Antibody Responses to the SARS-CoV-2 Ancestral Strain and Omicron Variants in Moderna mRNA-1273 Vaccinated Active-Duty US Navy Sailors and Marines.

Omicron and its subvariants have steadily gained greater capability of immune escape compared to other variants of concern, resulting in an increased incidence of reinfections even among vaccinated individuals. We evaluated the antibody response to Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and BA.4/5 in US military members vaccinated with the primary 2-dose series of Moderna mRNA-1273 in a cross-sectional study. While nearly all vaccinated participants had sustained spike (S) IgG and neutralizing antibodies (ND50) to the ancestral strain, only 7.7% participants had detectable ND50 to Omicron BA.1 at 8 months postvaccination. The neutralizing antibody response to BA.2 and BA.5 was similarly reduced. The reduced antibody neutralization of Omicron correlated with the decreased antibody binding to the receptor-binding domain. The participants' seropositivity to the nuclear protein positively correlated with ND50. Our data emphasizes the need for continuous vigilance in monitoring for emerging variants and the need to identify potential alternative targets for vaccine design.

Performance Evaluation of Five Rapid At-Home COVID-19 Antigen Tests against the Omicron Variant.

Rapid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antigen tests can be used to aid in quickly identifying positive cases, which can help mitigate the spread of COVID-19 infection. Using previously characterized Omicron-positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), non-Omicron-positive SARS-CoV-2, and negative samples, we evaluated five brands of at-home rapid COVID-19 antigen tests (On/Go at-home COVID-19 rapid antigen self-test, iHealth COVID-19 antigen rapid test, QuickVue SARS antigen test, Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 card home test, and InBios SCoV-2 Ag detect rapid self-test). Our results showed that these rapid tests had similar levels of sensitivity to Omicron and non-Omicron variants (On/Go, 76.4% and 71.0%; iHealth, 73.0% and 71.0%; QuickVue, 84.3% and 74.3%; BinaxNOW, 69.7% and 71.0%; and InBios, 66.3% and 64.5%, respectively). In conclusion, rapid COVID-19 antigen tests can continue to be used as part of public health measures to combat the spread of the Omicron variant, as their sensitivity was not significantly affected. IMPORTANCE The emergence of the Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is due to mutations as part of the virus evolution process. These mutations might affect the sensitivity of diagnostic tests that are currently being used to detect the virus. Because rapid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antigen tests are commonly used in the general population, it is important to assess their performance in detecting the Omicron variant. Here, we compared the performance of five brands of rapid tests against Omicron and non-Omicron variants using nasopharyngeal swab samples in viral transport media. Our result found no difference in their performance, suggesting no reduction in sensitivity when used to detect the Omicron variant.

Validation of SARS-CoV-2 pooled testing for surveillance using the Panther Fusion® system: Impact of pool size, automation, and assay chemistry.

Combining diagnostic specimens into pools has been considered as a strategy to augment throughput, decrease turnaround time, and leverage resources. This study utilized a multi-parametric approach to assess optimum pool size, impact of automation, and effect of nucleic acid amplification chemistries on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in pooled samples for surveillance testing on the Hologic Panther Fusion® System. Dorfman pooled testing was conducted with previously tested SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal samples using Hologic's Aptima® and Panther Fusion® SARS-CoV-2 Emergency Use Authorization assays. A manual workflow was used to generate pool sizes of 5:1 (five samples: one positive, four negative) and 10:1. An automated workflow was used to generate pool sizes of 3:1, 4:1, 5:1, 8:1 and 10:1. The impact of pool size, pooling method, and assay chemistry on sensitivity, specificity, and lower limit of detection (LLOD) was evaluated. Both the Hologic Aptima® and Panther Fusion® SARS-CoV-2 assays demonstrated >85% positive percent agreement between neat testing and pool sizes ≤5:1, satisfying FDA recommendation. Discordant results between neat and pooled testing were more frequent for positive samples with CT>35. Fusion® CT (cycle threshold) values for pooled samples increased as expected for pool sizes of 5:1 (CT increase of 1.92-2.41) and 10:1 (CT increase of 3.03-3.29). The Fusion® assay demonstrated lower LLOD than the Aptima® assay for pooled testing (956 vs 1503 cp/mL, pool size of 5:1). Lowering the cut-off threshold of the Aptima® assay from 560 kRLU (manufacturer's setting) to 350 kRLU improved the assay sensitivity to that of the Fusion® assay for pooled testing. Both Hologic's SARS-CoV-2 assays met the FDA recommended guidelines for percent positive agreement (>85%) for pool sizes ≤5:1. Automated pooling increased test throughput and enabled automated sample tracking while requiring less labor. The Fusion® SARS-CoV-2 assay, which demonstrated a lower LLOD, may be more appropriate for surveillance testing.

Biocompatibile nanofiber based membranes for high-efficiency filtration of nano-aerosols with low air resistance.

Particulate matter (PMs) from combustion emissions (traffic, power plant, and industries) and the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic have recently enhanced the development of personal protective equipment against airborne pathogens to protect humans' respiratory system. However, most commercial face masks still cannot simultaneously achieve breathability and high filtration of PMs, bacteria, and viruses. This study used the electrospinning method with polyimide (PI) and polyethersulfone (PES) solutions to form a nanofiber membrane with low-pressure loss and high biocompatibility for high-efficiency bacteria, viruses, and nano-aerosol removal. Conclusively, the optimized nano-sized PI/PES membrane (0.1625 m2/g basis weight) exhibited conspicuous performance for the highest filtration efficiency towards PM from 50 to 500 nm (99.74 %), good filter quality of nano-aerosol (3.27 Pa-1), exceptional interception ratio against 100-nm airborne COVID-19 (over 99 %), and non-toxic effect on the human body (107 % cell viability). The PI/PES nanofiber membrane required potential advantage to form a medical face mask because of its averaged 97 % BEF on Staphylococcus aureus filiation and ultra-low pressure loss of 0.98 Pa by referring ASTM F2101-01. The non-toxic PI/PES filters provide a new perspective on designing excellent performance for nano-aerosols from air pollution and airborne COVID-19 with easy and comfortable breathing under ultra-low air flow resistance.

Enhanced Immunogenicity of Inactivated Dengue Vaccines by Novel Polysaccharide-Based Adjuvants in Mice.

Dengue fever, caused by any of four dengue viruses (DENV1-4), is a major global burden. Currently, there is no effective vaccine that prevents infection in dengue naïve populations. We tested the ability of two novel adjuvants (Advax-PEI and Advax-2), using aluminum hydroxide (alum) as control, to enhance the immunogenicity of formalin- or psoralen-inactivated (PIV or PsIV) DENV2 vaccines in mice. Mice were vaccinated on days 0 and 30, and serum samples were collected on days 30, 60, 90, and 101. Neutralizing antibodies were determined by microneutralization (MN) assays, and the geometric mean 50% MN (MN50) titers were calculated. For the PIV groups, after one dose MN50 titers were higher in the novel adjuvant groups compared to the alum control, while MN50 titers were comparable between the adjuvant groups after the second dose. For the PsIV groups, both novel adjuvants induced higher MN50 titers than the alum control after the second dose. Spleen cells were collected on days 45 and 101 for enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) for IFNγ and IL4. Both PIV and PsIV groups elicited different degrees of IFNγ and IL4 responses. Overall, Advax-2 gave the best responses just ahead of Advax-PEI. Given Advax-2's extensive human experience in other vaccine applications, it will be pursued for further development.