Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
2.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 5352, 2022 09 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2016691

ABSTRACT

Prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, antibiotic resistance was listed as the major global health care priority. Some analyses, including the O'Neill report, have predicted that deaths due to drug-resistant bacterial infections may eclipse the total number of cancer deaths by 2050. Although fungal infections remain in the shadow of public awareness, total attributable annual deaths are similar to, or exceeds, global mortalities due to malaria, tuberculosis or HIV. The impact of fungal infections has been exacerbated by the steady rise of antifungal drug resistant strains and species which reflects the widespread use of antifungals for prophylaxis and therapy, and in the case of azole resistance in Aspergillus, has been linked to the widespread agricultural use of antifungals. This review, based on a workshop hosted by the Medical Research Council and the University of Exeter, illuminates the problem of antifungal resistance and suggests how this growing threat might be mitigated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Mycoses , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antifungal Agents/pharmacology , Antifungal Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Resistance, Bacterial , Humans , Mycology , Mycoses/drug therapy , Mycoses/microbiology , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Viruses ; 14(5)2022 05 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1903491

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a wide spectrum of disease, ranging from asymptomatic infection to acute respiratory distress syndrome. Some biomarkers may predict disease severity. Among them, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response has been related to severe disease. The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between the anti-SARS-CoV-2 serological response and COVID-19 outcome. Demographic, clinical, and biological data from nasopharyngeal-PCR confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized patients were prospectively collected between April and August 2020 at our institution. All patients had serial weekly serology testing for a maximum of three blood samples or until discharge. Two different serological assays were used: a chemiluminescent assay and an in-house developed Luminex immunoassay. Kinetics of the serological response and correlation between the antibody titers and outcome were assessed. Among the 70 patients enrolled in the study, 22 required invasive ventilation, 29 required non-invasive ventilation or oxygen supplementation, and 19 did not require any oxygen supplementation. Median duration of symptoms upon admission for the three groups were 13, 8, and 9 days, respectively. Antibody titers gradually increased for up to 3 weeks since the onset of symptoms for patients requiring oxygen supplementation with significantly higher antibody titers for patients requiring invasive ventilation. Antibody titers on admission were also significantly higher in severely ill patients and serology performed well in predicting the necessity of invasive ventilation (AUC: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.67-0.9). Serology testing at admission may be a good indicator to identify severe COVID-19 patients who will require invasive mechanical ventilation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Neutralization Tests
4.
Viruses ; 14(5):1089, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1857370

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a wide spectrum of disease, ranging from asymptomatic infection to acute respiratory distress syndrome. Some biomarkers may predict disease severity. Among them, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response has been related to severe disease. The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between the anti-SARS-CoV-2 serological response and COVID-19 outcome. Demographic, clinical, and biological data from nasopharyngeal-PCR confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized patients were prospectively collected between April and August 2020 at our institution. All patients had serial weekly serology testing for a maximum of three blood samples or until discharge. Two different serological assays were used: a chemiluminescent assay and an in-house developed Luminex immunoassay. Kinetics of the serological response and correlation between the antibody titers and outcome were assessed. Among the 70 patients enrolled in the study, 22 required invasive ventilation, 29 required non-invasive ventilation or oxygen supplementation, and 19 did not require any oxygen supplementation. Median duration of symptoms upon admission for the three groups were 13, 8, and 9 days, respectively. Antibody titers gradually increased for up to 3 weeks since the onset of symptoms for patients requiring oxygen supplementation with significantly higher antibody titers for patients requiring invasive ventilation. Antibody titers on admission were also significantly higher in severely ill patients and serology performed well in predicting the necessity of invasive ventilation (AUC: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.67–0.9). Serology testing at admission may be a good indicator to identify severe COVID-19 patients who will require invasive mechanical ventilation.

5.
J Clin Virol ; 142: 104931, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1322197

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In response to the current COVID-19 pandemic, multiple companies marketed serological tests. Rigorous, independent and comparative performances of these assays on defined clinical specimens are needed. METHODS: In a first preliminary phase, we investigated 16 IgG, IgM, IgA and pan Ig serological ELISA using a panel of 180 sera, comprising 97 sera from patients with a positive RT-PCR, and 83 negative sera sampled before November 1, 2019. In a second phase and to complete the evaluation on the full panel (100 positive and 300 negative), tests that passed pre-defined exclusion criteria of 90% sensitivity and 97% specificity were further evaluated on 220 additional sera chosen to assess possible cross-reactivity with other human viral infections. RESULTS: Among the 16 tests evaluated in the preliminary phase, two were excluded due to insufficient sensitivity at 15 days post-symptom onset and one was excluded due to poor specificity. Of the 13 tests evaluated using the full panel comprised of a diverse pool of sera including those reactive against known respiratory viruses, no systematic cross-reactivity was observed. However, heterogeneities across tests were found. Consistent with kinetics of antibody expression, maximal sensitivity was found two weeks post-symptom onset. CONCLUSION: In this independent evaluation, we compared the performance of 16 SARS-CoV-2 serological tests using well-characterized sera and found 13 tests with more than 90% sensitivity at 15 days post-symptom onset and 97% specificity across a diverse range of negative samples.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , Immunoglobulin M , Pandemics , Sensitivity and Specificity , Serologic Tests
6.
J Virol ; 95(3)2021 01 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1028544

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibody responses to the spike (S) protein monomer, S protein native trimeric form, or the nucleocapsid (N) proteins were evaluated in cohorts of individuals with acute infection (n = 93) and in individuals enrolled in a postinfection seroprevalence population study (n = 578) in Switzerland. Commercial assays specific for the S1 monomer, for the N protein, or within a newly developed Luminex assay using the S protein trimer were found to be equally sensitive in antibody detection in the acute-infection-phase samples. Interestingly, compared to anti-S antibody responses, those against the N protein appear to wane in the postinfection cohort. Seroprevalence in a "positive patient contacts" group (n = 177) was underestimated by N protein assays by 10.9 to 32.2%, while the "randomly selected" general population group (n = 311) was reduced by up to 45% relative to the S protein assays. The overall reduction in seroprevalence targeting only anti-N antibodies for the total cohort ranged from 9.4 to 31%. Of note, the use of the S protein in its native trimer form was significantly more sensitive compared to monomeric S proteins. These results indicate that the assessment of anti-S IgG antibody responses against the native trimeric S protein should be implemented to estimate SARS-CoV-2 infections in population-based seroprevalence studies.IMPORTANCE In the present study, we have determined SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody responses in sera of acute and postinfection phase subjects. Our results indicate that antibody responses against viral S and N proteins were equally sensitive in the acute phase of infection, but that responses against N appear to wane in the postinfection phase where those against the S protein persist over time. The most sensitive serological assay in both acute and postinfection phases used the native S protein trimer as the binding antigen, which has significantly greater conformational epitopes for antibody binding compared to the S1 monomer protein used in other assays. We believe these results are extremely important in order to generate correct estimates of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the general population. Furthermore, the assessment of antibody responses against the trimeric S protein will be critical to evaluate the durability of the antibody response and for the characterization of a vaccine-induced antibody response.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/immunology , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Immunoassay , Immunoglobulin A/blood , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Male , Phosphoproteins/immunology , Protein Multimerization , Sensitivity and Specificity , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/chemistry , Switzerland/epidemiology , Time Factors
7.
J Clin Virol ; 134: 104690, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-926280

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: These last months, dozens of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests have become available with varying performances. A major effort was completed to compare 17 serological tests available in April 2020 in Switzerland. METHODS: In a preliminary phase, we compared 17 IgG, IgM, IgA and pan Ig serological tests including ELISA, LFA, CLIA and ECLIA on a panel of 182 sera, comprising 113 sera from hospitalized patients with a positive RT-PCR, and 69 sampled before 1st November 2019, expected to give a positive and negative results, respectively. In a second phase, the five best performing and most available tests were further evaluated on a total of 582 sera (178 and 404 expected positive and negative, respectively), allowing the assessment of 20 possible cross-reactions with other viruses. RESULTS: In the preliminary phase, among eight IgG/pan-Ig ELISA or CLIA/ECLIA tests, five had a sensitivity and specificity above 90 % and 98 % respectively, and on six IgM/IgA tests, only one was acceptable. Only one LFA test on three showed good performances for both IgG and IgM. For all the tests IgM and IgG aroused concomitantly. In the second phase, no test showed particular cross-reaction. We observed an important heterogeneity in the development of the antibody response. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the evaluated tests exhibited high performances of IgG/pan-Ig sensitivity and specificity to detect the serological response of moderately to critically ill hospitalized patients. The IgM and IgA tests showed mostly insufficient performances with no added value for the early diagnostic on the cohort tested in this study.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antigens, Viral/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunosorbent Techniques/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Testing/methods , Cross Reactions , Humans , Immune Sera/chemistry , Immunoglobulin A/blood , Immunoglobulin M/blood , Immunosorbent Techniques/classification , Reproducibility of Results , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Sensitivity and Specificity , Severity of Illness Index , Switzerland
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL