Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
J Clin Virol ; 165: 105499, 2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2328193

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of the acute respiratory disease COVID-19. In addition to the full length positive-sensed, single-stranded genomic RNA (gRNA), viral subgenomic RNAs (sgRNAs) that are required for expression of the 3' region of the genome are synthesized in virus-infected cells. However, whether these sgRNA-species might be used as a measure of active virus replication and to predict infectivity is still under debate. The commonly used methods to monitor and quantitate SARS-CoV-2 infections are based on RT-qPCR analysis and the detection of gRNA. The infectivity of a sample obtained from nasopharyngeal or throat swabs is associated with the viral load and inversely correlates with Ct-values, however, a cut-off value predicting the infectivity highly depends on the performance of the assay. Furthermore, gRNA derived Ct-values result from nucleic acid detection and do not necessarily correspond to active replicating virus. We established a multiplex RT-qPCR assay on the cobas 6800 omni utility channel concomitantly detecting SARS-CoV-2 gRNAOrf1a/b, sgRNAE,7a,N, and human RNaseP-mRNA used as human input control. We compared the target specific Ct-values with the viral culture frequency and performed ROC curve analysis to determine the assay sensitivity and specificity. We found no advantage in the prediction of viral culture when using sgRNA detection compared to gRNA only, since Ct-values for gRNA and sgRNA were highly correlated and gRNA offered a slightly more reliable predictive value. Single Ct-values alone only provide a very limited prediction for the presence of replication competent virus. Hence, careful consideration of the medical history including symptom onset has to be considered for risk stratification.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , RNA, Viral , Humans , RNA, Viral/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/diagnosis , Subgenomic RNA , Genomics , Virus Replication
2.
J Clin Med ; 12(9)2023 Apr 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2314979

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Genesis and the prognostic value of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in COVID-19 remain partially described. The objective of our study was to characterize OD during SARS-CoV-2 infection and to examine whether testing of OD may be a useful tool in clinical practice in order to early identify patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Olfactory function assessment was objectively carried out using the u-Smell-it® test. In a cross-sectional study part, we evaluated this test in a control cohort of SARS-CoV-2 negative tested patients, who attended the University Hospital Frankfurt between May 2021 and March 2022. In a second longitudinal study part, sensitivity and specificity of OD was evaluated as a diagnostic marker of a SARS-CoV-2 infection in Frankfurt am Main, Germany in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and their close contacts. RESULTS: Among 494 SARS-CoV-2 negative tested patients, OD was detected in 45.7% and was found to be significantly associated with the male gender (p < 0.001), higher age (p < 0.001), cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities (p < 0.001; p = 0.03). Among 90 COVID-19 positive patients, OD was found in 65.6% and was significantly associated with male gender and positive smoking status (p = 0.04 each). Prevalence and severity of OD were significantly increased in infections with the Delta variant (B.1.617.2) compared to those with the Omicron variant (BA.1.1.529). Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of OD for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection were 69% and 64%, respectively. CONCLUSION: OD is common in COVID-19 negative and positive tested patients with significantly different prevalence rates observed between different variants. Diagnostic accuracy of OD is not high enough to implement olfactory testing as a tool in diagnostic routine to early identify patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection.

3.
EBioMedicine ; 82: 104158, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1991006

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In recent months, Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 have become dominant in many regions of the world, and case numbers with Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.2 continue to increase. Due to numerous mutations in the spike protein, the efficacy of currently available vaccines, which are based on Wuhan-Hu 1 isolate of SARS-CoV-2, is reduced, leading to breakthrough infections. Efficacy of monoclonal antibody therapy is also likely impaired. METHODS: In our in vitro study using A549-AT cells constitutively expressing ACE2 and TMPRSS2, we determined and compared the neutralizing capacity of vaccine-elicited sera, convalescent sera and monoclonal antibodies against authentic SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 compared with Delta. FINDINGS: Almost no neutralisation of Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 was observed using sera from individuals vaccinated with two doses 6 months earlier, regardless of the type of vaccine taken. Shortly after the booster dose, most sera from triple BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals were able to neutralise both Omicron variants. In line with waning antibody levels three months after the booster, only weak residual neutralisation was observed for BA.1 (26%, n = 34, 0 median NT50) and BA.2 (44%, n = 34, 0 median NT50). In addition, BA.1 but not BA.2 was resistant to the neutralising monoclonal antibodies casirivimab/imdevimab, while BA.2 exhibited almost a complete evasion from the neutralisation induced by sotrovimab. INTERPRETATION: Both SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.2 escape antibody-mediated neutralisation elicited by vaccination, previous infection with SARS-CoV-2, and monoclonal antibodies. Waning immunity renders the majority of tested sera obtained three months after booster vaccination negative in BA.1 and BA.2 neutralisation. Omicron subvariant specific resistance to the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab emphasizes the importance of genotype-surveillance and guided application. FUNDING: This study was supported in part by the Goethe-Corona-Fund of the Goethe University Frankfurt (M.W.) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (COVIDready; grant 02WRS1621C (M.W.).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antibodies, Neutralizing/metabolism , Antibodies, Viral , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Serotherapy
4.
Sci Immunol ; 7(75): eabq2427, 2022 09 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874491

ABSTRACT

Omicron is the evolutionarily most distinct severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant of concern (VOC) to date. We report that Omicron BA.1 breakthrough infection in BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals resulted in strong neutralizing activity against Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and previous SARS-CoV-2 VOCs but not against the Omicron sublineages BA.4 and BA.5. BA.1 breakthrough infection induced a robust recall response, primarily expanding memory B (BMEM) cells against epitopes shared broadly among variants, rather than inducing BA.1-specific B cells. The vaccination-imprinted BMEM cell pool had sufficient plasticity to be remodeled by heterologous SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein exposure. Whereas selective amplification of BMEM cells recognizing shared epitopes allows for effective neutralization of most variants that evade previously established immunity, susceptibility to escape by variants that acquire alterations at hitherto conserved sites may be heightened.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Envelope Proteins , BNT162 Vaccine , Epitopes , Humans , Membrane Glycoproteins , Memory B Cells , Neutralization Tests , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Int J Infect Dis ; 118: 126-131, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1712688

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: International travel poses the risk of importing SARS-CoV-2 infections and introducing new viral variants into the country of destination. Established measures include mandatory quarantine with the opportunity to abbreviate it with a negative rapid antigen test (RAT). METHODS: A total of 1,488 returnees were tested for SARS-CoV-2 with both PCR and RAT no earlier than 5 days after arrival. We assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the RAT. Positive samples were evaluated for infectivity in vitro in a cell culture outgrowth assay. We tracked if participants who tested negative were reported positive within 2 weeks of the initial test. RESULTS: Potential infectiousness was determined based on symptom onset analysis, resulting in a sensitivity of the antigen test of 89% in terms of infectivity. The specificity was 100%. All positive outgrowth assays were preceded by a positive RAT, indicating that all participants with proven in vitro infectivity were correctly identified. None of the negative participants tested positive during the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: RAT no earlier than the 5th day after arrival was a reliable method for detecting infectious travellers and can be recommended as an appropriate method for managing SARS-CoV-2 travel restrictions. Compliance to the regulations and a high standard of test quality must be ensured.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Quarantine , Sensitivity and Specificity , Travel
6.
J Infect Dis ; 224(7): 1109-1114, 2021 10 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1470152

ABSTRACT

Whether monoclonal antibodies are able to neutralize severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern has been investigated using pseudoviruses. In this study we show that bamlanivimab, casirivimab, and imdevimab efficiently neutralize authentic SARS-CoV-2, including variant B.1.1.7 (alpha), but variants B.1.351 (beta) and P.2 (zeta) were resistant against bamlanivimab and partially resistant to casirivimab. Whether antibodies are able to neutralize severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variantshas been investigated using pseudoviruses. We show that authentic SARS-CoV-2 carrying E484K were resistant against bamlanivimab and less susceptible to casirivimab, convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Amino Acid Substitution , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Humans , Mutation, Missense , Neutralization Tests
7.
Viruses ; 13(9)2021 08 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1374534

ABSTRACT

The capacity of convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera and monoclonal antibodies (mAb) to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 variants is currently of high relevance to assess the protection against infections. We performed a cell culture-based neutralization assay focusing on authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.617.1 (Kappa), B.1.617.2 (Delta), B.1.427/B.1.429 (Epsilon), all harboring the spike substitution L452R. We found that authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants harboring L452R had reduced susceptibility to convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera and mAbs. Compared to B.1, Kappa and Delta showed a reduced neutralization by convalescent sera by a factor of 8.00 and 5.33, respectively, which constitutes a 2-fold greater reduction when compared to Epsilon. BNT2b2 and mRNA1273 vaccine-elicited sera were less effective against Kappa, Delta, and Epsilon compared to B.1. No difference was observed between Kappa and Delta towards vaccine-elicited sera, whereas convalescent sera were 1.51-fold less effective against Delta, respectively. Both B.1.617 variants Kappa (+E484Q) and Delta (+T478K) were less susceptible to either casirivimab or imdevimab. In conclusion, in contrast to the parallel circulating Kappa variant, the neutralization efficiency of convalescent and vaccine-elicited sera against Delta was moderately reduced. Delta was resistant to imdevimab, which, however, might be circumvented by combination therapy with casirivimab together.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Mutation , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Alleles , Amino Acid Substitution , Cell Line , Genotype , Host-Pathogen Interactions , Humans , Neutralization Tests
8.
Microorganisms ; 9(4)2021 Apr 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1167666

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: International travel is a major driver of the introduction and spread of SARS-CoV-2. AIM: To investigate SARS-CoV-2 genetic diversity in the region of a major transport hub in Germany, we characterized the viral sequence diversity of the SARS-CoV-2 variants circulating in Frankfurt am Main, the city with the largest airport in Germany, from the end of October to the end of December 2020. METHODS: In total, we recovered 136 SARS-CoV-2 genomes from nasopharyngeal swab samples. We isolated 104 isolates that were grown in cell culture and RNA from the recovered viruses and subjected them to full-genome sequence analysis. In addition, 32 nasopharyngeal swab samples were directly sequenced. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: We found 28 different lineages of SARS-CoV-2 circulating during the study period, including the variant of concern B.1.1.7 (Δ69/70, N501Y). Six of the lineages had not previously been observed in Germany. We detected the spike protein (S) deletion Δ69/Δ70 in 15% of all sequences, a four base pair (bp) deletion (in 2.9% of sequences) and a single bp deletion (in 0.7% of sequences) in ORF3a, leading to ORF3a truncations. In four sequences (2.9%), an amino acid deletion at position 210 in S was identified. In a single sample (0.7%), both a 9 bp deletion in ORF1ab and a 7 bp deletion in ORF7a were identified. One sequence in lineage B.1.1.70 had an N501Y substitution while lacking the Δ69/70 in S. The high diversity of sequences observed over two months in Frankfurt am Main highlights the persisting need for continuous SARS-CoV-2 surveillance using full-genome sequencing, particularly in cities with international airport connections.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL