Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 5418, 2022 03 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1768847

ABSTRACT

To explore the potential modes of Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission, we collected 535 diverse clinical and environmental samples from 75 infected hospitalized and community patients. Infectious SARS-CoV-2 with quantitative burdens varying from 5 plaque-forming units/mL (PFU/mL) up to 1.0 × 106 PFU/mL was detected in 151/459 (33%) of the specimens assayed and up to 1.3 × 106 PFU/mL on fomites with confirmation by plaque morphology, PCR, immunohistochemistry, and/or sequencing. Infectious virus in clinical and associated environmental samples correlated with time since symptom onset with no detection after 7-8 days in immunocompetent hosts and with N-gene based Ct values ≤ 25 significantly predictive of yielding plaques in culture. SARS-CoV-2 isolated from patient respiratory tract samples caused illness in a hamster model with a minimum infectious dose of ≤ 14 PFU. Together, our findings offer compelling evidence that large respiratory droplet and contact (direct and indirect i.e., fomites) are important modes of SARS-CoV-2 transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Respiratory System , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
2.
J Appl Lab Med ; 7(4): 834-841, 2022 06 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1730685

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests have great potential to help combat the COVID-19 pandemic. In the performance of a rapid, antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 test (RAT), our study had 3 main objectives: to determine the accuracy of nasal swabs, the accuracy of using nasopharyngeal swabs for nasal collection (nasalNP), and the effectiveness of using residual extraction buffer for real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) confirmation of positive RAT (rPan). METHODS: Symptomatic adults recently diagnosed with COVID-19 in the community were recruited into the study. Nasal samples were collected using either a nasalNP or nasal swab and tested immediately with the RAT in the individual's home by a health care provider. 500 µL of universal transport media was added to the residual extraction buffer after testing and sent to the laboratory for SARS-CoV-2 testing using RT-PCR. Parallel throat swabs tested with RT-PCR were used as the reference comparators. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-five individuals were included in the study (99 nasal swabs, 56 nasalNP). Sensitivities of nasal samples tested on the RAT using either nasal or nasalNP were 89.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 80.7%-94.6%] and 90.2% (95% CI 78.6%-96.7%), respectively. rPan positivity agreement compared to throat RT-PCR was 96.2%. CONCLUSIONS: RAT reliably detect SARS-CoV-2 from symptomatic adults in the community presenting within 7 days of symptom onset using nasal swabs or nasalNP. High agreement with rPan can avoid the need for collecting a second swab for RT-PCR confirmation or testing of variants of concern from positive RAT in this population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Nasopharynx , Pandemics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
3.
J Med Microbiol ; 70(7)2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1324847

ABSTRACT

Introduction. The ID NOW is FDA approved for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic individuals within the first 7 days of symptom onset for COVID-19 if tested within 1 h of specimen collection.Gap statement. Clinical data on the performance of the ID NOW are limited, with many studies varying in their study design and/or having small sample size.Aim. In this study we aimed to determine the clinical performance of the ID NOW compared to conventional RT-PCR testing.Methodology. Adults with COVID-19 in the community or hospital were recruited into the study. Paired throat swabs were collected, with one throat swab transported immediately in an empty sterile tube to the laboratory for ID NOW testing, and the other transported in universal transport media and tested by an in-house SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay targeting the E gene.Results. In total, 133 individuals were included in the study; 129 samples were positive on either the ID NOW and/or RT-PCR. Assuming any positive result on either assay represents a true positive, positive per cent agreement (PPA) of the ID NOW compared to RT-PCR with 95 % confidence intervals was 89.1 % (82.0-94.1%) and 91.6 % (85.1-95.9%), respectively. When analysing individuals with symptom duration ≤7 days and who had the ID NOW performed within 1 h (n=62), ID NOW PPA increased to 98.2 %.Conclusion. Results from the ID NOW were reliable, especially when adhering to the manufacturer's recommendations for testing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Adult , False Negative Reactions , False Positive Reactions , Female , Humans , Male , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques , Reproducibility of Results , Time Factors
4.
J Assoc Med Microbiol Infect Dis Can ; 6(1): 16-22, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1234644

ABSTRACT

Background: The recent emergence and rapid global spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) demonstrates the urgent need for laboratory-developed assays for clinical diagnosis and public health interventions in the absence of commercial assays. Methods: We outline the progression of reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays that were developed and validated at the Alberta Precision Laboratories, Public Health Laboratory, Alberta, Canada, to respond to this pandemic. Initially, testing was performed using SARS-CoV-2-specific and pan-coronavirus gel-based assays that were soon superseded by real-time RT-PCR assays targeting the envelope and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase genes to accommodate the high anticipated volumes of samples. Throughput was further enhanced by multiplexing the different targets together with the co-detection of an internal extraction control. Results: These assays are comparable in sensitivity and specificity to the assays recommended by the World Health Organization and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Conclusions: The availability of real-time RT-PCR assays early in the pandemic was essential to provide valuable time to local health authorities to contain transmission and prepare for appropriate response strategies.


Historique: La récente émergence et la propagation mondiale rapide du coronavirus 2 du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère (SARS-CoV-2) a démontré l'urgence de créer des dosages en laboratoire pour poser un diagnostic clinique et adopter des interventions sanitaires en l'absence de dosages commerciaux. Méthodologie: Les chercheurs exposent la progression des dosages d'amplification en chaîne par polymérase couplée à la transcriptase inverse (RT-PCR) mis au point et validés par les Alberta Precision Laboratories du Laboratoire de santé publique de l'Alberta, au Canada, pour répondre à cette pandémie. Les tests ont d'abord été effectués au moyen de dosages sur gel spécifiques au SARS-CoV-2 ou décelant tous les coronavirus, mais ont vite été remplacés par des dosages RT-PCR en temps réel ciblant l'enveloppe et les gènes d'ARN polymérase sous la dépendance d'ARN pour répondre au fort volume anticipé d'échantillons. Le criblage a également été renforcé par le multiplexage conjoint des différentes cibles et la codétection d'un contrôle d'extraction interne. Résultats: Ces dosages ont une sensibilité et une spécificité comparables à ceux recommandés par l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé et les Centers for Disease Control and Prevention des États-Unis. Conclusions: Il était essentiel de disposer de dosages RT-PCR au début de la pandémie pour que les autorités sanitaires locales puissent profiter de temps précieux pour contenir la transmission et préparer les stratégies de réponse appropriées.

5.
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis ; 40(8): 1721-1726, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1141451

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests used at the point-of-care, such as the Abbott Panbio, have great potential to help combat the COVID-19 pandemic. The Panbio is Health Canada approved for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic individuals within the first 7 days of COVID-19 symptom onset(s). Symptomatic adults recently diagnosed with COVID-19 in the community were recruited into the study. Paired nasopharyngeal (NP), throat, and saliva swabs were collected, with one paired swab tested immediately with the Panbio, and the other transported in universal transport media and tested using real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). We also prospectively evaluated results from assessment centers within the community. For those individuals, an NP swab was collected for Panbio testing and paired with RT-PCR results from parallel NP or throat swabs. One hundred and forty-five individuals were included in the study. Collection of throat and saliva was stopped early due to poorer performance (throat sensitivity 57.7%, n=61, and saliva sensitivity 2.6%, n=41). NP swab sensitivity was 87.7% [n=145, 95% confidence interval (CI) 81.0-92.7%]. There were 1641 symptomatic individuals tested by Panbio in assessment centers with 268/1641 (16.3%) positive for SARS-CoV-2. There were 37 false negatives and 2 false positives, corresponding to a sensitivity and specificity of 86.1% [95% CI 81.3-90.0%] and 99.9% [95% CI 99.5-100.0%], respectively. The Panbio test reliably detects most cases of SARS-CoV-2 from adults in the community setting presenting within 7 days of symptom onset using nasopharyngeal swabs. Throat and saliva swabs are not reliable specimens for the Panbio.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Nasopharynx/virology , Pharynx/virology , Saliva/virology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Canada , False Negative Reactions , False Positive Reactions , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Sensitivity and Specificity , Specimen Handling
7.
J Clin Microbiol ; 58(8)2020 Jul 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-999210

ABSTRACT

An outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by a novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]) began in Wuhan, Hubei, China, in December 2019 and spread rapidly worldwide. The response by the Alberta Precision Laboratories, Public Health Laboratory (ProvLab), AB, Canada, included the development and implementation of nucleic acid detection-based assays and dynamic changes in testing protocols for the identification of cases as the epidemic curve increased exponentially. This rapid response was essential to slow down and contain transmission and provide valuable time to the local health authorities to prepare appropriate response strategies. As of May 24, 2020, 236,077 specimens were tested, with 6,475 (2.74%) positives detected in the province of Alberta, Canada. Several commercial assays are now available; however, the response from commercial vendors to develop and market validated tests is a time-consuming process. In addition, the massive global demand made it difficult to secure a reliable commercial supply of testing kits and reagents. A public health laboratory serves a unique and important role in the delivery of health care. One of its functions is to anticipate and prepare for novel emerging pathogens with a plan for pandemic preparedness. Here, we outline the response that involved the development and deployment of testing methodologies that evolved as SARS-CoV-2 spread worldwide, the challenges encountered, and mitigation strategies. We also provide insight into the organizational structure of how a public health response is coordinated in Alberta, Canada, and its benefits.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Diagnostic Services/organization & administration , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Public Health Administration/methods , Alberta , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL