Antigen rapid tests, nasopharyngeal PCR and saliva PCR to detect SARS-CoV-2: A prospective comparative clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Nasopharyngeal antigen Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs), saliva RT-PCR and nasopharyngeal (NP) RT-PCR have shown different performance characteristics to detect patients infected by SARS-CoV-2, according to the viral load (VL)-and thus transmissibility. METHODS: In October 2020, we conducted a prospective trial involving patients presenting at testing centres with symptoms of COVID-19. We compared detection rates and performance of RDT, saliva PCR and nasopharyngeal (NP) PCR, according to VL and symptoms duration. RESULTS: Out of 949 patients enrolled, 928 patients had all three tests performed. Detection rates were 35.2% (95%CI 32.2-38.4%) by RDT, 39.8% (36.6-43.0%) by saliva PCR, 40.1% (36.9-43.3%) by NP PCR, and 41.5% (38.3-44.7%) by any test. For those with viral loads (VL) ≥106 copies/ml, detection rates were 30.3% (27.3-33.3), 31.4% (28.4-34.5), 31.5% (28.5-34.6), and 31.6% (28.6-34.7%) respectively. Sensitivity of RDT compared to NP PCR was 87.4% (83.6-90.6%) for all positive patients, 94.5% (91.5-96.7%) for those with VL≥105 and 96.5% (93.6-98.3%) for those with VL≥106. Sensitivity of STANDARD-Q®, Panbio™ and COVID-VIRO® Ag tests were 92.9% (86.4-96.9%), 86.1% (78.6-91.7%) and 84.1% (76.9-89.7%), respectively. For those with VL≥106, sensitivity was 96.6% (90.5-99.3%), 97.8% (92.1-99.7%) and 95.3% (89.4-98.5%) respectively. No patient with VL<104 was detected by RDT. Specificity of RDT was 100% (99.3-100%) compared to any PCR. RDT sensitivity was similar <4 days (87.8%, 83.5-91.3%) and ≥4 days (85.7%, 75.9-92.6%) after symptoms onset (p = 0.6). Sensitivity of saliva and NP PCR were 95.7% (93.1-97.5%) and 96.5% (94.1-98.1%), respectively, compared to the other PCR. CONCLUSIONS: RDT results allow rapid identification of COVID cases with immediate isolation of most contagious individuals. RDT can thus be a game changer both in ambulatory care and community testing aimed at stopping transmission chains, and even more so in resource-constrained settings thanks to its very low price. When PCR is performed, saliva could replace NP swabbing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT04613310 (03/11/2020).

Swiss public health measures associated with reduced SARS-CoV-2 transmission using genome data.

Genome sequences from evolving infectious pathogens allow quantification of case introductions and local transmission dynamics. We sequenced 11,357 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) genomes from Switzerland in 2020 - the sixth largest effort globally. Using a representative subset of these data, we estimated viral introductions to Switzerland and their persistence over the course of 2020. We contrasted these estimates with simple null models representing the absence of certain public health measures. We show that Switzerland's border closures de-coupled case introductions from incidence in neighboring countries. Under a simple model, we estimate an 86-98% reduction in introductions during Switzerland's strictest border closures. Furthermore, the Swiss 2020 partial lockdown roughly halved the time for sampled introductions to die out. Last, we quantified local transmission dynamics once introductions into Switzerland occurred, using a phylodynamic model. We found that transmission slowed 35-63% upon outbreak detection in summer 2020, but not in fall. This finding may indicate successful contact tracing over summer before overburdening in fall. The study highlights the added value of genome sequencing data for understanding transmission dynamics.

SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody response in vaccinated and non-vaccinated hospital healthcare workers with or without history of infection.

Between March 2021 and February 2022, SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies dynamics was investigated in a prospective observational study in 903 healthcare workers of a hospital in Switzerland. A surrogate neutralization assay measuring the competitive inhibition of the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) binding to the spike protein (S) of the SARS-CoV-2 wild type virus and to five variants of concern (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Omicron) was used. We observed a broad distribution of neutralization activity among participants and substantial differences in neutralizing titers against variants. Participants were grouped based on combinations of vaccination status (1, 2 or 3 doses) and/or prior or subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection/reinfection. Triple vaccination resulted in the highest neutralization response, as did double vaccination with prior or subsequent infection. Double vaccination without infection showed an intermediate neutralization response while SARS-CoV-2 infection in non-vaccinated participants resulted in poor neutralization response. After triple vaccination or double vaccination plus infection, additional vaccination and/or reinfection had no impact on neutralizing antibody titers over the observed period. These results strongly support the booster dose strategy, while additional booster doses within short time intervals might not improve immunization. However, dynamics of neutralizing antibodies titers needs to be monitored individually, over time and include newly emerging variants.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection clusters: The useful combination of spatiotemporal clustering and genomic analyses.

Background: The need for effective public health surveillance systems to track virus spread for targeted interventions was highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic. It spurred an interest in the use of spatiotemporal clustering and genomic analyses to identify high-risk areas and track the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, these two approaches are rarely combined in surveillance systems to complement each one's limitations; spatiotemporal clustering approaches usually consider only one source of virus transmission (i.e., the residential setting) to detect case clusters, while genomic studies require significant resources and processing time that can delay decision-making. Here, we clarify the differences and possible synergies of these two approaches in the context of infectious disease surveillance systems by investigating to what extent geographically-defined clusters are confirmed as transmission clusters based on genome sequences, and how genomic-based analyses can improve the epidemiological investigations associated with spatiotemporal cluster detection. Methods: For this purpose, we sequenced the SARS-CoV-2 genomes of 172 cases that were part of a collection of spatiotemporal clusters found in a Swiss state (Vaud) during the first epidemic wave. We subsequently examined intra-cluster genetic similarities and spatiotemporal distributions across virus genotypes. Results: Our results suggest that the congruence between the two approaches might depend on geographic features of the area (rural/urban) and epidemic context (e.g., lockdown). We also identified two potential superspreading events that started from cases in the main urban area of the state, leading to smaller spreading events in neighboring regions, as well as a large spreading in a geographically-isolated area. These superspreading events were characterized by specific mutations assumed to originate from Mulhouse and Milan, respectively. Our analyses propose synergistic benefits of using two complementary approaches in public health surveillance, saving resources and improving surveillance efficiency.

Comparison of Nasopharyngeal and Saliva Swab Nucleic Acid Amplification and Rapid Antigen Testing To Detect Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern: a Prospective Clinical Trial (OMICRON).

In November 2021, the World Health Organization declared the Omicron variant (B.1.1.519) a variant of concern. Since then, worries have been expressed regarding the ability of usual diagnostic tests to detect the Omicron variant. In addition, some recently published data suggested that the salivary reverse transcription (RT)-PCR might perform better than the current gold standard, nasopharyngeal (NP) RT-PCR. In this study, we aimed to compare the sensitivities of nasopharyngeal and saliva RT-PCR and assess the diagnostic performances of rapid antigen testing (RAT) in nasopharyngeal and saliva samples. We conducted a prospective clinical study among symptomatic health care professionals consulting the occupational health service of our hospital for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) screening and hospitalized patients in internal medicine/intensive care wards screened for SARS-CoV-2 with COVID-19-compatible symptoms. A composite outcome considering NP PCR and/or saliva PCR was used as a reference standard to define COVID-19 cases. A total of 475 paired NP/saliva specimens have been collected with a positivity rate of 40% (n = 192). NP and salivary RT-PCR exhibited sensitivities of 98% (95% CI, 94 to 99%) and 87% (95% CI, 81 to 91%), respectively, for outpatients (n = 453) and 94% (95% CI, 72 to 99%) and 69% (95% CI, 44 to 86%), respectively, for hospitalized patients (n = 22). Nasopharyngeal rapid antigen testing exhibited much lower diagnostic performances (sensitivity of 66% and 31% for outpatients and inpatients, respectively), while saliva RAT showed a sensitivity of less than 5% in both groups. Nasopharyngeal RT-PCR testing remains the gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant screening. Salivary RT-PCR can be used as an alternative in case of contraindication to perform NP sampling. The use of RAT should be limited to settings where access to molecular diagnostic methods is lacking. IMPORTANCE The Omicron variant of concern spread rapidly since it was first reported in November 2021 and currently accounts for the vast majority of new infections worldwide. Recent reports suggest that saliva sampling might outweigh nasopharyngeal sampling for the diagnosis of the Omicron variant. Nevertheless, data investigating the best diagnostic strategy specifically for the Omicron variant of concern remain scarce. This study fills this gap in current knowledge and elucidates the question of which strategy to use in which patient. It provides a new basis for further improving COVID-19 screening programs and managing patients suspected to have COVID-19.

Antibody response and intra-host viral evolution after plasma therapy in COVID-19 patients pre-exposed or not to B-cell-depleting agents.

Administration of plasma therapy may contribute to viral control and survival of COVID-19 patients receiving B-cell-depleting agents that impair humoral immunity. However, little is known on the impact of anti-CD20 pre-exposition on the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Here, we evaluated the relationship between anti-spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) kinetics and the clinical status or intra-host viral evolution after plasma therapy in 36 eligible hospitalized COVID-19 patients, pre-exposed or not to B-cell-depleting treatments. The majority of anti-CD20 pre-exposed patients (14/17) showed progressive declines of anti-spike IgG titres following plasma therapy, contrasting with the 4/19 patients who had not received B-cell-depleting agents (p = 0.0006). Patients with antibody decay also depicted prolonged clinical symptoms according to the World Health Organization (WHO) severity classification (p = 0.0267) and SARS-CoV-2 viral loads (p = 0.0032) before complete virus clearance. Moreover, they had higher mutation rates than patients able to mount an endogenous humoral response (p = 0.015), including three patients with one to four spike mutations, potentially associated with immune escape. No relevant differences were observed between patients treated with plasma from convalescent and/or mRNA-vaccinated donors. Our study emphasizes the need for an individualized clinical care and follow-up in the management of COVID-19 patients with B-cell lymphopenia.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in hospital healthcare workers in Western Switzerland at the end of the second pandemic wave.

Introduction. In early January 2020, the pandemic of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) rapidly spread from China and caused a worldwide pandemic.Hypothesis. Healthcare workers represent a high-risk group for acquiring COVID-19 and for nosocomial transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Aim. We aimed to investigate over a 1 year period, across two pandemic waves, the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in employees at a Western Switzerland public hospital.Methodology. A prospective observational SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence study was proposed to all hospital employees who enrolled on a voluntary basis.Results. Out of 594 participants recruited on a voluntary basis, 269 volunteers (45.3 %) had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: this seroprevalence was twice higher than that reported in the local community. Healthcare workers with prolonged exposure to patients with COVID-19 showed a significantly higher odds ratio (OR) of having a positive SARS-CoV-2 serology [OR 3.19, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.16-4.74]. Symptoms showing the highest association with a positive serology were anosmia (OR 11.9, 95 % CI 5.58-30.9) and ageusia (OR 10.3, 95 % CI 4.8-26.3). A total of 17.1 % (95 % CI 12.2-21.1 %) of SARS-CoV-2 seropositive volunteers did not report a suspicion of COVID-19 in their personal history.Conclusion. Overall, we observed that the impact of the second SARS-CoV-2 pandemic wave was considerable and significantly affected healthcare workers with prolonged exposure to patients with COVID-19.

Multifocal lymphadenopathies with polyclonal reactions primed after EBV infection in a mRNA-1273 vaccine recipient.

We report a case of recurrent tender, multifocal lymphadenopathies associated with B-symptoms, clinically mimicking lymphoma in a mRNA-1273 vaccine recipient after a recent Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection. In the lymph node biopsy, monocytoid B-cell hyperplasia, TH2 (GATA3+) predominance, and hyperplasia of interferon-gamma-producing plasmacytoid dendritic cells were observed along with sustained neutralising antibody production against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and five variants. High titres of anti-S antibodies and neutralising antibodies were observed, excepted for variant B.1.529** (omicron) and B.1.351** (beta), due to several mutations in the spike protein, including the E484K mutation. We postulated that EBV acted as an immunological enhancer with the mRNA-1273 vaccine, inducing a sustained inflammatory response over several weeks. However, the polyclonal nature of the lymphadenopathy with polytypic plasmacytosis and pseudo-tumoural reaction cell hyperplasia were associated with failure to mount acute phase responses.

Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 tests costs and reimbursement tariffs readjustments during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: While laboratories have been facing limited supplies of reagents for diagnostic tests throughout the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, national and international health plans, as well as billing costs, have been constantly adjusted in order to optimize the use of resources. We aimed to assess the impact of SARS-CoV-2 test costs and reimbursement tariff adjustments on diagnostic strategies in Switzerland to determine the advantages and disadvantages of different costs and resource saving plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We specifically assessed the cost of diagnostic SARS-COV-2 RT-PCR using five different approaches: i) in-house platform, ii) cobas 6800® (Roche, Basel, Switzerland), iii) GeneXpert® SARS-CoV-2 test (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA), iv) VIASURE SARS-CoV-2 (N1 + N2) Real-Time PCR Detection Kit for BD MAX™ (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lake, NJ, USA), v) cobas® Liat® SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B (Roche, Basel, Switzerland). We compared these costs to the evolution of the reimbursement tariffs. RESULTS: The cost of a single RT-PCR test varied greatly (as did the volume of tests performed), ranging from as high as 180 CHF per test at the beginning of the pandemic (February to April 2020) to as low as 82 CHF per test at the end of 2020. Depending on the time period within the pandemic, higher costs did not necessarily mean greater benefits for the laboratories. The costs of molecular reagents for rapid tests were higher than of those for classic RT-PCR platforms, but the rapid tests had reduced turnaround times (TATs), thus improving patient care and enabling more efficient implementation of isolation measures, as well as reducing the burden of possible nosocomial infections. At the same time, there were periods when the production or distribution of these reagents was insufficient, and only the use of several different molecular platforms allowed us to sustain the high number of tests requested. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-saving plans need to be thoroughly assessed and constantly adjusted according to the epidemiological situation, the clinical context and the national resources in order to always guarantee that the highest performing diagnostic solutions are available. Not all cost-saving strategies guarantee good analytical performance.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Titers Predict the Severity of COVID-19.

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.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Titers Predict the Severity of COVID-19

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.

Mycoplasma pneumoniae detections before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: results of a global survey, 2017 to 2021.

BackgroundMycoplasma pneumoniae respiratory infections are transmitted by aerosol and droplets in close contact.AimWe investigated global M. pneumoniae incidence after implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) against COVID-19 in March 2020.MethodsWe surveyed M. pneumoniae detections from laboratories and surveillance systems (national or regional) across the world from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021 and compared them with cases from corresponding months between 2017 and 2020. Macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae (MRMp) data were collected from 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2021.ResultsThirty-seven sites from 21 countries in Europe, Asia, America and Oceania submitted valid datasets (631,104 tests). Among the 30,617 M. pneumoniae detections, 62.39% were based on direct test methods (predominantly PCR), 34.24% on a combination of PCR and serology (no distinction between methods) and 3.37% on serology alone (only IgM considered). In all countries, M. pneumoniae incidence by direct test methods declined significantly after implementation of NPIs with a mean of 1.69% (SD ± 3.30) compared with 8.61% (SD ± 10.62) in previous years (p < 0.01). Detection rates decreased with direct but not with indirect test methods (serology) (-93.51% vs + 18.08%; p < 0.01). Direct detections remained low worldwide throughout April 2020 to March 2021 despite widely differing lockdown or school closure periods. Seven sites (Europe, Asia and America) reported MRMp detections in one of 22 investigated cases in April 2020 to March 2021 and 176 of 762 (23.10%) in previous years (p = 0.04).ConclusionsThis comprehensive collection of M. pneumoniae detections worldwide shows correlation between COVID-19 NPIs and significantly reduced detection numbers.

PCR performance in the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant of concern?

The new SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) has been recently declared a Variant of Concern due to a series of important mutations in the viral spike protein and especially in the receptor-binding domain. While investigations into the spread of this new variant are ongoing, the first cases have been detected in Switzerland. Important questions have been raised: (1) Will the PCR assays commonly used to detect SARS-CoV-2 still work for the Omicron variant? (2) Can specific PCR features, e.g. S-gene dropout, be used to identify potential Omicron samples? In this minireview we provide current knowledge on the Omicron variant and guidance on its PCR validation.

An Automated Dashboard to Improve Laboratory COVID-19 Diagnostics Management.

Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, our microbial diagnostic laboratory located in a university hospital has implemented several distinct SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR systems in a very short time. More than 148,000 tests have been performed over 12 months, which represents about 405 tests per day, with peaks to more than 1,500 tests per days during the second wave. This was only possible thanks to automation and digitalization, to allow high throughput, acceptable time to results and to maintain test reliability. An automated dashboard was developed to give access to Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to improve laboratory operational management. Methods: RT-PCR data extraction of four respiratory viruses-SARS-CoV-2, influenza A and B and RSV-from our laboratory information system (LIS), was automated. This included age, gender, test result, RT-PCR instrument, sample type, reception time, requester, and hospitalization status etc. Important KPIs were identified and the visualization was achieved using an in-house dashboard based on the open-source language R (Shiny). Results: The dashboard is organized into three main parts. The "Filter" page presents all the KPIs, divided into five sections: (i) general and gender-related indicators, (ii) number of tests and positivity rate, (iii) cycle threshold and viral load, (iv) test durations, and (v) not valid results. Filtering allows to select a given period, a dedicated instrument, a given specimen, an age range or a requester. The "Comparison" page allows a custom charting of all the available variables, which represents more than 182 combination. The "Data" page, gives the user an access to the raw data in tables format, with possibility of filtering, allowing for a deeper analysis and data download. Informations are updated every 4 h. Conclusions: By giving a rapid access to a huge number of up-to-date information, represented using the most relevant visualization types, without the burden of timely data extraction and analysis, the dashboard represents a reliable and user-friendly tool for operational laboratory management. The dashboard represents a reliable and user-friendly tool improving the decision-making process, resource planning and quality management.

Multicenter Technical Validation of 30 Rapid Antigen Tests for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 (VALIDATE).

During COVID19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (RATs) were marketed with minimal or no performance data. We aimed at closing this gap by determining technical sensitivities and specificities of 30 RATs prior to market release. We developed a standardized technical validation protocol and assessed 30 RATs across four diagnostic laboratories. RATs were tested in parallel using the Standard Q® (SD Biosensor/Roche) assay as internal reference. We used left-over universal transport/optimum media from nasopharyngeal swabs of 200 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative and 100 PCR-positive tested patients. Transport media was mixed with assay buffer and applied to RATs according to manufacturer instructions. Sensitivities were determined according to viral loads. Specificity of at least 99% and sensitivity of 95%, 90%, and 80% had to be reached for 107, 106, 105 virus copies/mL, respectively. Sensitivities ranged from 43.5% to 98.6%, 62.3% to 100%, and 66.7% to 100% at 105, 106, 107 copies/mL, respectively. Automated assay readers such as ExDia or LumiraDx showed higher performances. Specificities ranged from 88.8% to 100%. Only 15 of 30 (50%) RATs passed our technical validation. Due to the high failure rate of 50%, mainly caused by lack of sensitivity, we recommend a thorough validation of RATs prior to market release.

Decreased Fetal Movements: A Sign of Placental SARS-CoV-2 Infection with Perinatal Brain Injury.

Neonatal COVID-19 is rare and mainly results from postnatal transmission. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), however, can infect the placenta and compromise its function. We present two cases of decreased fetal movements and abnormal fetal heart rhythm 5 days after mild maternal COVID-19, requiring emergency caesarean section at 29 + 3 and 32 + 1 weeks of gestation, and leading to brain injury. Placental examination revealed extensive and multifocal chronic intervillositis, with intense cytoplasmic positivity for SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody and SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR. Vertical transmission was confirmed in one case, and both neonates developed extensive cystic peri-ventricular leukomalacia.

Computer-Aided Medical Microbiology Monitoring Tool: A Strategy to Adapt to the SARS-CoV-2 Epidemic and That Highlights RT-PCR Consistency.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, important health and regulatory decisions relied on SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results. Our diagnostic laboratory faced a rapid increase in the number of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. To maintain a rapid turnaround time, we moved from a case-by-case validation of RT-PCR results to an automated validation and immediate results transmission to clinicians. A quality-monitoring tool based on a homemade algorithm coded in R was developed, to preserve high quality and to track aberrant results. We present the results of this quality-monitoring tool applied to 35,137 RT-PCR results. Patients tested several times led to 4,939 pairwise comparisons: 88% concordant and 12% discrepant. The algorithm automatically solved 428 out of 573 discrepancies. The most likely explanation for these 573 discrepancies was related for 44.9% of the situations to the clinical evolution of the disease, 27.9% to preanalytical factors, and 25.3% to stochasticity of the assay. Finally, 11 discrepant results could not be explained, including 8 for which clinical data was not available. For patients repeatedly tested on the same day, the second result confirmed a first negative or positive result in 99.2% or 88.9% of cases, respectively. The implemented quality-monitoring strategy allowed to: i) assist the investigation of discrepant results ii) focus the attention of medical microbiologists onto results requiring a specific expertise and iii) maintain an acceptable turnaround time. This work highlights the high RT-PCR consistency for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 and the necessity for automated processes to handle a huge number of microbiological results while preserving quality.

Sensitivity of Rapid Antigen Testing and RT-PCR Performed on Nasopharyngeal Swabs versus Saliva Samples in COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients: Results of a Prospective Comparative Trial (RESTART).

Saliva sampling could serve as an alternative non-invasive sample for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis while rapid antigen tests (RATs) might help to mitigate the shortage of reagents sporadically encountered with RT-PCR. Thus, in the RESTART study we compared antigen and RT-PCR testing methods on nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs and salivary samples. We conducted a prospective observational study among COVID-19 hospitalized patients between 10 December 2020 and 1 February 2021. Paired saliva and NP samples were investigated by RT-PCR (Cobas 6800, Roche-Switzerland, Basel, Switzerland) and by two rapid antigen tests: One Step Immunoassay Exdia® COVID-19 Ag (Precision Biosensor, Daejeon, Korea) and Standard Q® COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test (Roche-Switzerland). A total of 58 paired NP-saliva specimens were collected. A total of 32 of 58 (55%) patients were hospitalized in the intensive care unit, and the median duration of symptoms was 11 days (IQR 5-19). NP and salivary RT-PCR exhibited sensitivity of 98% and 69% respectively, whereas the specificity of these RT-PCRs assays was 100%. The NP RATs exhibited much lower diagnostic performance, with sensitivities of 35% and 41% for the Standard Q® and Exdia® assays, respectively, when a wet-swab approach was used (i.e., when the swab was diluted in the viral transport medium (VTM) before testing). The sensitivity of the dry-swab approach was slightly better (47%). These antigen tests exhibited very low sensitivity (4% and 8%) when applied to salivary swabs. Nasopharyngeal RT-PCR is the most accurate test for COVID-19 diagnosis in hospitalized patients. RT-PCR on salivary samples may be used when nasopharyngeal swabs are contraindicated. RATs are not appropriate for hospitalized patients.

Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Genome Sequencing: Quality Criteria and Low-Frequency Variants.

Although many laboratories worldwide have developed their sequencing capacities in response to the need for SARS-CoV-2 genome-based surveillance of variants, only a few reported some quality criteria to ensure sequence quality before lineage assignment and submission to public databases. Hence, we aimed here to provide simple quality control criteria for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing to prevent erroneous interpretation of low-quality or contaminated data. We retrospectively investigated 647 SARS-CoV-2 genomes obtained over 10 tiled amplicons sequencing runs. We extracted 26 potentially relevant metrics covering the entire workflow from sample selection to bioinformatics analysis. Based on data distribution, critical values were established for 11 selected metrics to prompt further quality investigations for problematic samples, in particular those with a low viral RNA quantity. Low-frequency variants (<70% of supporting reads) can result from PCR amplification errors, sample cross contaminations, or presence of distinct SARS-CoV2 genomes in the sample sequenced. The number and the prevalence of low-frequency variants can be used as a robust quality criterion to identify possible sequencing errors or contaminations. Overall, we propose 11 metrics with fixed cutoff values as a simple tool to evaluate the quality of SARS-CoV-2 genomes, among which are cycle thresholds, mean depth, proportion of genome covered at least 10×, and the number of low-frequency variants combined with mutation prevalence data.