identifying potential independent predictors of severe/lethal COVID-19, including the treatment with Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and/or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers (ARBs).

Methods and results

All adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection in two Italian provinces were followed for a median of 24 days. ARBs and/or ACEi treatments, and hypertension, diabetes, cancer, COPD, renal and major cardiovascular diseases (CVD) were extracted from clinical charts and electronic health records, up to two years before infection. The sample consisted of 1603 subjects (mean age 58.0y; 47.3% males): 454 (28.3%) had severe symptoms, 192 (12.0%) very severe or lethal disease (154 deaths; mean age 79.3 years; 70.8% hypertensive, 42.2% with CVD). The youngest deceased person aged 44 years. Among hypertensive subjects (n = 543), the proportion of those treated with ARBs or ACEi were 88.4%, 78.7% and 80.6% among patients with mild, severe and very severe/lethal disease, respectively. At multivariate analysis, no association was observed between therapy and disease severity (Adjusted OR for very severe/lethal COVID-19: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.50–1.49). Significant predictors of severe disease were older age (with AORs largely increasing after 70 years of age), male gender (AOR: 1.76; 1.40–2.23), diabetes (AOR: 1.52; 1.05–2.18), CVD (AOR: 1.88; 1.32–2.70) and COPD (AOR: 1.88; 1.11–3.20). Only gender, age and diabetes also predicted very severe/lethal disease.

Conclusion

No association was found between COVID-19 severity and treatment with ARBs and/or ACEi, supporting the recommendation to continue medication for all patients unless otherwise advised by their physicians.

Can nanotechnology help in the fight against COVID-19?

INTRODUCTION

The current COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus demands the development of strategies not only to detect or inactivate the virus, but to treat it (therapeutically and prophylactically). COVID-19 is not only a critical threat for the population with risk factors, but also generates a dramatic economic impact in terms of morbidity and the overall interruption of economic activities.

AREAS COVERED

Advanced materials are the basis of several technologies that could diminish the impact of COVID-19: biosensors might allow early virus detection, nanosized vaccines are powerful agents that could prevent viral infections, and nanosystems with antiviral activity could bind the virus for inactivation or destruction upon application of an external stimulus. Herein all these methods are discussed under the light of cutting-edge technologies and the previously reported prototypes targeting enveloped viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2. This analysis was derived from an extensive scientific literature search (including pubmed) performed on April 2020.

EXPERT OPINION

Perspectives on how biosensors, vaccines, and antiviral nanosystems can be implemented to fight COVID-19 are envisioned; identifying the approaches that can be implemented in the short term and those that deserve long term research to cope with respiratory viruses-related pandemics in the future.

Persisting SARS-CoV-2 viraemia after rituximab therapy: two cases with fatal outcome and a review of the literature

SARS-CoV-2 infection can cause severe pneumonia (COVID-19). There is evidence that patients with comorbidities are at higher risk of a severe disease course. The role of immunosuppression in the disease course is not clear. In the present report, we first describe two cases of persisting SARS-CoV-2 viraemia with fatal outcome in patients after rituximab therapy.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA identification in nasopharyngeal swabs: issues in pre-analytics

Objectives

The direct identification of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs is recommended for diagnosing the novel COVID-19 disease. Pre-analytical determinants, such as sampling procedures, time and temperature storage conditions, might impact on the end result. Our aim was to evaluate the effects of sampling procedures, time and temperature of the primary nasopharyngeal swabs storage on real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) results.

Methods

Each nasopharyngeal swab obtained from 10 hospitalized patients for COVID-19 was subdivided in 15 aliquots: five were kept at room temperature; five were refrigerated (+4 °C); five were immediately mixed with the extraction buffer and refrigerated at +4 °C. Every day and for 5 days, one aliquot per condition was analyzed (rRT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 gene E and RNaseP and threshold cycles (Ct) compared. To evaluate manual sampling, 70 nasopharyngeal swabs were sampled twice by two different operators and analyzed separately one from the other.

Results

A total of 6/10 swabs were SARS-CoV-2 positive. No significant time or storage-dependent variations were observed in SARS-CoV-2 Ct. Re-sampling of swabs with SARS-CoV-2 Ct lower than 33 resulted in highly reproducible results (CV=2.9%), while a high variability was observed when Ct values were higher than 33 (CV=10.3%).

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that time and temperature of nasopharyngeal swabs storage do not significantly impact on results reproducibility. However, swabs sampling is a critical step, and especially in case of low viral load, might be a potential source of diagnostic errors.

The Strategic Alliance between Clinical and Molecular Science in the War against SARS-CoV-2, with the Rapid-Diagnostics Test as an Indispensable Weapon for Front Line Doctors

Our work concerns the actual problem of spread of SARS- CoV-2 outbreak which requires fast and correct as possible answer. In current scenario, the need of rapid answer put away the imperative of proper methodology. We focus on the serogical immunoassay for diagnosis of Covid-19 as an important weapon not only for diagnostic purpose, but also for epidemiologic one. The right equilibrium between high speed, low cost and accuracy is obtained with easy-to-use decentralized point-of-care test as the colloidal gold-based immunochromatographic strip assay which detects IgM and IgG antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2. As our aim is to evaluate the efficacy of Covid-19 rapid tests and of serological assays in real-life settings, we designed a research protocol aimed to establish how to use correctly these diagnostics, taking into account the different possible clinical and epidemiological scenarios.

Coronavirus-SARS-CoV-2: Biology and Problems in rRT-PCR Detection

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first appeared in China in December 2019 and was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. COVID-19 is caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a new virus previously unknown to humans. Here we look at what is known about this virus, the main method for detecting the presence of this virus in a person who is used as a golden standard, and the problems that could arise in this detection method. Understanding the biology of the virus and the strengths and weaknesses of the detection method are important for patient management and for overcoming the pandemic.

Tracheotomy in the age of the COVID-19 pandemic: up-to-date review

<b>Introduction:</b> The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is one of the biggest healthcare challenges that the medical environment has needed to face since many, many years. Clinicians all over the world present their recommendations for everyday procedures in order to provide safety to the medical staff as well as to patients. The disease leads to ARDS in many cases and some patients will require prolonged intubation; therefore, to avoid the negative aspects of this condition, a number of patients will undergo tracheostomy. Tracheostomy is an aerosol-generating procedure, therefore, when performed on a SARS-CoV-2-positive patient, there is a high risk of contamination both of the medical team and the operating theatre. <br><b>Aim:</b> We describe a set of guidelines that we believe should minimize those risks. We focus on aspects like: presurgical testing, proper preparation of the operating theatre prior to the patients’ arrival, initial education of the medical staff participating in the surgery, patient’ transport and tracheostomy. We describe the critical points during every step and suggest ways to minimalize the risk of viral transmission.

Successful implementation of preventive measures leads to low relevance of SARS-CoV-2 in liver transplant patients: Observations from a German outpatient department

Background

Immunosuppressed liver transplant (LT) patients are considered to be at high risk for any kind of infection. What the outbreak of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) means for the transplant cohort is a question that, as of now, cannot easily be answered. Data on prevalence, relevance of the novel virus, and clinical course of the infection in stable LT patients are limited.

Methods

Nasopharyngeal swabs were performed in our outpatient department during the shutdown between March and April 2020 in Germany.

Results

The prevalence of SARS‐CoV‐2 was 3%. Three out of a cohort of 101 LT patients were asymptomatic for respiratory diseases. Respiratory complaints were common and not associated with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. The overall monthly mortality rate was 0.22% and did not show alterations during the shutdown in Germany.

Conclusions

If preventive measures are applied, LT patients do not seem to be at a higher risk for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Telemedicine in the outpatient setting may help to maintain distance and to reduce direct patient contact. However, standard of care must be guaranteed for patients with relevant comorbidities in spite of pandemics, because complications may arise from preexisting conditions.

Community Treatment Centers for Isolation of Asymptomatic and Mildly Symptomatic Patients with Coronavirus Disease, South Korea

As a part of measures to decrease spikes in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases and deaths outside of hospitals, the government of South Korea introduced a plan for community treatment centers (CTCs) to isolate and monitor patients with mild COVID-19 symptoms. We assessed outcomes of 568 patients admitted to 3 CTCs near Daegu. More (64.6%) women than men (35.4%) were admitted, and the mean age of patients was 36.0 years (SD +15.0 years). Among all patients, 75.7% remained asymptomatic while at the CTCs. The mean time patients remained at CTCs was 19.6 days (SD +5.8 days) from the day of diagnosis until our study ended on March 23, 2020. Because they offer appropriate clinical triaging and daily monitoring for patients, CTCs are a safe alternative to medical institutions for asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients with COVID-19.

Triplex Real-Time RT-PCR for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

Most reverse transcription PCR protocols for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) include 2-3 targets for detection. We developed a triplex, real-time reverse transcription PCR for SARS-CoV-2 that maintained clinical performance compared with singleplex assays. This protocol could streamline detection and decrease reagent use during current high SARS-CoV-2 testing demands.

Diagnostic accuracy of the FebriDx host response point-of-care test in patients hospitalised with suspected COVID-19

•

Centralised laboratory PCR testing for COVID-19 is associated with long delays.

•

The FebriDx POCT can detect an antiviral host response protein (MxA) in 10 min.

•

We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of FebriDx in 251 patients hospitalised with suspected COVID-19 during the first wave.

•

Compared to PCR sensitivity of FebriDx was 93% and specificity was 86%.

•

FebriDx could be used as a rapid front door triage tool in hospitals.

Introduction

Management of the COVID-19 pandemic is hampered by long delays associated with centralised laboratory PCR testing. In hospitals this leads to poor patient flow and nosocomial transmission and so rapid, accurate diagnostic tests are urgently required. The FebriDx is a point-of-care test that detects an antiviral host response protein in finger prick blood within 10 min, but its accuracy for the identification of COVID-19 is unknown.

Methods

We performed a real-world diagnostic accuracy study of FebriDx in hospitalised patients during the first wave of the pandemic. Measures of diagnostic accuracy were calculated based on FebriDx results compared to the reference standard of SARS-CoV-2 PCR on combined nose and throat swabs. A multivariable predictive model including FebriDx, age, sex, and clinical characteristics was developed and underwent internal validation.

Results

FebriDx was performed on 251 patients and gave a valid result in 248. 118 of 248 (48%) were PCR positive for COVID-19. FebriDx results were available after 10 min compared with 1.7 (1.6 to 2.1) hours with point-of-care PCR testing and 23.4 (17.2 to 31.1) hours with laboratory PCR testing. Sensitivity of FebriDx for the identification of COVID-19 was 93% (110/118; 95% CI 87 to 97%) and specificity was 86% (112/130; 95%CI 79 to 92%). Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 6.73 (95%CI 4.37 to 10.37) and 0.08 (95%CI 0.04 to 0.15) respectively. In the multivariate model age, sex and other clinical features did not contribute significantly to the effect of the FebriDx result in distinguishing patients with and without COVID-19.

Conclusions

During the first wave of the pandemic, FebriDx had high accuracy for the identification of COVID-19 in hospitalised adults and could be deployed as a front door triage tool.

Trial registration

ISRCTN14966673

Evidence Supporting Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 While Presymptomatic or Asymptomatic

Recent epidemiologic, virologic, and modeling reports support the possibility of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission from persons who are presymptomatic (SARS-CoV-2 detected before symptom onset) or asymptomatic (SARS-CoV-2 detected but symptoms never develop). SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the absence of symptoms reinforces the value of measures that prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 by infected persons who may not exhibit illness despite being infectious. Critical knowledge gaps include the relative incidence of asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, the public health interventions that prevent asymptomatic transmission, and the question of whether asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection confers protective immunity.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-Specific Antibody Responses in Coronavirus Disease Patients

A new coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has recently emerged to cause a human pandemic. Although molecular diagnostic tests were rapidly developed, serologic assays are still lacking, yet urgently needed. Validated serologic assays are needed for contact tracing, identifying the viral reservoir, and epidemiologic studies. We developed serologic assays for detection of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing, spike protein–specific, and nucleocapsid-specific antibodies. Using serum samples from patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, other coronaviruses, or other respiratory pathogenic infections, we validated and tested various antigens in different in-house and commercial ELISAs. We demonstrated that most PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2–infected persons seroconverted by 2 weeks after disease onset. We found that commercial S1 IgG or IgA ELISAs were of lower specificity, and sensitivity varied between the 2 assays; the IgA ELISA showed higher sensitivity. Overall, the validated assays described can be instrumental for detection of SARS-CoV-2–specific antibodies for diagnostic, seroepidemiologic, and vaccine evaluation studies.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Shedding by Travelers, Vietnam, 2020

We analyzed 2 clusters of 12 patients in Vietnam with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection during January-February 2020. Analysis indicated virus transmission from a traveler from China. One asymptomatic patient demonstrated virus shedding, indicating potential virus transmission in the absence of clinical signs and symptoms.

Predictive factors of mortality in patients treated with tocilizumab for acute respiratory distress syndrome related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

COVID-19 patients (n = 34) suffering from ARDS were treated with tocilizumab (TCZ). Outcome was classified in two groups: “Death” and “Recovery”. Predictive factors of mortality were studied. Mean age was 75.3, mean oxygen (O₂) requirements 10.4 l/min. At baseline, all patients had multiple biological abnormalities (lymphopenia, increased CRP, ferritin, fibrinogen, D-dimer and liver enzymes). 24 patients (70.5%) recovered after TCZ therapy and 10 died (29.5%). Deceased subjects differed from patients in whom treatment was effective with regard to more pronounced lymphopenia (0.6 vs 1.0 G/l; p = 0.037), lower platelet number (156 vs 314 G/l; p = 0.0001), lower fibrinogen serum level (0.6 vs 1.0 G/l; p = 0.03), higher aspartate-amino-transferase (108 vs 57 UI/l; p = 0.05) and greater O₂ requirements (11 vs 8 l/min; p = 0.003).

Impact of heat-inactivation on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibody by ELISA

BACKGROUND

To establish a safe and accurate method for detecting SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG, we assessed the impact of sera after heat-inactivation on the SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG levels measured by ELISA-immunoassay.

METHODS

The serum samples of 62 patients with COVID-19 and 18 healthy controls were collected in Hankou's Hospital of Wuhan from February 27 to March 6, 2020. Before and after the samples were inactivated, the levels of IgM and IgG antibodies were measured.

RESULTS

The indexes of antibodies after inactivated were significantly higher than those in fresh sera, while the positive rates in all participants or in patients with COVID-19 did not change. The positive coincidence rate, negative coincidence rate and total coincidence rate of IgM antibodies before and after inactivation were 100.00% (55/55), 96.00% (24/25) and 98.75% (79/80), respectively (κ = 0.971, P < 0.001), while those for IgG antibodies were 98.21% (55/56), 91.67% (22/24) and 98.75% (79/80) respectively (κ = 0.910, P < 0.001). These results showed a good consistency.

CONCLUSIONS

Heating-activation does not decrease the diagnostic efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 IgM or IgG antibodies. Sera inactivated by heating at 56 °C for 30 min should be recommended to minimize the risk of virus contamination of laboratory staff.

Optimized qRT-PCR Approach for the Detection of Intra- and Extra-Cellular SARS-CoV-2 RNAs

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of the acute respiratory disease COVID-19, which has become a global concern due to its rapid spread. Meanwhile, increased demand for testing has led to a shortage of reagents and supplies and compromised the performance of diagnostic laboratories in many countries. Both the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend multi-step RT-PCR assays using multiple primer and probe pairs, which might complicate the interpretation of the test results, especially for borderline cases. In this study, we describe an alternative RT-PCR approach for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA that can be used for the probe-based detection of clinical isolates in diagnostics as well as in research labs using a low-cost SYBR green method. For the evaluation, we used samples from patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and performed RT-PCR assays along with successive dilutions of RNA standards to determine the limit of detection. We identified an M-gene binding primer and probe pair highly suitable for the quantitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA for diagnostic and research purposes.

Venous thrombosis and arteriosclerosis obliterans of lower extremities in a very severe patient with 2019 novel coronavirus disease: a case report

The outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) began since early December 2019, and has been declared as a public health emergency by the World Health Organization. Due to the hypercoagulable state, blood stasis and endothelial injury, severe patients with COVID-19 are at high risk for thrombosis. We report a case of very severe COVID-19 complicated with venous thrombosis and arteriosclerosis obliterans of lower extremities. Risk stratification for deep vein thrombosis and peripheral arterial disease are of vital importance for the prognosis of COVID-19.

Responding to the Challenge of the Dual COVID-19 and Ebola Epidemics in the Democratic Republic of Congo-Priorities for Achieving Control

As of June 11, 2020, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has reported 4,258 COVID-19 cases with 90 deaths. With other African countries, the DRC faces the challenge of striking a balance between easing public health lockdown measures to curtail the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and minimizing both economic hardships for large sectors of the population and negative impacts on health services for other infectious and noninfectious diseases. The DRC recently controlled its tenth Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak, but COVID-19 and a new EVD outbreak beginning on June 1, 2020 in the northwest Équateur Province have added an additional burden to health services. Although the epidemiology and transmission of EVD and COVID-19 differ, leveraging the public health infrastructures and experiences from coordinating the EVD response to guide the public health response to COVID-19 is critical. Building on the DRC’s 40 years of experience with 10 previous EVD outbreaks, we highlight the DRC’s multi-sectoral public health approach to COVID-19, which includes community-based screening, testing, contact-tracing, risk communication, community engagement, and case management. We also highlight remaining challenges and discuss the way forward for achieving control of both COVID-19 and EVD in the DRC.

COVID-19: Progress in diagnostics, therapy and vaccination

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has recently become a pandemic. As the sudden emergence and rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 is endangering global health and the economy, the development of strategies to contain the virus's spread are urgently needed. At present, various diagnostic kits to test for SARS-CoV-2 are available for use to initiate appropriate treatment faster and to limit further spread of the virus. Several drugs have demonstrated in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 or potential clinical benefits. In addition, institutions and companies worldwide are working tirelessly to develop treatments and vaccines against COVID-19. However, no drug or vaccine has yet been specifically approved for COVID-19. Given the urgency of the outbreak, we focus here on recent advances in the diagnostics, treatment, and vaccine development for SARS-CoV-2 infection, helping to guide strategies to address the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Identification of nsp1 gene as the target of SARS-CoV-2 real-time RT-PCR using nanopore whole-genome sequencing

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) has caused the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Accurate detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 using molecular assays is critical for patient management and the control of the COVID‐19 pandemic. However, there is an increasing number of SARS‐CoV‐2 viruses with mutations at the primer or probe binding sites, and these mutations may affect the sensitivity of currently available real‐time reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) assays targeting the nucleocapsid (N), envelope (E), and open reading frame 1a or 1b genes. Using sequence‐independent single‐primer amplification and nanopore whole‐genome sequencing, we have found that the nonstructural protein 1 (nsp1) gene, located at the 5′ end of the SARS‐CoV‐2 genome, was highly expressed in the nasopharyngeal or saliva specimens of 9 COVID‐19 patients of different clinical severity. Based on this finding, we have developed a novel nsp1 real‐time RT‐PCR assay. The primers and probes are highly specific for SARS‐CoV‐2. Validation with 101 clinical specimens showed that our nsp1 RT‐PCR assay has a sensitivity of 93.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86.2%‐97.2%), which was similar to those of N and E gene RT‐PCR assays. The diagnostic specificity was 100% (95% CI: 92.9%‐100%). The addition of nsp1 for multitarget detection of SARS‐CoV‐2 can avoid false‐negative results due to mutations at the primers/probes binding sites of currently available RT‐PCR assays.

Nanopore sequencing is useful in identifying highly expressed gene region for diagnostic tests.

nsp1 is a suitable alternative gene target for SARS‐CoV‐2 RT‐PCR.

Clinical features, isolation, and complete genome sequence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 from the first two patients in Vietnam

In January 2020, we identified two severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2)‐infected patients in a familial cluster with one person coming from Wuhan, China. The complete genome sequences of two SARS‐CoV‐2 strains isolated from these patients were identical and 99.98% similar to strains isolated in Wuhan. This is genetically suggestive of human‐to‐human transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2 and indicates Wuhan as the most plausible origin of the early outbreak in Vietnam. The younger patient had a mild upper respiratory illness and a brief viral shedding, whereas the elderly with multi‐morbidity had pneumonia, prolonged viral shedding, and residual lung damage. The evidence of nonsynonymous substitutions in the ORF1ab region of the viral sequence warrants further studies.

Transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2 is a global public health and clinical concern.

This report describes clinical features, virus isolation, and complete genome sequences from the first two SARS‐CoV‐2 infections in Vietnam.

Epidemiological and phylogenetic analysis suggested evidence of human‐to‐human transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2. Comparison of SARS‐CoV‐2 strains isolated from these two patients with those from Wuhan showed high similarities.

Nonsynonymous substitutions existed in the ORF1ab region of the viral sequence.

Compared with mild clinical and virological manifestations in the younger patient, the elderly suffered from pneumonia, prolonged viral shedding, and residual lung damage.

COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA): An Australian case report

As the COVID-19 pandemic has developed, concern for invasive fungal infections in critically ill COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has emerged. We describe a clinical case of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) associated pulmonary aspergillus (CAPA) infection and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with a good clinical outcome, in a previously well, non-immunocompromised Australian woman.

Compassionate use of hydroxychloroquine in clinical practice for patients with mild to severe Covid-19 in a French university hospital

Background

Data from non-randomized studies have suggested that hydroxychloroquine could be an effective therapeutic agent against Covid-19.

Methods

We conducted an observational, retrospective cohort study involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed, mild to severe Covid-19 in a French university hospital. Patients who received hydroxychloroquine (200mg tid dosage for 10 days) on a compassionate basis in addition to SOCwere compared to patients without contraindications to hydroxychloroquine who received SOCalone. A propensity score-weighted analysis was performed to control for confounders: age, sex, time between symptom onset and admission ≤ 7 days, Charlson comorbidity index, medical history of arterial hypertension, and obesity, NEWS2 score at admission, and pneumonia severity. The primary endpoint was time to unfavorable outcome, defined as: death, admission to an intensive care unit, or decision to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments, whichever came first.

Results

Data from 89 patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 were analyzed, 84 of whom were considered in the primary analysis; 38 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and 46 patients treated with SOCalone. At admission, the mean age of patients was 66 years, the median Charlson comorbidity index was 3, and the median NEWS2 severity score was 3. After propensity score weighting, treatment with hydroxycholoroquine was not associated with a significantly reduced risk of unfavorable outcome (HR 0.90 [0.38; 2.1], p = 0.81). Overall survival was not significantly different between the two groups (HR 0.89 [0.23; 3.47], p = 1)

Conclusion

In hospitalized adults with Covid-19, no significant reduction of the risk of unfavorable outcomes was observed with hydroxychloroquine in comparison to standard of care. Unmeasured confounders may however have persisted despite careful propensity-weighted analysis and the study might be underpowered. Ongoing controlled trials in patients with varying degrees of initial severity on a larger scale will help determine whether there is a place for hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of Covid-19.

Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Blockers and the Risk of Covid-19

BACKGROUND

A potential association between the use of angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has not been well studied.

METHODS

We carried out a population-based case-control study in the Lombardy region of Italy. A total of 6272 case patients in whom infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was confirmed between February 21 and March 11, 2020, were matched to 30,759 beneficiaries of the Regional Health Service (controls) according to sex, age, and municipality of residence. Information about the use of selected drugs and patients' clinical profiles was obtained from regional databases of health care use. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for associations between drugs and infection, with adjustment for confounders, were estimated by means of logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among both case patients and controls, the mean (±SD) age was 68±13 years, and 37% were women. The use of ACE inhibitors and ARBs was more common among case patients than among controls, as was the use of other antihypertensive and non-antihypertensive drugs, and case patients had a worse clinical profile. Use of ARBs or ACE inhibitors did not show any association with Covid-19 among case patients overall (adjusted odds ratio, 0.95 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.86 to 1.05] for ARBs and 0.96 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.07] for ACE inhibitors) or among patients who had a severe or fatal course of the disease (adjusted odds ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.63 to 1.10] for ARBs and 0.91 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.21] for ACE inhibitors), and no association between these variables was found according to sex.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, population-based study, the use of ACE inhibitors and ARBs was more frequent among patients with Covid-19 than among controls because of their higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease. However, there was no evidence that ACE inhibitors or ARBs affected the risk of COVID-19.

Full genome sequence of the first SARS-CoV-2 detected in Mexico

SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in the city of Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. In this report, we describe the complete genome sequence of the first imported SARS-CoV-2, detected in a Mexican patient who had traveled to Bergamo, Italy. Phylogenetic analysis showed that this isolate belongs to subclade A2a (lineage G) and is closely related to isolates from Finland, Germany and Brazil, all of which were from patients with a history of travel to Italy. This is the first report of the complete genome sequence of this virus in Mexico.

Epidemiological and clinical features of 2019 novel coronavirus diseases (COVID-19) in the South of Iran

BACKGROUND

In March 2020, the WHO declared the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a global pandemic. Although the number of infected cases is increasing, information about its clinical characteristics in the Middle East, especially in Iran, a country which is considered to be one of the most important focal points of the disease in the world, is lacking. To date, there is no available literature on the clinical data on COVID-19 patients in Iran.

METHODS

In this multicenter retrospective study, 113 hospitalized confirmed cases of COVID-19 admitted to university affiliated hospitals in Shiraz, Iran from February 20 to March 20 were entered in the study.

RESULTS

The mean age was 53.75 years and 71 (62.8%) were males. The most common symptoms at onset were fatigue (75: 66.4%), cough (73: 64.6%), and fever (67: 59.3%). Laboratory data revealed significant correlation between lymphocyte count (P value = 0.003), partial thromboplastin time (P value = 0.000), international normalized ratio (P value = 0.000) with the severity of the disease. The most common abnormality in chest CT scans was ground-glass opacity (77: 93.9%), followed by consolidation (48: 58.5%). Our results revealed an overall 8% (9 out of 113 cases) mortality rate among patients, in which the majority was among patients admitted to the ICU (5: 55.6%).

CONCLUSION

Evaluating the clinical data of COVID-19 patients and finding the source of infection and studying the behavior of the disease is crucial for understanding the pandemic.

Novel rapid identification of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time RT-PCR using BD Max Open System in Taiwan

Coronavirus disease 2019 has become a worldwide pandemic. By April 7, 2020, approximately 1,279,722 confirmed cases were reported worldwide including those in Asia, European Region, African Region and Region of the Americas. Rapid and accurate detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is critical for patient care and implementing public health measures to control the spread of infection. In this study, we developed and validated a rapid total nucleic acid extraction method based on real-time RT-PCR for reliable, high-throughput identification of SARS-CoV-2 using the BD MAX platform. For clinical validation, 300 throat swab and 100 sputum clinical samples were examined by both the BD MAX platform and in-house real-time RT-PCR methods, which showed 100% concordant results. This BD MAX protocol is fully automated and the turnaround time from sample to results is approximately 2.5 h for 24 samples compared to 4.8 h by in-house real-time RT-PCR. Our developed BD MAX RT-PCR assay can accurately identify SARS-CoV-2 infection and shorten the turnaround time to increase the effectiveness of control and prevention measures for this emerging infectious disease.

Comparison of commercial realtime reverse transcription PCR assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2

•

Commercial SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR analytical performance comparison.

•

Analytical sensitivity of 13 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCRs varied between 3.3–330 RNA copies.

•

All but 1 assay had sensitivity within one order of magnitude of the reference assay.

•

Only 1 assay cross reacted with another coronavirus (MERS).

The emergence of a new coronavirus in Wuhan China has triggered a global need for accurate diagnostic assays. Initially, mostly laboratory developed molecular tests were available but shortly thereafter different commercial assays started to appear and are still increasing in number. Although independent performance evaluations are ongoing, available data is still scarce. Here we provide a direct comparison of key performance characteristics of 13 commercial RT-PCR assays. Thirteen RT-PCR assays were selected based on the criteria that they can be used following generic RNA extraction protocols, on common PCR platforms and availability. Using a 10-fold and 2-fold dilution series of a quantified SARS-CoV-2 cell-cultured virus stock, performance was assessed compared to our in house validated assay. Specificity was tested by using RNA extracted from cultured common human coronaviruses. All RT-PCR kits included in this study exhibited PCR efficiencies > 90%, except for the Sentinel Diagnostics B E-gene RUO assay (80%). Analytical sensitivity varied between 3.3 RNA copies to 330 RNA copies. Only one assay cross reacted with another human coronavirus (MERS). This study provides a technical baseline of 13 different commercial PCR assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection that can be used by laboratories interested in purchasing any of these for further full clinical validation.

Treatment strategies of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-19

With the outbreak of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), Changsha faced an increasing burden of treating the Wuhan migrants and their infected patients. This study is a retrospective, single-center case series of the 238 consecutive hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 at the First Hospital of Changsha city, China, from 01/21 to 02/14, 2020; the final date of follow-up was 02/27, 2020. Of 238 patients 43.7% visited Wuhan, 58.4% got in touch with Wuhan people, and 47.5% had contacted with diagnosed patients. 37.8% patients had family members infected. 190 cases had mild / general disease, and 48 cases had severe / critical disease. Compared to mild or general patients, more severe or critical patients visited Wuhan (59.6% vs 40.2%; P=0.02) and contacted with Wuhan people (74.5% vs 55.0%; P=0.02). All patients received antiviral treatment, including Lopinavir / Ritonavir (29.3%), Interferon (14.6%) and their combination (40.6%), Arbidol (6.7%), Xuebijing (7.1%) and Chloroquine phosphate (1.3%). Severe and critical patients received glucocorticoid, Gamma-globulin and oxygen inhalation. Some received mechanic ventilation support. As of 02/27, 161 patients discharged. The median length of hospital stay was 13 days. The 10-, 14-, 20- and 28-day discharge rate was 19.1%, 42.8%, 65.0% and 76.4%, respectively. No hospital-related transmission was observed.

COVID-19 Molecular Testing in Korea: Practical Essentials and Answers From Experts Based on Experiences of Emergency Use Authorization Assays

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Early detection of COVID-19 and immediate isolation of infected patients from the naive population are important to prevent further pandemic spread of the infection. Real-time reverse transcription (RT)-PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA is currently the most reliable diagnostic method for confirming COVID-19 worldwide. Guidelines for clinical laboratories on the COVID-19 diagnosis have been recently published by Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine and the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, these formal guidelines do not address common practical laboratory issues related to COVID-19 real-time RT-PCR testing and their solutions. Therefore, this guideline is intended as a practical and technical supplement to the “Guidelines for Laboratory Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Korea”.

Performance Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 PCR Assays Developed by WHO Referral Laboratories

A reliable diagnostic assay is crucial to early detect new COVID-19 cases and limit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization has published several diagnostic molecular approaches developed by referral laboratories, including Charité (Germany), HKU (Hong Kong), China CDC (China), US CDC (United States), and Institut Pasteur, Paris (France). We aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of these different RT-PCR assays using SARS-CoV-2 cell culture supernatants and clinical respiratory samples. Overall, the different RT-PCR assays performed well for SARS-CoV-2 detection and were all specific except the N Charité (Germany), and N2 US CDC (United States) assays. RdRp Institut Pasteur (IP2, IP4), N China CDC, and N1 US CDC were found to be the most sensitive assays. The data presented herein are of prime importance to facilitate the equipment choice of diagnostic laboratories, as well as for the development of marketed tests.

Case Report: The Importance of Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) and Coinfection with Other Respiratory Pathogens in the Current Pandemic

The early shortage of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) tests in the United States led many hospitals to first screen for common respiratory pathogens, and only if this screen was negative to proceed with COVID-19 testing. We report a case of a 56-year-old woman with severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) coinfection with group A Streptococcus. The initial testing strategy resulted in delays in both diagnosis and implementation of appropriate precautions. Underlined is the importance of testing for both SARS-CoV-2 and other common respiratory pathogens during the current pandemic.

Performance Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 PCR Assays Developed by WHO Referral Laboratories

A reliable diagnostic assay is crucial to early detect new COVID-19 cases and limit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization has published several diagnostic molecular approaches developed by referral laboratories, including Charité (Germany), HKU (Hong Kong), China CDC (China), US CDC (United States), and Institut Pasteur, Paris (France). We aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of these different RT-PCR assays using SARS-CoV-2 cell culture supernatants and clinical respiratory samples. Overall, the different RT-PCR assays performed well for SARS-CoV-2 detection and were all specific except the N Charité (Germany), and N2 US CDC (United States) assays. RdRp Institut Pasteur (IP2, IP4), N China CDC, and N1 US CDC were found to be the most sensitive assays. The data presented herein are of prime importance to facilitate the equipment choice of diagnostic laboratories, as well as for the development of marketed tests.

Four point-of-care lateral flow immunoassays for diagnosis of COVID-19 and for assessing dynamics of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the role of rapid serological tests in the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 16 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-confirmed symptomatic patients with COVID-19 and 58 COVID-19 negative patients at a medical center in Taiwan over a 3-month period. Serial serum samples were collected and tested for antibody response using four point-of-care (POC) lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) (ALLTEST 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Rapid Test, Dynamiker 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Rapid Test, ASK COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test, and Wondfo SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test). Time-dependent detection sensitivity and timeliness of seroconversion were determined and compared between the four POC rapid tests.

RESULTS

The overall sensitivity and specificity of the four tests for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after 3 weeks of symptom onset were 100% and 100%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the rapid tests used for detection of IgM and IgG separately and those used for detection of combined total antibody (mainly IgM/IgG). There was no significant difference between the four POC rapid tests in terms of time required for determining seroconversion of COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 with pneumonia demonstrated shorter seroconversion time than those without pneumonia.

CONCLUSION

Though the POC antibody rapid tests based on LFIA showed reliable performance in the detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, the results of these tests should be interpreted and applied appropriately in the context of antibody dynamic of COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 patients complicated with pneumonia exhibited earlier anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response than COVID-19 patients without pneumonia.

COVID-19 - 6 million cases worldwide and an overview of the diagnosis in Brazil: a tragedy to be announced

On 1 June 2020, 6 million cases of COVID-19 were recorded with a total of 374,927 deaths worldwide. Brazil, at that point, presented a total of 514,992 cases and 29,341 deaths caused by the COVID-19 disease. At that moment, Brazil appeared in the second position regarding number of cases, fourth in number of deaths, second in number of recovered patients (N = 206,555), second in number of follow-up cases (N = 279,096), third in number of active and serious cases (N = 8,318), 39^th in number of cases per million inhabitants (N = 2,424), and 125^th in number of SARS-CoV-2 real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) exams per million inhabitants (N = 4,378). To beat the pandemic, Brazil needs to optimize the COVID-19 diagnosis through the SARS-CoV-2 identification using RT-PCR tests and adjust its policies to save lives. Brazil is in a crucial moment to minimize the impact of the illness on society by reducing the number of new cases and thus, preventing deaths, mainly of the risk group populations. However, as widely announced, in Brazil the diagnosis using RT-PCR is still scarce and part of the material collected from COVID-19 patients was disposed of and many patients were not tested, regardless of the seriousness of the symptoms, due to errors of medical data records, improper conservation of the samples after collection and/or during transport, which compromised the quality of the material to be tested. Moreover, the federal government has supported the end of the quarantine, while the number of deaths has grown in thousands every day and the cases have been expanding to the interior of the country.

COVID-19: molecular diagnostics overview

The last day of 2019 delivered the first report to the World Health Organization (WHO) about a group of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology in Wuhan, China. Subsequent investigations identified the new comer, a novel coronavirus related to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and thus was termed as SARS-CoV-2. Being very contagious, the new virus led the era of “COVID-19” which is the acronym of “coronavirus disease 2019,” evoking an imminent threat to global health security with unprecedented devastating challenges to human kind. In this article, we provide a molecular overview on the SARS-CoV-2 virus and summarize tremendous efforts that have been made to develop a rapid confirmatory diagnostic test for COVID-19. The diagnostic performances of the available tests are analyzed based on the best current information from the early research.

Potential Antiviral Options against SARS-CoV-2 Infection

As of June 2020, the number of people infected with severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to skyrocket, with more than 6.7 million cases worldwide. Both the World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations (UN) has highlighted the need for better control of SARS-CoV-2 infections. However, developing novel virus-specific vaccines, monoclonal antibodies and antiviral drugs against SARS-CoV-2 can be time-consuming and costly. Convalescent sera and safe-in-man broad-spectrum antivirals (BSAAs) are readily available treatment options. Here, we developed a neutralization assay using SARS-CoV-2 strain and Vero-E6 cells. We identified the most potent sera from recovered patients for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. We also screened 136 safe-in-man broad-spectrum antivirals against the SARS-CoV-2 infection in Vero-E6 cells and identified nelfinavir, salinomycin, amodiaquine, obatoclax, emetine and homoharringtonine. We found that a combination of orally available virus-directed nelfinavir and host-directed amodiaquine exhibited the highest synergy. Finally, we developed a website to disseminate the knowledge on available and emerging treatments of COVID-19.