Comparative genomic analysis demonstrates that true reinfection following SARS-CoV-2 infection is possible.

Background: In recent months, multiple cases of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 reinfection have been reported. However, accurate epidemiological and virological data, including genomic analysis where possible, are required to differentiate cases of prolonged viral RNA shedding (i.e. intermittent detection) from true reinfection. The objective of this review was to systematically identify and summarise all cases of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection confirmed by comparative genomic analysis. Methods: A protocol based on Cochrane rapid review methodology was employed. Databases and pre-print servers were searched until 9/11/2020. Results: Ten studies, representing 17 patients, were identified (mean age=40; 71% male). The time interval between primary infection and reinfection ranged from 13 to 142 days (median: 60).Comparative whole genome sequencing confirmed reinfection in 14 patients (the primary and secondary infections were caused by different viruses). A further three cases had strong, but not confirmed evidence of reinfection, as only partial genomes were retrieved on primary infection.Across 12 studies that reported the number of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) comparing the first and second genomes, between 8 and 24 SNPs were discovered. With an average SARS-CoV-2 mutation acquisition rate of 1-2 per month, in all cases it is likely that the secondary infection was caused by a different SARS-CoV-2 virus, rather than prolonged shedding of viral RNA from the primary infection.In five reinfection cases, the primary and secondary infections were caused by different SARS-CoV-2 lineages/clades, strongly indicating that infections were caused by different viruses. Conclusion: Comparative genomic analyses from 14 patients confirm that SARS-CoV-2 reinfection can occur.

D614G SARS-CoV-2 Pseudovirus Infectivity and Binding of Spike Protein to the ACE2 Receptor Inversely Correlates with Serum SARS-CoV-2-Specific IgG Levels.

Understanding the functional characteristics of antibodies produced against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) will assist in the determination of disease outcomes for this virus. In this study, the ability of antibodies to inhibit viral entry into the host cell through the interaction of the receptor binding domain of the viral spike protein and the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor on the human cell surface was investigated. The SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels in 20 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients were measured using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and the samples were further analyzed using a functional binding assay. Inhibition of viral infectivity was also measured using a pseudovirus neutralization assay against a D614G SARS-CoV-2 virus strain. A significant correlation between IgG levels and neutralizing antibody 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) titers was observed (p < 0.05). Similarly, the IC50 titers obtained in the neutralization and binding assays were significantly correlated (p < 0.001). Varying levels of IgG and IC50 titers were observed for the SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positive samples, with one sample not showing any neutralizing capability despite detectable IgG levels. Gender comparisons showed no statistical differences in any of the assays. These results suggest that increased SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels correlate with greater protection against the entry of the virus into cells; however, further investigations in larger studies are needed to confirm the correlates of protection.

SARS-CoV-2 variant trends in Ireland: Wastewater-based epidemiology and clinical surveillance.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantification in wastewater is an important tool for monitoring the prevalence of COVID-19 disease on a community scale which complements case-based surveillance systems. As novel variants of concern (VOCs) emerge there is also a need to identify the primary circulating variants in a community, accomplished to date by sequencing clinical samples. Quantifying variants in wastewater offers a cost-effective means to augment these sequencing efforts. In this study, SARS-CoV-2 N1 RNA concentrations and daily loadings were determined and compared to case-based data collected as part of a national surveillance programme to determine the validity of wastewater surveillance to monitor infection spread in the greater Dublin area. Further, sequencing of clinical samples was conducted to determine the primary SARS-CoV-2 lineages circulating in Dublin. Finally, digital PCR was employed to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 VOCs, Alpha and Delta, were quantifiable from wastewater. No lead or lag time was observed between SARS-CoV-2 wastewater and case-based data and SARS-CoV-2 trends in Dublin wastewater significantly correlated with the notification of confirmed cases through case-based surveillance preceding collection with a 5-day average. This demonstrates that viral RNA in Dublin's wastewater mirrors the spread of infection in the community. Clinical sequence data demonstrated that increased COVID-19 cases during Ireland's third wave coincided with the introduction of the Alpha variant, while the fourth wave coincided with increased prevalence of the Delta variant. Interestingly, the Alpha variant was detected in Dublin wastewater prior to the first genome being sequenced from clinical samples, while the Delta variant was identified at the same time in clinical and wastewater samples. This work demonstrates the validity of wastewater surveillance for monitoring SARS-CoV-2 infections and also highlights its effectiveness in identifying circulating variants which may prove useful when sequencing capacity is limited.

Re-emergence of enterovirus D68 in Europe after easing the COVID-19 lockdown, September 2021.

We report a rapid increase in enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) infections, with 139 cases reported from eight European countries between 31 July and 14 October 2021. This upsurge is in line with the seasonality of EV-D68 and was presumably stimulated by the widespread reopening after COVID-19 lockdown. Most cases were identified in September, but more are to be expected in the coming months. Reinforcement of clinical awareness, diagnostic capacities and surveillance of EV-D68 is urgently needed in Europe.

Fetal Deaths in Ireland Due to SARS-CoV-2 Placentitis Caused by SARS-CoV-2 Alpha.

CONTEXT.­: A severe third wave of COVID-19 disease affected Ireland in the first 3 months of 2021. In this wave, 1 second-trimester miscarriage and 6 stillbirths were observed in the Irish population because of placental insufficiency as a result of SARS-CoV-2 placentitis. This observation was at odds with the country's previous experience with COVID-19 disease in pregnant mothers. OBJECTIVE.­: To describe the clinical and pathologic features of these pregnancy losses. DESIGN.­: Retrospective review of clinical and pathologic data of cases of second-trimester miscarriage, stillbirth, or neonatal death identified by perinatal pathologists as being due to SARS-CoV-2 placentitis during the third wave of COVID-19 in Ireland. RESULTS.­: Clinical and pathologic data were available for review in 6 pregnancies. Sequencing or genotyping of the virus identified SARS-CoV-2 alpha (B.1.1.7) in all cases. Three of the 6 cases had maternal thrombocytopenia, and fetal growth restriction was not prominent, suggesting a rapidly progressive placental disease. CONCLUSIONS.­: The identification of SARS-CoV-2 alpha in all these cases suggests that the emergence of the variant was associated with an increased risk of fetal death due to SARS-CoV-2 placentitis when compared with the original virus. Maternal thrombocytopenia may have potential as a clinical marker of placentitis, but other inflammatory markers need investigation. Three of the 6 women had been assessed for reduced fetal movements in hospital some days before the fetal deaths actually occurred; this could suggest that there may be a window for intervention in some cases.

The Study to Investigate COVID-19 Infection in People Living in Ireland (SCOPI): A seroprevalence study, June to July 2020.

BackgroundRobust data on SARS-CoV-2 population seroprevalence supplement surveillance data in providing evidence for public health action.AimTo conduct a SARS-CoV-2 population-based seroprevalence survey in Ireland.MethodsUsing a cross-sectional study design, we selected population samples from individuals aged 12-69 years in counties Dublin and Sligo using the Health Service Executive Primary Care Reimbursement Service database as a sampling frame. Samples were selected with probability proportional to the general population age-sex distribution, and by simple random sampling within age-sex strata. Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were detected using the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG Assay and confirmed using the Wantai Assay. We estimated the population SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence weighted for age, sex and geographic area.ResultsParticipation rates were 30% (913/3,043) and 44% (820/1,863) in Dublin and Sligo. Thirty-three specimens had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (1.9%). We estimated weighted seroprevalences of 3.12% (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.05-4.53) and 0.58% (95% CI: 0.18-1.38) for Dublin and Sligo, and 1.69% (95% CI: 1.13-2.41) nationally. This equates to an estimated 59,482 (95% CI: 39,772-85,176) people aged 12-69 years nationally having had infection with SARS-CoV-2, 3.0 (95% CI: 2.0-4.3) times higher than confirmed notifications. Ten participants reported a previous laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 -infection; eight of these were antibody-positive. Twenty-five antibody-positive participants had not reported previous laboratory-confirmed infection.ConclusionThe majority of people in Ireland are unlikely to have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 by June-July 2020. Non-pharmaceutical public health measures remained key pending widespread availability of vaccination, and effective treatments.

Genomic epidemiological analysis of SARS-CoV-2 household transmission.

Family clusters have contributed significantly to the onward spread of SARS-CoV-2. However, the dynamics of viral transmission in this setting remain incompletely understood. We describe the clinical and viral-phylogenetic characteristics of a family cluster of SARS-CoV-2 infections with a high attack rate, and explore how whole-genome sequencing (WGS) can inform outbreak investigations in this context. In this cluster, the first symptomatic case was a 22-month-old infant who developed rhinorrhoea and sneezing 2 days prior to attending a family gathering. Subsequently, seven family members in attendance at this event were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infections, including the infant described. WGS revealed indistinguishable SARS-CoV-2 genomes recovered from the adults at the gathering, which were closely related genetically to B.1 lineage viruses circulating in the local community. However, a divergent viral sub-lineage was recovered from the infant and another child, each harbouring a distinguishing spike substitution (N30S). This suggested that the infant was unlikely to be the primary case, despite displaying symptoms first, and additional analysis of her nasopharyngeal swab revealed a picornavirus co-infection to account for her early symptoms. Our findings demonstrate how WGS can elucidate the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infections within household clusters and provide useful information to support outbreak investigations. Additionally, our description of SARS-CoV-2 viral lineages and notable variants circulating in Ireland to date provides an important genomic-epidemiological baseline in the context of vaccine introduction.

SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Testing in Health Care Workers: A Comparison of the Clinical Performance of Three Commercially Available Antibody Assays.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies are an excellent indicator of past COVID-19 infection. As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, retained sensitivity over time is an important quality in an antibody assay that is to be used for the purpose of population seroprevalence studies. We compared 5,788 health care worker (HCW) serum samples by using two serological assays (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid immunoglobulin G (IgG) and Roche anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid total antibody) and a subset of samples (all Abbott assay positive or grayzone, n = 485) on Wantai SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). For 367 samples from HCW with a previous PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, we correlated the timing of infection with assay results. Overall, seroprevalence was 4.2% on Abbott and 9.5% on Roche. Of those with previously confirmed infection, 41% (150/367) and 95% (348/367) tested positive on Abbott and Roche, respectively. At 21 weeks (150 days) after confirmed infection, positivity on Abbott started to decline. Roche positivity was retained for the entire study period (33 weeks). Factors associated (P ≤ 0.050) with Abbott seronegativity in those with previous PCR-confirmed infection included sex (odds ratio [OR], 0.30 male ; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15 to 0.60), symptom severity (OR 0.19 severe symptoms; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.61), ethnicity (OR, 0.28 Asian ethnicity; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.60), and time since PCR diagnosis (OR, 2.06 for infection 6 months previously; 95% CI, 1.01 to 4.30). Wantai detected all previously confirmed infections. In our population, Roche detected antibodies up to at least 7 months after natural infection with SARS-CoV-2. This finding indicates that the Roche total antibody assay is better suited than Abbott IgG assay to population-based studies. Wantai demonstrated high sensitivity, but sample selection was biased. The relationship between serological response and functional immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection needs to be delineated. IMPORTANCE As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, retained sensitivity over time is an important quality in an antibody assay that is to be used for the purpose of population seroprevalence studies. There is a relative paucity of published literature in this field to help guide public health specialists when planning seroprevalence studies. In this study, we compared results of 5,788 health care worker blood samples tested by using two assays (Roche and Elecsys, anti-nucleocapsid antibody) and by testing a subset on a third assay (Wantai enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA] anti-spike antibody). We found significant differences in the performance of these assays, especially with distance in time from PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection, and we feel these results may significantly impact the choice of assay for others conducting similar studies.

Immunological assessment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy from diagnosis to delivery: A multicentre prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Background Population-based data on SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy and assessment of passive immunity to the neonate, is lacking. We profiled the maternal and fetal response using a combination of viral RNA from naso-pharyngeal swabs and serological assessment of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: This multicentre prospective observational study was conducted between March 24th and August 31st 2020. Two independent cohorts were established, a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 cohort and a cohort of asymptomatic pregnant women attending two of the largest maternity hospitals in Europe. Symptomatic women were invited to provide a serum sample to assess antibody responses. Asymptomatic pregnant women provided a nasopharyngeal swab and serum sample. RT-PCR for viral RNA was performed using the Cobas SARS-CoV-2 6800 platform (Roche). Umbilical cord bloods were obtained at delivery. Maternal and fetal serological response was measured using both the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay (Roche), Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG Assay and the IgM Architect assay. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants. RESULTS: Ten of twenty three symptomatic women had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected on nasopharyngeal swabs. Five (5/23, 21.7%) demonstrated serological evidence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies and seven (30.4%, 7/23) were positive for IgM antibodies. In the asymptomatic cohort, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in RNA was 0.16% (1/608). IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 1·67% (10/598, 95% CI 0·8%-3·1%) and IgM in 3·51% (21/598, 95% CI 2·3-5·5%). Nine women had repeat testing post the baseline test. Four (4/9, 44%) remained IgM positive and one remained IgG positive. 3 IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detectable in cord bloods from babies born to five seropositive women who delivered during the study. The mean gestation at serological test was 34 weeks. The mean time between maternal serologic positivity and detection in umbilical cord samples was 28 days. CONCLUSION: Using two independent serological assays, we present a comprehensive illustration of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in pregnancy, and show a low prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV2. Transplacental migration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was identified in cord blood of women who demonstrated antenatal anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, raising the possibility of passive immunity.

Review Article: vaccination for patients with inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Poor immune responses are frequently observed in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving established vaccines; risk factors include immunosuppressants and active disease. AIMS: To summarise available information regarding immune responses achieved in patients with IBD receiving established vaccines. Using this information, to identify risk factors in the IBD population related to poor vaccine-induced immunity that may be applicable to vaccines against COVID-19. METHODS: We undertook a literature review on immunity to currently recommended vaccines for patients with IBD and to COVID-19 vaccines and summarised the relevant literature. RESULTS: Patients with IBD have reduced immune responses following vaccination compared to the general population. Factors including the use of immunomodulators and anti-TNF agents reduce response rates. Patients with IBD should be vaccinated against COVID-19 at the earliest opportunity as recommended by International Advisory Committees, and vaccination should not be deferred because a patient is receiving immune-modifying therapies. Antibody titres to COVID-19 vaccines appear to be reduced in patients receiving anti-TNF therapy, especially in combination with immunomodulators after one vaccination. Therefore, we should optimise any established risk factors that could impact response to vaccination in patients with IBD before vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Ideally, patients with IBD should be vaccinated at the earliest opportunity against COVID-19. Patients should be in remission and, if possible, have their corticosteroid dose minimised before vaccination. Further research is required to determine the impact of different biologics on vaccine response to COVID-19 and the potential for booster vaccines or heterologous prime-boost vaccinations in the IBD population.

Quantifying the risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection over time.

Despite over 140 million SARS-CoV-2 infections worldwide since the beginning of the pandemic, relatively few confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection have been reported. While immunity from SARS-CoV-2 infection is probable, at least in the short term, few studies have quantified the reinfection risk. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to synthesise the evidence on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection over time. A standardised protocol was employed, based on Cochrane methodology. Electronic databases and preprint servers were searched from 1 January 2020 to 19 February 2021. Eleven large cohort studies were identified that estimated the risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection over time, including three that enrolled healthcare workers and two that enrolled residents and staff of elderly care homes. Across studies, the total number of PCR-positive or antibody-positive participants at baseline was 615,777, and the maximum duration of follow-up was more than 10 months in three studies. Reinfection was an uncommon event (absolute rate 0%-1.1%), with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time. Only one study estimated the population-level risk of reinfection based on whole genome sequencing in a subset of patients; the estimated risk was low (0.1% [95% CI: 0.08-0.11%]) with no evidence of waning immunity for up to 7 months following primary infection. These data suggest that naturally acquired SARS-CoV-2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post-infection. However, the applicability of these studies to new variants or to vaccine-induced immunity remains uncertain.

Airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via aerosols.

A key consideration in the Covid-19 pandemic is the dominant modes of transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. The objective of this review was to synthesise the evidence for the potential airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via aerosols. Systematic literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Europe PMC and National Health Service UK evidence up to 27 July 2020. A protocol was published and Cochrane guidance for rapid review methodology was adhered to throughout. Twenty-eight studies were identified. Seven out of eight epidemiological studies suggest aerosol transmission may occur, with enclosed environments and poor ventilation noted as possible contextual factors. Ten of the 16 air sampling studies detected SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid; however, only three of these studies attempted to culture the virus with one being successful in a limited number of samples. Two of four virological studies using artificially generated aerosols indicated that SARS-CoV-2 is viable in aerosols. The results of this review indicate there is inconclusive evidence regarding the viability and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in aerosols. Epidemiological studies suggest possible transmission, with contextual factors noted. Viral particles have been detected in air sampling studies with some evidence of clinical infectivity, and virological studies indicate these particles may represent live virus, adding further plausibility. However, there is uncertainty as to the nature and impact of aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, and its relative contribution to the Covid-19 pandemic compared with other modes of transmission.

Alternative clinical specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review.

The collection of nasopharyngeal swabs to test for the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an invasive technique with implications for patients and clinicians. Alternative clinical specimens from the upper respiratory tract may offer benefits in terms of collection, comfort and infection risk. The objective of this review was to synthesise the evidence for detection of SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid (RNA) using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tested saliva or nasal specimens compared with RT-PCR tested nasopharyngeal specimens. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Europe PMC and NHS evidence from December 2019 to 20 July 2020. Eighteen studies were identified; 12 for saliva, four for nasal and two included both specimen types. For saliva-based studies, the proportion of saliva samples testing positive relative to all positive samples in each study ranged from 82.9% to 100%; detection in nasopharyngeal specimens ranged from 76.7% to 100%; positive agreement between specimens for overall detection ranged from 65.4% to 100%. For nasal-based studies, the proportion of nasal swabs testing positive relative to all positive samples in each study ranged from 81.9% to 100%; detection in nasopharyngeal specimens ranged from 70% to 100%; positive agreement between specimens for overall detection ranged from 62.3% to 100%. The results indicate an inconsistency in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the specimen types included, often with neither the index nor the reference of interest detecting all known cases. Depending on the test environment, these clinical specimens may offer a viable alternative to standard. However, at present the evidence is limited, of variable quality, and relatively inconsistent.

The duration of infectiousness of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVES: To summarise the evidence on the duration of infectiousness of individuals in whom SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid is detected. METHODS: A rapid review was undertaken in PubMed, Europe PubMed Central and EMBASE from 1 January 2020 to 26 August 2020. RESULTS: We identified 15 relevant studies, including 13 virus culture and 2 contact tracing studies. For 5 virus culture studies, the last day on which SARS-CoV-2 was isolated occurred within 10 days of symptom onset. For another 5 studies, SARS-CoV-2 was isolated beyond day 10 for approximately 3% of included patients. The remaining 3 virus culture studies included patients with severe or critical disease; SARS-CoV-2 was isolated up to day 32 in one study. Two studies identified immunocompromised patients from whom SARS-CoV-2 was isolated for up to 20 days. Both contact tracing studies, when close contacts were first exposed greater than 5 days after symptom onset in the index case, found no evidence of laboratory-confirmed onward transmission of SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients with mild-to-moderate illness are highly unlikely to be infectious beyond 10 days of symptoms. However, evidence from a limited number of studies indicates that patients with severe-to-critical illness or who are immunocompromised, may shed infectious virus for longer.

Immune response following infection with SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses: A rapid review.

In this review, we systematically searched and summarized the evidence on the immune response and reinfection rate following SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also retrieved studies on SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV to assess the long-term duration of antibody responses. A protocol based on Cochrane rapid review methodology was adhered to and databases were searched from 1/1/2000 until 26/5/2020. Of 4744 citations retrieved, 102 studies met our inclusion criteria. Seventy-four studies were retrieved on SARS-CoV-2. While the rate and timing of IgM and IgG seroconversion were inconsistent across studies, most seroconverted for IgG within 2 weeks and 100% (N = 62) within 4 weeks. IgG was still detected at the end of follow-up (49-65 days) in all patients (N = 24). Neutralizing antibodies were detected in 92%-100% of patients (up to 53 days). It is not clear if reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is possible, with studies more suggestive of intermittent detection of residual RNA. Twenty-five studies were retrieved on SARS-CoV. In general, SARS-CoV-specific IgG was maintained for 1-2 years post-infection and declined thereafter, although one study detected IgG up to 12 years post-infection. Neutralizing antibodies were detected up to 17 years in another study. Three studies on MERS-CoV reported that IgG may be detected up to 2 years. In conclusion, limited early data suggest that most patients seroconvert for SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG within 2 weeks. While the long-term duration of antibody responses is unknown, evidence from SARS-CoV studies suggest SARS-CoV-specific IgG is sustained for 1-2 years and declines thereafter.