Multiple Variants of SARS-CoV-2 in a University Outbreak After Spring Break - Chicago, Illinois, March-May 2021.

To prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, colleges and universities have implemented multiple strategies including testing, isolation, quarantine, contact tracing, masking, and vaccination. In April 2021, the Chicago Department of Public Health (CDPH) was notified of a large cluster of students with COVID-19 at an urban university after spring break. A total of 158 cases of COVID-19 were diagnosed among undergraduate students during March 15-May 3, 2021; the majority (114; 72.2%) lived in on-campus dormitories. CDPH evaluated the role of travel and social connections, as well as the potential impact of SARS-CoV-2 variants, on transmission. Among 140 infected students who were interviewed, 89 (63.6%) reported recent travel outside Chicago during spring break, and 57 (40.7%) reported indoor social exposures. At the time of the outbreak, undergraduate-aged persons were largely ineligible for vaccination in Chicago; only three of the students with COVID-19 (1.9%) were fully vaccinated. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) of 104 specimens revealed multiple distinct SARS-CoV-2 lineages, suggesting several nearly simultaneous introductions. Most specimens (66; 63.5%) were B.1.1.222, a lineage not widely detected in Chicago before or after this outbreak. These results demonstrate the potential for COVID-19 outbreaks on university campuses after widespread student travel during breaks, at the beginning of new school terms, and when students participate in indoor social gatherings. To prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission, colleges and universities should encourage COVID-19 vaccination; discourage unvaccinated students from travel, including during university breaks; implement serial COVID-19 screening among unvaccinated persons after university breaks; encourage masking; and implement universal serial testing for students based on community transmission levels.

Sensitive detection and quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva.

Saliva has significant advantages as a test medium for detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients, such as ease of collection, minimal requirement of supplies and trained personnel, and safety. Comprehensive validation in a large cohort of prospectively collected specimens with unknown SARS-CoV-2 status should be performed to evaluate the potential and limitations of saliva-based testing. We developed a saliva-based testing pipeline for detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids using real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) readouts, and measured samples from 137 outpatients tested at a curbside testing facility and 29 inpatients hospitalized for COVID-19. These measurements were compared to the nasal swab results for each patient performed by a certified microbiology laboratory. We found that our saliva testing positively detects 100% (RT-PCR) and 93.75% (ddPCR) of curbside patients that were identified as SARS-CoV-2 positive by the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) certified nasal swab testing assay. Quantification of viral loads by ddPCR revealed an extremely wide range, with 1 million-fold difference between individual patients. Our results demonstrate for both community screening and hospital settings that saliva testing reliability is on par with that of the nasal swabs in detecting infected cases, and has potential for higher sensitivity when combined with ddPCR in detecting low-abundance viral loads that evade traditional testing methods.

Implementation of a Sample Pooling Strategy for the Direct Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To report our institutional experience in devising and implementing a pooling protocol and process for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing over a 3-month period in the fall of 2020. METHODS: The widespread testing implemented in the United States for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to a significant shortage of testing supplies and therefore has become a major impediment to the public health response. To date, several institutions have implemented sample pooling, but publications documenting these experiences are sparse. Nasal and nasopharyngeal samples collected from low-positivity (<5%) areas were tested in pools of five on the Roche cobas 6800 analyzer system. Routine SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR turnaround times between sample collection to result reporting were monitored and compared before and after sample pooling implementation. RESULTS: A total of 4,131 sample pools were tested over a 3-month period (during which 39,770 RT-PCR results were reported from the Roche system), allowing our laboratory to save 13,824 tests, equivalent to a conservation rate of 35%. A 48-hour or less turnaround time was generally maintained throughout the pooling period. CONCLUSIONS: Sample pooling offers a viable means to mitigate shortfalls of PCR testing supplies in the ongoing pandemic without significantly compromising overall turnaround times.

Effectiveness of facemasks for opening a university campus in Mississippi, United States - a modelling study.

Background: Universities are at risk for COVID-19 and Fall semester begins in August 2020 for most campuses in the United States. The Southern States, including Mississippi, are experiencing a high incidence of COVID-19. Aims: The objective of this study is to model the impact of face masks and hybrid learning on the COVID-19 epidemic on Mississippi State University (MSU) campus. Methods: We used an age structured deterministic mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission within the MSU campus population, accounting for asymptomatic transmission. We modeled facemasks for the campus population at varying proportions of mask use and effectiveness, and Hyflex model of partial online learning with reduction of people on campus. Results: Facemasks can substantially reduce cases and deaths, even with modest effectiveness. Even 20% uptake of masks will halve the epidemic size. Facemasks combined with Hyflex reduces epidemic size even more. Conclusions: Universal use of face masks and reducing the number of people on campus may allow safer universities reopening.

Evaluation of the EUROIMMUN Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA Assay for detection of IgA and IgG antibodies.

As the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic evolves, the development of immunoassays to help determine exposure and potentially predict immunity has become a pressing priority. In this report we present the performance of the EUROIMMUN enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for semi-quantitative detection of IgA and IgG antibodies in serum and plasma samples using recombinant S1 domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein as antigen. Specimens from patients, with and without COVID-19 infection, were tested at the University of Chicago Clinical Microbiology and Immunology Laboratory. Of 86 samples from SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative patients, including 28 samples positive for common human coronavirus strains, 76 tested negative and 10 tested positive for IgA (88.4% agreement, 95% CI: 79.9-93.6) while 84 tested negative and 2 tested positive for IgG (97.7% agreement, 95% CI: 91.9-99.6). Of 82 samples from SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients, 14 tested negative and 68 tested positive for IgA (82.9% agreement, 95% CI: 73.4-89.5) while 27 tested negative and 55 tested positive for IgG (67.1% agreement, 95% CI: 56.3-76.3). Of samples collected ≥4 days after positive PCR, 38 of 42 (90.5% agreement, 95% CI: 77.9-96.2) were positive for IgA, and 42 of 42 (100% agreement, 95% CI: 91.6-100) were positive for IgG, respectively. The EUROIMMUN Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA Assay demonstrated good sensitivity for detection of IgA and excellent sensitivity for detection of IgG antibodies from samples collected ≥4 days, after COVID-19 diagnosis by PCR. This assay demonstrated good specificity for IgA and excellent specificity for IgG and demonstrated only borderline cross reaction in 2 of the 28 samples from patients with common human coronaviruses infection, types NL63 and OC43.