Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
2.
J Clin Virol ; 165: 105498, 2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20231170

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Concerns around accuracy and performance of rapid antigen tests continue to be raised with the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of two widely used SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests during BA.4/BA.5 SARS-CoV-2 wave in South Africa (May - June 2022). STUDY DESIGN: A prospective field evaluation compared the SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid test from Hangzhou AllTest Biotech (nasal swab) and the Standard Q COVID-19 Rapid Antigen test from SD Biosensor (nasopharyngeal swab) to the Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 assay (nasopharyngeal swab) on samples collected from 540 study participants. RESULTS: Overall 28.52% (154/540) were SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive with median cycle number value of 12.30 (IQR 9.30-19.40). Out of the 99 successfully sequenced SARS-CoV-2 positive samples, 18 were classified as BA.4 and 56 were classified as BA.5. The overall sensitivities of the AllTest SARS-CoV-2 Ag test and Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test were 73.38% (95% CI 65.89-79.73) and 74.03% (95% CI 66.58-80.31) and their specificities were 97.41% (95% CI 95.30-98.59) and 99.22% (95% CI 97.74-99.74) respectively. Sensitivity was >90% when the cycle number value was <20. The sensitivity of both rapid tests was >90% in samples infected with Omicron sub-lineage BA.4 and BA.5. CONCLUSION: Accuracy of tested rapid antigen tests that target the nucleocapsid SARS-CoV-2 protein, were not adversely affected by BA.4 and BA.5 Omicron sub-variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , South Africa , COVID-19/diagnosis , Biological Assay , Nucleocapsid Proteins , Sensitivity and Specificity
3.
Nature ; 607(7918): 356-359, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1830078

ABSTRACT

The extent to which Omicron infection1-9, with or without previous vaccination, elicits protection against the previously dominant Delta (B.1.617.2) variant is unclear. Here we measured the neutralization capacity against variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in 39 individuals in South Africa infected with the Omicron sublineage BA.1 starting at a median of 6 (interquartile range 3-9) days post symptom onset and continuing until last follow-up sample available, a median of 23 (interquartile range 19-27) days post symptoms to allow BA.1-elicited neutralizing immunity time to develop. Fifteen participants were vaccinated with Pfizer's BNT162b2 or Johnson & Johnson's Ad26.CoV2.S and had BA.1 breakthrough infections, and 24 were unvaccinated. BA.1 neutralization increased from a geometric mean 50% focus reduction neutralization test titre of 42 at enrolment to 575 at the last follow-up time point (13.6-fold) in vaccinated participants and from 46 to 272 (6.0-fold) in unvaccinated participants. Delta virus neutralization also increased, from 192 to 1,091 (5.7-fold) in vaccinated participants and from 28 to 91 (3.0-fold) in unvaccinated participants. At the last time point, unvaccinated individuals infected with BA.1 had low absolute levels of neutralization for the non-BA.1 viruses and 2.2-fold lower BA.1 neutralization, 12.0-fold lower Delta neutralization, 9.6-fold lower Beta variant neutralization, 17.9-fold lower ancestral virus neutralization and 4.8-fold lower Omicron sublineage BA.2 neutralization relative to vaccinated individuals infected with BA.1. These results indicate that hybrid immunity formed by vaccination and Omicron BA.1 infection should be protective against Delta and other variants. By contrast, infection with Omicron BA.1 alone offers limited cross-protection despite moderate enhancement.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Cross Protection , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Ad26COVS1/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , BNT162 Vaccine/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Cross Protection/immunology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/classification , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
4.
Curr HIV/AIDS Rep ; 19(1): 46-53, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1748428

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe how mitigation measures against COVID-19 have impacted HIV and TB research in South Africa. RECENT FINDINGS: South Africa has the highest number of COVID-19 (34%) cases in Africa, accounting for 43% of all reported COVID-19-related deaths on the continent. The country accounts for 20% of all people living with HIV and ranked third in the world for new TB infections in 2019. While South Africa's investments in its HIV and TB responses enabled it to pivot rapidly to respond to the emerging COVID-19 epidemic, it negatively impacted the HIV and TB response through temporary suspension of research, diversion of key resources for HIV and TB control, and patient access to health care facilities; the full extent of this has yet to emerge. Success in integrating responses to the colliding epidemics could potentially enhance survival outcomes and ensure gains made to date in HIV and TB are not reversed and we stay on track toward achieving the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Tuberculosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , South Africa/epidemiology , Tuberculosis/epidemiology , Tuberculosis/prevention & control
6.
PLoS Med ; 18(10): e1003797, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1448570

ABSTRACT

Elvin Geng and co-authors discuss monitoring and achieving equity in provision of vaccines for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Global Health/trends , Health Equity/trends , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/therapy , Humans
9.
N Engl J Med ; 384(6): 497-511, 2021 02 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-953632

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: World Health Organization expert groups recommended mortality trials of four repurposed antiviral drugs - remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon beta-1a - in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). METHODS: We randomly assigned inpatients with Covid-19 equally between one of the trial drug regimens that was locally available and open control (up to five options, four active and the local standard of care). The intention-to-treat primary analyses examined in-hospital mortality in the four pairwise comparisons of each trial drug and its control (drug available but patient assigned to the same care without that drug). Rate ratios for death were calculated with stratification according to age and status regarding mechanical ventilation at trial entry. RESULTS: At 405 hospitals in 30 countries, 11,330 adults underwent randomization; 2750 were assigned to receive remdesivir, 954 to hydroxychloroquine, 1411 to lopinavir (without interferon), 2063 to interferon (including 651 to interferon plus lopinavir), and 4088 to no trial drug. Adherence was 94 to 96% midway through treatment, with 2 to 6% crossover. In total, 1253 deaths were reported (median day of death, day 8; interquartile range, 4 to 14). The Kaplan-Meier 28-day mortality was 11.8% (39.0% if the patient was already receiving ventilation at randomization and 9.5% otherwise). Death occurred in 301 of 2743 patients receiving remdesivir and in 303 of 2708 receiving its control (rate ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.11; P = 0.50), in 104 of 947 patients receiving hydroxychloroquine and in 84 of 906 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.59; P = 0.23), in 148 of 1399 patients receiving lopinavir and in 146 of 1372 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.25; P = 0.97), and in 243 of 2050 patients receiving interferon and in 216 of 2050 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.39; P = 0.11). No drug definitely reduced mortality, overall or in any subgroup, or reduced initiation of ventilation or hospitalization duration. CONCLUSIONS: These remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon regimens had little or no effect on hospitalized patients with Covid-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation, and duration of hospital stay. (Funded by the World Health Organization; ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN83971151; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04315948.).


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Interferon beta-1a/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Aged , Alanine/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/mortality , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Intention to Treat Analysis , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial , Treatment Failure
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL