Performance of the LIAISON® SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Assay vs. SARS-CoV-2-RT-PCR.

We aimed to evaluate the LIAISON® SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay (DiaSorin), comparing its performance to real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. 182 (110 PCR-positive and 72 PCR-negative) nasopharyngeal swab samples were taken for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. RT-PCR and antigen assay were performed using the same material. The sensitivity and specificity of the antigen assay were calculated for different cut-offs, with RT-PCR serving as the reference method. Stored clinical samples that were positive for other respiratory viruses were tested to evaluate cross-reactivity. One third (33/110, 30%) were falsely classified as negative, while no false positives were found using the 200 TCID50/mL cut-off for the SARS-CoV-2 antigen as proposed by the manufacturer. This corresponded to a sensitivity of 70% (60-78%) and a specificity of 100% (94-100%). Lowering the cut-off for positivity of the antigen assay to 22.79 or 57.68 TCID50/mL increased the sensitivity of the method, reaching a sensitivity of 92% (85-96%) vs. 79% (70-86%) and a specificity of 81% (69-89%) vs. 99% (91-100%), respectively. The antigen assay reliably detected samples with high SARS-CoV-2 viral loads (≥106 copies SARS-CoV-2/mL), while it cannot differentiate between negative and low positive samples. Cross-reactivity toward other respiratory viruses was not detected.

COVID-19 vaccination in psoriasis patients receiving systemic treatment: A prospective single-center study.

Background: The rate of seroconversion after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis requiring systemic treatment is poorly understood. Objectives: The aim of this prospective single-center cohort study performed between May 2020 and October 2021 was to determine the rate of seroconversion after COVID-19 vaccination in patients under active systemic treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis. Methods: Inclusion criteria were systemic treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis, known COVID-19 vaccination status, and repetitive anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG serum quantification. The primary outcome was the rate of anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG seroconversion after complete COVID-19 vaccination. Results: 77 patients with a median age of 55.9 years undergoing systemic treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis were included. The majority of patients received interleukin- (n=50, 64.9%) or tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors (n=16, 20.8%) as systemic treatment for psoriasis; nine patients (11.7%) were treated with methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy, and one patient each received dimethyl fumarate (1.3%), respectively apremilast (1.3%). All included patients completed COVID-19 vaccination with two doses over the course of the study. Serum testing revealed that 74 patients (96.1%) showed an anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG seroconversion. While all patients on IL-17A, -12 or -12/23 inhibitors (n=50) achieved seroconversion, three of 16 patients (18.8%) receiving MTX and/or a TNF-α inhibitor as main anti-psoriatic treatment did not. At follow-up, none of the patients had developed symptomatic COVID-19 or died from COVID-19. Conclusions: Anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG seroconversion rates following COVID-19 vaccination in psoriasis patients under systemic treatment were high. An impaired serological response, however, was observed in patients receiving MTX and/or TNF-α inhibitors, in particular infliximab.

COVID-19 vaccination in advanced skin cancer patients receiving systemic anticancer treatment: A prospective singlecenter study investigating seroconversion rates.

Background: COVID-19 vaccination reduces risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 severity and death. However, the rate of seroconversion after COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients requiring systemic anticancer treatment is poorly investigated. The aim of the present study was to determine the rate of seroconversion after COVID-19 vaccination in advanced skin cancer patients under active systemic anticancer treatment. Methods: This prospective single-center study of a consecutive sample of advanced skin cancer patients was performed from May 2020 until October 2021. Inclusion criteria were systemic treatment for advanced skin cancer, known COVID-19 vaccination status, repetitive anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG serum quantification and first and second COVID-19 vaccination. Primary outcome was the rate of anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG seroconversion after complete COVID-19 vaccination. Results: Of 60 patients with advanced skin cancers, 52 patients (86.7%) received immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI), seven (11.7%) targeted agents (TT), one (1.7%) chemotherapy. Median follow-up time was 12.7 months. During study progress ten patients had died from skin cancer prior to vaccination completion, six patients were lost to follow-up and three patients had refused vaccination. 41 patients completed COVID-19 vaccination with two doses and known serological status. Of those, serum testing revealed n=3 patients (7.3%) as anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG positive prior to vaccination, n=32 patients (78.0%) showed a seroconversion, n=6 patients (14.6%) did not achieve a seroconversion. Patients failing serological response were immunocompromised due to concomitant hematological malignancy, previous chemotherapy or autoimmune disease requiring immunosuppressive comedications. Immunosuppressive comedication due to severe adverse events of ICI therapy did not impair seroconversion following COVID-19 vaccination. Of 41 completely vaccinated patients, 35 (85.4%) were under treatment with ICI, five (12.2%) with TT, and one (2.4%) with chemotherapy. 27 patients (65.9%) were treated non adjuvantly. Of these patients, 13 patients had achieved objective response (complete/partial response) as best tumor response (48.2%). Conclusion and relevance: Rate of anti-SARS-CoV-2-S IgG seroconversion in advanced skin cancer patients under systemic anticancer treatment after complete COVID-19 vaccination is comparable to other cancer entities. An impaired serological response was observed in patients who were immunocompromised due to concomitant diseases or previous chemotherapies. Immunosuppressive comedication due to severe adverse events of ICI did not impair the serological response to COVID-19 vaccination.

Discrepancy between frequent occurrence of COVID-19-like symptoms and low seroconversion rates among healthcare workers.

During the first wave of the pandemic, we compared the occurrence of subjectively experienced COVID-19-like symptoms and true severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seroconversion rates among medical personnel in general practices. This cross-sectional study determined the SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody status of medical staff from 100 outpatient practices in Germany. Study cohort characteristics and COVID-19-like symptoms were obtained by questionnaires. The initial screening for SARS-CoV-2-recognizing antibodies was performed using a commercial chemiluminescence microparticle immunoassay. Positive results were controlled with another approved test. Samples with discrepant results were subjected to a third IgG-binding assay and a neutralization test. A total of 861 participants were included, 1.7% (n = 15) of whom tested positive for SARS-CoV-specific IgG in the initial screening test. In 46.6% (n = 7) of positive cases, test results were confirmed by an independent test. In the eight samples with discrepant results, neither spike-specific antibodies nor in vitro neutralizing capacity were detectable, resulting in a genuine seroprevalence rate of 0.8%. 794 participants completed the questionnaire. Intriguingly, a total of 53.7% (n = 426) of them stated episodes of COVID-19-like symptoms. Except for smell and taste dysfunction, there were no significant differences between the groups with and without laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion. Our results demonstrated that only 0.8% of participants acquired SARS-CoV-2 even though 53.7% of participants reportedly experienced COVID-19-like symptoms. Thus, even among medical staff, self-diagnosis based on subjectively experienced symptoms does not have a relevant predictive value.

Observational cohort study of neurological involvement among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: A growing number of reports suggest that infection with SARS-CoV-2 often leads to neurological involvement; however, data on the incidence and severity are limited to mainly case reports and retrospective studies. METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional study of 102 SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients investigated the frequency, type, severity and risk factors as well as underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of neurological involvement (NIV) in COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: Across the cohort, 59.8% of patients had NIV. Unspecific NIV was suffered by 24.5%, mainly general weakness and cognitive decline or delirium. Mild NIV was found in 9.8%; most commonly, impaired taste or smell. Severe NIV was present in 23.5%; half of these suffered cerebral ischaemia. Incidence of NIV increased with respiratory symptoms of COVID-19. Mortality was higher with increasing NIV severity. Notably, 83.3% with severe NIV had a pre-existing neurological co-morbidity. All cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples were negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and SARS-CoV-2 antibody quotient did not suggest intrathecal antibody synthesis. Of the patients with severe NIV, 50% had blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption and showed a trend of elevated interleukin levels in CSF. Antibodies against neuronal and glial epitopes were detected in 35% of the patients tested. CONCLUSION: Cerebrovascular events were the most frequent severe NIV and severe NIV was associated with high mortality. Incidence of NIV increased with respiratory symptoms and NIV and pre-existing neurological morbidities were independent risk factors for fatality. Inflammatory involvement due to BBB disruption and cytokine release drives NIV, rather than direct viral invasion. These findings might help physicians define a further patient group requiring particular attention during the pandemic.

Common respiratory viral infections: Bilateral versus unilateral bronchoalveolar lavage versus endotracheal aspiration.

Data about the diagnostic efficiency of bilateral bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples and endotracheal aspirates (EA) testing for common viral respiratory infections are scarce. We analyzed data from 167 cases, where bilateral BAL samples were tested, and from 101 cases, where BAL samples and EA were tested. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed with the fast track diagnostics viral respiratory panel, producing data on the adenovirus, coronavirus, enterovirus, human metapneumovirus, bocavirus, influenza virus, parainfluenza virus, rhinovirus, and respiratory syncytial virus status of patients with respiratory disease symptoms. In the bilateral BAL cohort, 46 (27.5%) cases were positive for at least one of the viruses mentioned above in both samples. Discrepant results (virus not detected on one side) were seen in six (3.6%) cases. In the BAL versus EA cohort, 12 (11.9%) cases were positive in both materials, discrepant results (only one material being positive) were observed in 11 (10.9%) cases, with seven (63.6%) BAL samples, and four (36.4%) EA being positive. Bilateral sampling does not significantly improve the diagnostic efficiency of BAL for the detection of common respiratory viral pathogens via PCR. The diagnostic quality of EA and BAL samples for the detection of common viral respiratory pathogens is comparable.