Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Clin Chim Acta ; 531: 237-242, 2022 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778016

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the current COVID-19 pandemic, early and rapid diagnosis of potentially infected and contagious individuals enables containment of the disease through quarantine and contact tracing. The rapid global expansion of these diagnostic testing services raises questions concerning the current state of the art with regard to standardization of testing and quality assessment practices. The aim of this study was to provide a global overview of the test methods, laboratory procedures and quality assessment practices used for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. METHODS: The Molecular Diagnostics Committee of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC C-MD) initiated a survey among international laboratories performing molecular genetic detection of SARS-CoV-2. Questions on quality assurance, variant testing, sequencing and the transmission of findings were included in the survey. RESULTS: A total of 273 laboratories from 49 countries participated in the survey. The majority of the participating laboratories (92.2%) use reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The majority of participating laboratories do not conduct testing to identify SARS CoV-2 variants. Participation in external quality assessment programs was reported by the majority of laboratories, however, 33.2% of the laboratories reported not participating in external quality assurance programmes. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the survey, molecular diagnostic methods for SARS-CoV-2 detection are clearly not standardized across different countries and laboratories. The survey found an array of responses in regard to sample preparation, collection, processing and reporting of results. This work suggests quality assurance is insufficiently performed by diagnostic laboratories conducting SARS-CoV-2 testing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Pandemics , Pathology, Molecular , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
2.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 291, 2022 Mar 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1765436

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to assess the impact the impact of gender and age on reactogenicity to three COVID-19 vaccine products: Biontech/Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) and AstraZeneca (ChAdOx). Additional analyses focused on the reduction in working capacity after vaccination and the influence of the time of day when vaccines were administered. METHODS: We conducted a survey on COVID-19 vaccinations and eventual reactions among 73,000 employees of 89 hospitals of the Helios Group. On May 19th, 2021 all employees received an email, inviting all employees who received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 to participate using an attached link. Additionally, the invitation was posted in the group's intranet page. Participation was voluntary and non-traceable. The survey was closed on June 21st, 2021. RESULTS: 8375 participants reported on 16,727 vaccinations. Reactogenicity was reported after 74.6% of COVID-19 vaccinations. After 23.0% vaccinations the capacity to work was affected. ChAdOx induced impairing reactogenicity mainly after the prime vaccination (70.5%), while mRNA-1273 led to more pronounced reactions after the second dose (71.6%). Heterologous prime-booster vaccinations with ChAdOx followed by either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 were associated with the highest risk for impairment (81.4%). Multivariable analyses identified the factors older age, male gender and vaccine BNT162b as independently associated with lower odds ratio for both, impairing reactogenicity and incapacity to work. In the comparison of vaccine schedules, the heterologous combination ChAdOx + BNT162b or mRNA-1273 was associated with the highest and the homologue prime-booster vaccination with BNT162b with the lowest odds ratios. The time of vaccination had no significant influence. CONCLUSIONS: Around 75% of the COVID-19 vaccinations led to reactogenicity and nearly 25% of them led to one or more days of work loss. Major risk factors were female gender, younger age and the administration of a vaccine other than BNT162b2. When vaccinating a large part of a workforce against COVID-19, especially in professions with a higher proportion of young and women such as health care, employers and employees must be prepared for a noticeable amount of absenteeism. Assuming vaccine effectiveness to be equivalent across the vaccine combinations, to minimize reactogenicity, employees at risk should receive a homologous prime-booster immunisation with BNT162b2. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the Ethic Committee of the Aerztekammer Berlin on May 27th, 2021 (Eth-37/21) and registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS 00025745). The study was supported by the Helios research grant HCRI-ID 2021-0272.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis Vaccine , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Vaccination
3.
Viruses ; 14(3)2022 02 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1744919

ABSTRACT

Respiratory viruses play an important role in asthma exacerbation, and early exposure can be involved in recurrent bronchitis and the development of asthma. The exact mechanism is not fully clarified, and pathogen-to-host interaction studies are warranted to identify biomarkers of exacerbation in the early phase. Only a limited number of international exacerbation cohorts were studied. Here, we have established a local pediatric exacerbation study in Germany consisting of children with asthma or chronic, recurrent bronchitis and analyzed the viriome within the nasopharyngeal swab specimens derived from the entire cohort (n = 141). Interestingly, 41% of exacerbated children had a positive test result for human rhinovirus (HRV)/human enterovirus (HEV), and 14% were positive for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). HRV was particularly prevalent in asthmatics (56%), wheezers (50%), and atopic (66%) patients. Lymphocytes were decreased in asthmatics and in HRV-infected subjects, and patients allergic to house dust mites were more susceptible to HRV infection. Our study thus confirms HRV infection as a strong 'biomarker' of exacerbated asthma. Further longitudinal studies will show the clinical progress of those children with a history of an RSV or HRV infection. Vaccination strategies and novel treatment guidelines against HRV are urgently needed to protect those high-risk children from a serious course of disease.


Subject(s)
Asthma , Bronchitis , Enterovirus Infections , Enterovirus , Picornaviridae Infections , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections , Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human , Respiratory Tract Infections , Virus Diseases , Viruses , Asthma/epidemiology , Biomarkers , Child , Humans , Infant , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Rhinovirus
4.
Microorganisms ; 9(12)2021 Dec 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1580574

ABSTRACT

The scale of the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic warrants the urgent establishment of a global decentralized surveillance system to recognize local outbreaks and the emergence of novel variants of concern. Among available deep-sequencing technologies, nanopore-sequencing could be an important cornerstone, as it is mobile, scalable, and cost-effective. Therefore, streamlined nanopore-sequencing protocols need to be developed and optimized for SARS-CoV-2 variants identification. We adapted and simplified existing workflows using the 'midnight' 1200 bp amplicon split primer sets for PCR, which produce tiled overlapping amplicons covering almost the entire SARS-CoV-2 genome. Subsequently, we applied Oxford Nanopore Rapid Barcoding and the portable MinION Mk1C sequencer combined with the interARTIC bioinformatics pipeline. We tested a simplified and less time-consuming workflow using SARS-CoV-2-positive specimens from clinical routine and identified the CT value as a useful pre-analytical parameter, which may help to decrease sequencing failures rates. Complete pipeline duration was approx. 7 h for one specimen and approx. 11 h for 12 multiplexed barcoded specimens. The adapted protocol contains fewer processing steps and can be completely conducted within one working day. Diagnostic CT values deduced from qPCR standardization experiments can act as principal criteria for specimen selection. As a guideline, SARS-CoV-2 genome copy numbers lower than 4 × 106 were associated with a coverage threshold below 20-fold and incompletely assembled SARS-CoV-2 genomes. Thus, based on the described thermocycler/chemistry combination, we recommend CT values of ~26 or lower to achieve full and high-quality SARS-CoV-2 (+)RNA genome coverage.

5.
Children (Basel) ; 8(8)2021 Aug 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1348608

ABSTRACT

We assessed the performance of a rapid antigen test (RAT) in everyday clinical practice. Between 1 November 2020 until 1 April 2021 all in-patients at the Helios University Hospital Wuppertal, Germany, as well as the accompanying relatives at the Children's Hospital received a SARS-CoV-2 RAT and a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR prior to admission. Out of 3686 patients, 22 (0.6%) subjects were tested positive by RT-PCR and RAT, and 3591 (97.4%) were negative by both methods, showing discordant results: RT-PCR+/RAT- in 58 (1.6%) and RT-PCR-/RAT+ in 15 patients (0.4%). Overall sensitivity and specificity of RAT was 27.5% (95%CI 18.1-38.6%) and 99.6% (95%CI 99.3-99.8%), respectively. The sensitivity was slightly higher in adults (30.4%, 95%CI 18.8-90.9%) than in pediatric subjects (20.8%, 95%CI 7.1-42.2%). False negative RAT had a statistically higher Ct-value (p < 0.001) compared to true positive values, and overall sensitivity increased to 80% [59.3-93.2%] with Ct value < 30. While the sensitivity of the RAT was poor compared with the RT-PCR, the specificity was excellent. However, the sensitivity increased with lower Ct value, and with the right anamnesis the RAT can be a quick and easy approach to distinguish people who are infectious with SARS-CoV-2 from noninfectious people, enabling appropriate triage in clinical practice while waiting for the RT-PCR result.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL