One assay to test them all: Multiplex assays for expansion of respiratory virus surveillance.

Molecular multiplex assays (MPAs) for simultaneous detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in a single RT-PCR reaction reduce time and increase efficiency to identify multiple pathogens with overlapping clinical presentation but different treatments or public health implications. Clinical performance of XpertXpress® SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV (Cepheid, GX), TaqPath™ COVID-19, FluA/B, RSV Combo kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, TP), and PowerChek™ SARS-CoV-2/Influenza A&B/RSV Multiplex RT-PCR kit II (KogeneBiotech, PC) was compared to individual Standards of Care (SoC). Thirteen isolates of SARS-CoV-2, human seasonal influenza, and avian influenza served to assess limit of detection (LoD). Then, positive and negative residual nasopharyngeal specimens, collected under public health surveillance and pandemic response served for evaluation. Subsequently, comparison of effectiveness was assessed. The three MPAs confidently detect all lineages of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. MPA-LoDs vary from 1 to 2 Log10 differences from SoC depending on assay and strain. Clinical evaluation resulted in overall agreement between 97 and 100%, demonstrating a high accuracy to detect all targets. Existing differences in costs, testing burden and implementation constraints influence the choice in primary or community settings. TP, PC and GX, reliably detect SARS-CoV-2, influenza and RSV simultaneously, with reduced time-to-results and simplified workflows. MPAs have the potential to enhance diagnostics, surveillance system, and epidemic response to drive policy on prevention and control of viral respiratory infections.

A Look inside the Replication Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in Blyth's Horseshoe Bat (Rhinolophus lepidus) Kidney Cells.

Bats are considered the natural reservoir of numerous emerging viruses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses (SARS-CoVs). There is a need for immortalized bat cell lines to culture and investigate the pathogenicity, replication kinetics, and evolution of emerging coronaviruses. We illustrate the susceptibility and permissiveness of a spontaneously immortalized kidney cell line (Rhileki) from Blyth's horseshoe bat (R. lepidus) to SARS-CoV-2 virus, including clinical isolates, suggesting a possible virus-host relationship. We were able to observe limited SARS-CoV-2 replication in Rhileki cells compared with simian VeroE6 cells. Slower viral replication in Rhileki cells was indicated by higher ct values (RT-PCR) at later time points of the viral culture and smaller foci (foci forming assay) compared with those of VeroE6 cells. With this study we demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 replication is not restricted to R. sinicus and could include more Rhinolophus species. The establishment of a continuous Rhinolophus lepidus kidney cell line allows further characterization of SARS-CoV-2 replication in Rhinolophus bat cells, as well as isolation attempts of other bat-borne viruses. IMPORTANCE The current COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates the significance of bats as reservoirs for severe viral diseases. However, as bats are difficult to establish as animal models, bat cell lines can be an important proxy for the investigation of bat-virus interactions and the isolation of bat-borne viruses. This study demonstrates the susceptibility and permissiveness of a continuous kidney bat cell line to SARS-CoV-2. This does not implicate the bat species Rhinolophus lepidus, where these cells originate from, as a potential reservoir, but emphasizes the usefulness of this cell line for further characterization of SARS-CoV-2. This can lead to a better understanding of emerging viruses that could cause significant disease in humans and domestic animals.

Rapid Generation of In-House Serological Assays Is Comparable to Commercial Kits Critical for Early Response to Pandemics: A Case With SARS-CoV-2.

Introduction: Accurate and sensitive measurement of antibodies is critical to assess the prevalence of infection, especially asymptomatic infection, and to analyze the immune response to vaccination during outbreaks and pandemics. A broad variety of commercial and in-house serological assays are available to cater to different laboratory requirements; however direct comparison is necessary to understand utility. Materials and Methods: We investigate the performance of six serological methods against SARS-CoV-2 to determine the antibody profile of 250 serum samples, including 234 RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases, the majority with asymptomatic presentation (87.2%) at 1-51 days post laboratory diagnosis. First, we compare to the performance of two in-house antibody assays: (i) an in-house IgG ELISA, utilizing UV-inactivated virus, and (ii) a live-virus neutralization assay (PRNT) using the same Cambodian isolate as the ELISA. In-house assays are then compared to standardized commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 electrochemiluminescence immunoassays (Elecsys ECLIAs, Roche Diagnostics; targeting anti-N and anti-S antibodies) along with a flow cytometry based assay (FACS) that measures IgM and IgG against spike (S) protein and a multiplex microsphere-based immunoassay (MIA) determining the antibodies against various spike and nucleoprotein (N) antigens of SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses (SARS-CoV-1, MERS-CoV, hCoVs 229E, NL63, HKU1). Results: Overall, specificity of assays was 100%, except for the anti-S IgM flow cytometry based assay (96.2%), and the in-house IgG ELISA (94.2%). Sensitivity ranged from 97.3% for the anti-S ECLIA down to 76.3% for the anti-S IgG flow cytometry based assay. PRNT and in-house IgG ELISA performed similarly well when compared to the commercial ECLIA: sensitivity of ELISA and PRNT was 94.7 and 91.1%, respectively, compared to S- and N-targeting ECLIA with 97.3 and 96.8%, respectively. The MIA revealed cross-reactivity of antibodies from SARS-CoV-2-infected patients to the nucleocapsid of SARS-CoV-1, and the spike S1 domain of HKU1. Conclusion: In-house serological assays, especially ELISA and PRNT, perform similarly to commercial assays, a critical factor in pandemic response. Selection of suitable immunoassays should be made based on available resources and diagnostic needs.

Robust and Functional Immune Memory Up to 9 Months After SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Southeast Asian Longitudinal Cohort.

The duration of humoral and cellular immune memory following SARS-CoV-2 infection in populations in least developed countries remains understudied but is key to overcome the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Sixty-four Cambodian individuals with laboratory-confirmed infection with asymptomatic or mild/moderate clinical presentation were evaluated for Spike (S)-binding and neutralizing antibodies and antibody effector functions during acute phase of infection and at 6-9 months follow-up. Antigen-specific B cells, CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were characterized, and T cells were interrogated for functionality at late convalescence. Anti-S antibody titers decreased over time, but effector functions mediated by S-specific antibodies remained stable. S- and nucleocapsid (N)-specific B cells could be detected in late convalescence in the activated memory B cell compartment and are mostly IgG+. CD4+ and CD8+ T cell immune memory was maintained to S and membrane (M) protein. Asymptomatic infection resulted in decreased antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) and frequency of SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ T cells at late convalescence. Whereas anti-S antibodies correlated with S-specific B cells, there was no correlation between T cell response and humoral immune memory. Hence, all aspects of a protective immune response are maintained up to nine months after SARS-CoV-2 infection and in the absence of re-infection.

Kinetics of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibody Response and Serological Estimation of Time Since Infection.

BACKGROUND: Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) induces a complex antibody response that varies by orders of magnitude between individuals and over time. METHODS: We developed a multiplex serological test for measuring antibodies to 5 SARS-CoV-2 antigens and the spike proteins of seasonal coronaviruses. We measured antibody responses in cohorts of hospitalized patients and healthcare workers followed for up to 11 months after symptoms. A mathematical model of antibody kinetics was used to quantify the duration of antibody responses. Antibody response data were used to train algorithms for estimating time since infection. RESULTS: One year after symptoms, we estimate that 36% (95% range, 11%-94%) of anti-Spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) remains, 31% (95% range, 9%-89%) anti-RBD IgG remains, and 7% (1%-31%) of anti-nucleocapsid IgG remains. The multiplex assay classified previous infections into time intervals of 0-3 months, 3-6 months, and 6-12 months. This method was validated using data from a seroprevalence survey in France, demonstrating that historical SARS-CoV-2 transmission can be reconstructed using samples from a single survey. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to diagnosing previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, multiplex serological assays can estimate the time since infection, which can be used to reconstruct past epidemics.

Assessment of inactivation procedures for SARS-CoV-2.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), presents a challenge to laboratorians and healthcare workers around the world. Handling of biological samples from individuals infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus requires strict biosafety measures. Within the laboratory, non-propagative work with samples containing the virus requires, at minimum, Biosafety Level-2 (BSL-2) techniques and facilities. Therefore, handling of SARS-CoV-2 samples remains a major concern in areas and conditions where biosafety for specimen handling is difficult to maintain, such as in rural laboratories or austere field testing sites. Inactivation through physical or chemical means can reduce the risk of handling live virus and increase testing ability especially in low-resource settings due to easier and faster sample processing. Herein we assess several chemical and physical inactivation techniques employed against SARS-CoV-2 isolates from Cambodia. This data demonstrates that all chemical (AVL, inactivating sample buffer and formaldehyde) and heat-treatment (56 and 98 °C) methods tested completely inactivated viral loads of up to 5 log10.