Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics and risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in Zambia

Wastewater Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in Zambia: An Early Warning Tool

Wastewater-based surveillance has emerged as an important method for monitoring the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study investigated the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater in Zambia. We conducted a longitudinal study in the Copperbelt and Eastern provinces of Zambia from October 2023 to December 2023 during which 155 wastewater samples were collected. The samples were subjected to three different concentration methods, namely bag-mediated filtration, skimmed milk flocculation, and polythene glycol-based concentration assays. Molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid was conducted using real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). Whole genome sequencing was conducted using Illumina COVIDSEQ assay. Of the 155 wastewater samples, 62 (40%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Of these, 13 sequences of sufficient length to determine SARS-CoV-2 lineages were obtained and 2 sequences were phylogenetically analyzed. Various Omicron subvariants were detected in wastewater including BA.5, XBB.1.45, BA.2.86, and JN.1. Some of these subvariants have been detected in clinical cases in Zambia. Interestingly, phylogenetic analysis positioned a sequence from the Copperbelt Province in the B.1.1.529 clade, suggesting that earlier Omicron variants detected in late 2021 could still be circulating and may not have been wholly replaced by newer subvariants. This study stresses the need for integrating wastewater surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 into mainstream strategies for monitoring SARS-CoV-2 circulation in Zambia.

SARS-CoV-2 Testing Strategies in the Diagnosis and Management of COVID-19 Patients in Low-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

The accuracy of diagnostic laboratory tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can impact downstream clinical procedures in managing and controlling the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To assess the effectiveness of laboratory tools for managing COVID-19 patients in low-income countries (LICs), we systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Scopus and CINHAL databases for reports published between January 2020 and June 2022. We found that 22 of 1303 articles reported the performance of various SARS-CoV-2 detection tools across 10 LICs. These tools were (1) real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR); (2) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP); (3) rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs); (4) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); and (5) dot-blot immunoassay. The detection of COVID-19 is largely divided into two main streams-direct virus (antigen) detection and serology (immunoglobulin)-based detection. Point-of-care testing using antigen-based RDTs is preferred in LICs because of cost effectiveness and simplicity in the test procedures. The nucleic acid amplification technology (RT-PCR and RT-LAMP) has the highest diagnostic performance among the available tests, but it is not broadly used in this context due to costs and shortage of facilities/trained staff. The serology-based test method is affected by antibody interferences and varying amounts of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulins expressed at different stages of disease onset. We further discuss the effectiveness and shortcomings of each of these tools in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19. Using the LICs as the study model, our findings highlight ways to improve the quality and turnaround time of COVID-19 testing in resource-constrained settings, notably through local/international collaborative efforts to refine the molecular-based or immunoassay-based testing technologies.

Comparison of the performance of two real-time fluorescent quantitative PCR kits for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid: a study based on large real clinical samples

BACKGROUND

The global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to the development of multiple detection kits by national manufacturers for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 viral nucleic acid testing. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of different kits (i.e., Maccura kit and Sansure kit) in real clinical work using clinical samples, which will help with the optimization of the test kits.

METHOD

During the past three months (March-May 2022), 1399 pharyngeal swabs from suspected COVID-19 patients have been initially screened using the Maccura kit in Jilin, China, and the test results were verified using the Sansure kit. The cycle threshold (Ct) values generated by the two kits were compared at different viral load levels. Correlation and consistency of the Ct values were investigated using Spearman correlation, Deming regression, and Bland-Altman plots. The cut-off Ct values of the Maccura kit were recalculated by referencing the result of the Sansure kit as a standard. Furthermore, another 163 pharyngeal swabs from suspected COVID-19 patients were collected to verify the new cut-off values.

RESULTS

As a result of the Maccura kit testing, 1192 positive cases and 207 suspected COVID-19 cases were verified. After re-examination by the Sansure kit, 1118 positive cases were confirmed. The difference between the Ct values provided by the two kits was statistically significant, except for the N gene at high viral load. The Ct values obtained from the two kits presented a linear positive correlation. The Maccura kit used new cut-off Ct values of 35.00 (ORF1ab gene) and 35.07 (N gene). Based on that, the validation pass rate for the new cut-off Ct values was 91.41%.

CONCLUSION

Since the Maccura kit is found to have false positives in actual clinical work, recalculation of the cut-off values can reduce this occurrence. In order to improve the accuracy of the testing, laboratories should use two kits for COVID-19 testing, and the adjusting and optimizing of the kits for their situation are needed.