Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
J Clin Virol ; 164: 105494, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2325364

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During active transcription, SARS-CoV-2 generates subgenomic regions of viral RNA. While standard SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR amplifies region(s) of genomic RNA, it cannot distinguish active infection from remnant viral genomic material. However, screening for subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) by RT-PCR may aid in the determination of actively transcribing virus. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical utility of SARS-CoV-2 sgRNA RT-PCR testing in a pediatric population. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis was performed on inpatients from February-September 2022 positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR with a concomitant order for sgRNA RT-PCR. Chart abstractions were conducted to determine clinical outcomes, management, and infection prevention and control (IPC) practices. RESULTS: Of 95 SARS-CoV-2 positive samples from 75 unique patients, 27 (28.4%) were positive by sgRNA RT-PCR. A negative sgRNA RT-PCR test allowed for de-isolation in 68 (71.6%) patient episodes. Regardless of age or sex, a positive sgRNA RT-PCR result significantly correlated with disease severity (P = 0.007), generalized COVID-19 symptoms (P = 0.012), hospitalization for COVID-19 (P = 0.019), and immune status (P = 0.024). Moreover, sgRNA RT-PCR results prompted changes in management in 28 patients (37.3%); specifically, therapeutic escalation in 13/27 (48.1%) positives and de-escalation in 15/68 (22.1%) negatives. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these findings underscore the clinical utility of sgRNA RT-PCR testing in a pediatric population as we report significant associations between sgRNA RT-PCR results and clinical parameters related to COVID-19. These findings align with the proposed use of sgRNA RT-PCR testing to guide patient management and IPC practices in the hospital setting.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Child , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/diagnosis , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19 Testing , RNA, Viral/genetics , Subgenomic RNA
3.
J Clin Virol ; 153: 105217, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1885897

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Humoral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among immunosuppressed patients remain poorly defined, as well as variables associated with poor response. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational cohort study at a large Northern California healthcare system of infection-naïve individuals fully vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 (mRNA-1273, BNT162b2, or Ad26.COV2.S) with clinical SARS-CoV-2 interferon gamma release assay (IGRA) ordered between January through November 2021. Humoral and cellular immune responses were measured by anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG ELISA (anti-S1 IgG) and IGRA, respectively, following primary and/or booster vaccination. RESULTS: 496 immunosuppressed patients (54% female; median age 50 years) were included. 62% (261/419) of patients had positive anti-S1 IgG and 71% (277/389) had positive IGRA after primary vaccination, with 20% of patients having a positive IGRA only. Following booster, 69% (81/118) had positive anti-S1 IgG and 73% (91/124) had positive IGRA. Factors associated with low humoral response rates after primary vaccination included anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (P < 0.001), sphingosine 1-phsophate (S1P) receptor modulators (P < 0.001), mycophenolate (P = 0.002), and B cell lymphoma (P = 0.004); those associated with low cellular response rates included S1P receptor modulators (P < 0.001) and mycophenolate (P < 0.001). Of patients who had poor humoral response to primary vaccination, 35% (18/52) developed a significantly higher response after the booster. Only 5% (2/42) of patients developed a significantly higher cellular response to the booster dose compared to primary vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Humoral and cellular response rates to primary and booster SARS-CoV-2 vaccination differ among immunosuppressed patient groups. Clinical testing of cellular immunity is important in monitoring vaccine response in vulnerable populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , Ad26COVS1 , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Humans , Immunity, Humoral , Immunoglobulin G , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
4.
Cell ; 185(6): 1025-1040.e14, 2022 03 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1649487

ABSTRACT

During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, novel and traditional vaccine strategies have been deployed globally. We investigated whether antibodies stimulated by mRNA vaccination (BNT162b2), including third-dose boosting, differ from those generated by infection or adenoviral (ChAdOx1-S and Gam-COVID-Vac) or inactivated viral (BBIBP-CorV) vaccines. We analyzed human lymph nodes after infection or mRNA vaccination for correlates of serological differences. Antibody breadth against viral variants is lower after infection compared with all vaccines evaluated but improves over several months. Viral variant infection elicits variant-specific antibodies, but prior mRNA vaccination imprints serological responses toward Wuhan-Hu-1 rather than variant antigens. In contrast to disrupted germinal centers (GCs) in lymph nodes during infection, mRNA vaccination stimulates robust GCs containing vaccine mRNA and spike antigen up to 8 weeks postvaccination in some cases. SARS-CoV-2 antibody specificity, breadth, and maturation are affected by imprinting from exposure history and distinct histological and antigenic contexts in infection compared with vaccination.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Germinal Center , Antigens, Viral , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , Vaccination
5.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(10): 2720-2723, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1486743

ABSTRACT

We report persistent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in a patient with HIV/AIDS; the virus developed spike N terminal domain and receptor binding domain neutralization resistance mutations. Our findings suggest that immunocompromised patients can harbor emerging variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.


Subject(s)
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome , COVID-19 , Humans , Mutation , Protein Binding , SARS-CoV-2 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics
6.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 101(4): 115517, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1347571

ABSTRACT

Dengue and COVID-19 cocirculation presents a diagnostic conundrum for physicians evaluating patients with acute febrile illnesses, both in endemic regions and among returning travelers. We present a case of a returning traveler from Pakistan who, following repeated negative SARS-CoV-2 tests, was found to have a Dengue virus serotype 2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Dengue/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , California/epidemiology , Dengue/epidemiology , Dengue Virus/classification , Dengue Virus/genetics , Female , Genome, Viral , Humans , Pakistan/epidemiology , Phylogeny , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Serogroup , Travel
7.
Clin Chem ; 67(7): 977-986, 2021 07 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1132473

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Laboratory-based methods for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection vary widely in performance. However, there are limited prospectively-collected data on assay performance, and minimal clinical information to guide interpretation of discrepant results. METHODS: Over a 2-week period, 1080 consecutive plasma samples submitted for clinical SARS-CoV-2 IgG testing were tested in parallel for anti-nucleocapsid IgG (anti-N, Abbott) and anti-spike IgG (anti-S1, EUROIMMUN). Chart review was conducted for samples testing positive or borderline on either assay, and for an age/sex-matched cohort of samples negative by both assays. CDC surveillance case definitions were used to determine clinical sensitivity/specificity and conduct receiver operating characteristics curve analysis. RESULTS: There were 52 samples positive by both methods, 2 positive for anti-N only, 34 positive for anti-S1 only, and 27 borderline for anti-S1. Of the 34 individuals positive for anti-S1 alone, 8 (24%) had confirmed COVID-19. No anti-S1 borderline cases were positive for anti-N or had confirmed/probable COVID-19. The anti-N assay was less sensitive (84.2% [95% CI 72.1-92.5%] vs 94.7% [95% CI 85.4-98.9%]) but more specific (99.2% [95% CI 95.5-100%] vs 86.9% [95% CI 79.6-92.3%]) than anti-S1. Abbott anti-N sensitivity could be improved to 96.5% with minimal effect on specificity if the index threshold was lowered from 1.4 to 0.6. CONCLUSION: Real-world concordance between different serologic assays may be lower than previously described in retrospective studies. These findings have implications for the interpretation of SARS-CoV-2 IgG results, especially with the advent of spike antigen-targeted vaccination, as a subset of patients with true infection are anti-N negative and anti-S1 positive.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Nucleocapsid/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Adult , Area Under Curve , COVID-19/virology , Case-Control Studies , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , ROC Curve , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL