Limitations introduced by a low participation rate of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence data.

BACKGROUND: There has been a large influx of COVID-19 seroprevalence studies, but comparability between the seroprevalence estimates has been an issue because of heterogeneities in testing platforms and study methodology. One potential source of heterogeneity is the response or participation rate. METHODS: We conducted a review of participation rates (PR) in SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies collected by SeroTracker and examined their effect on the validity of study conclusions. PR was calculated as the count of participants for whom the investigators had collected a valid sample, divided by the number of people invited to participate in the study. A multivariable beta generalized linear model with logit link was fitted to determine if the PR of international household and community-based seroprevalence studies was associated with the factors of interest, from 1 December 2019 to 10 March 2021. RESULTS: We identified 90 papers based on screening and were able to calculate the PR for 35 out of 90 papers (39%), with a median PR of 70% and an interquartile range of 40.92; 61% of the studies did not report PR. CONCLUSIONS: Many SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies do not report PR. It is unclear what the median PR rate would be had a larger portion not had limitations in reporting. Low participation rates indicate limited representativeness of results. Non-probabilistic sampling frames were associated with higher participation rates but may be less representative. Standardized definitions of participation rate and data reporting necessary for the PR calculations are essential for understanding the representativeness of seroprevalence estimates in the population of interest.

Investigating transmission of SARS-CoV-2 using novel face mask sampling: a protocol for an observational prospective study of index cases and their contacts in a congregate setting.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to measure how transmission of SARS-CoV-2 occurs in communities and to identify conditions that lend to increased transmission focusing on congregate situations. We will measure SARS-CoV-2 in exhaled breath of asymptomatic and symptomatic persons using face mask sampling-a non-invasive method for SARS-CoV-2 detection in exhaled air. We aim to detect transmission clusters and identify risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 transmission in presymptomatic, asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this observational prospective study with daily follow-up, index cases and their respective contacts are identified at each participating institution. Contact definitions are based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and local health department guidelines. Participants will wear masks with polyvinyl alcohol test strips adhered to the inside for 2 hours daily. The strips are applied to all masks used over at least 7 days. In addition, self-administered nasal swabs and (optional) finger prick blood samples are performed by participants. Samples are tested by standard PCR protocols and by novel antigen tests. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board and the WHO Ethics Review Committee. From the data generated, we will analyse transmission clusters and risk factors for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in congregate settings. The kinetics of asymptomatic transmission and the evaluation of non-invasive tools for detection of transmissibility are of crucial importance for the development of more targeted control interventions-and ultimately to assist with keeping congregate settings open that are essential for our social fabric. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT05145803).

Challenges of data sharing in European Covid-19 projects: A learning opportunity for advancing pandemic preparedness and response.

The COVID-19 pandemic saw a massive investment into collaborative research projects with a focus on producing data to support public health decisions. We relay our direct experience of four projects funded under the Horizon2020 programme, namely ReCoDID, ORCHESTRA, unCoVer and SYNCHROS. The projects provide insight into the complexities of sharing patient level data from observational cohorts. We focus on compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and ethics approvals when sharing data across national borders. We discuss procedures for data mapping; submission of new international codes to standards organisation; federated approach; and centralised data curation. Finally, we put forward recommendations for the development of guidelines for the application of GDPR in case of major public health threats; mandatory standards for data collection in funding frameworks; training and capacity building for data owners; cataloguing of international use of metadata standards; and dedicated funding for identified critical areas.

Serology Assays Used in SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence Surveys Worldwide: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Assay Features, Testing Algorithms, and Performance.

Background: Many serological assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Differences in the detection mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 serological assays limited the comparability of seroprevalence estimates for populations being tested. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of serological assays used in SARS-CoV-2 population seroprevalence surveys, searching for published articles, preprints, institutional sources, and grey literature between 1 January 2020, and 19 November 2021. We described features of all identified assays and mapped performance metrics by the manufacturers, third-party head-to-head, and independent group evaluations. We compared the reported assay performance by evaluation source with a mixed-effect beta regression model. A simulation was run to quantify how biased assay performance affects population seroprevalence estimates with test adjustment. Results: Among 1807 included serosurveys, 192 distinctive commercial assays and 380 self-developed assays were identified. According to manufacturers, 28.6% of all commercial assays met WHO criteria for emergency use (sensitivity [Sn.] >= 90.0%, specificity [Sp.] >= 97.0%). However, manufacturers overstated the absolute values of Sn. of commercial assays by 1.0% [0.1, 1.4%] and 3.3% [2.7, 3.4%], and Sp. by 0.9% [0.9, 0.9%] and 0.2% [−0.1, 0.4%] compared to third-party and independent evaluations, respectively. Reported performance data was not sufficient to support a similar analysis for self-developed assays. Simulations indicate that inaccurate Sn. and Sp. can bias seroprevalence estimates adjusted for assay performance; the error level changes with the background seroprevalence. Conclusions: The Sn. and Sp. of the serological assay are not fixed properties, but varying features depending on the testing population. To achieve precise population estimates and to ensure the comparability of seroprevalence, serosurveys should select assays with high performance validated not only by their manufacturers and adjust seroprevalence estimates based on assured performance data. More investigation should be directed to consolidating the performance of self-developed assays.

Lessons from the pandemic: Responding to emerging zoonotic viral diseases-a Keystone Symposia report.

The COVID-19 pandemic caught the world largely unprepared, including scientific and policy communities. On April 10-13, 2022, researchers across academia, industry, government, and nonprofit organizations met at the Keystone symposium "Lessons from the Pandemic: Responding to Emerging Zoonotic Viral Diseases" to discuss the successes and challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic and what lessons can be applied moving forward. Speakers focused on experiences not only from the COVID-19 pandemic but also from outbreaks of other pathogens, including the Ebola virus, Lassa virus, and Nipah virus. A general consensus was that investments made during the COVID-19 pandemic in infrastructure, collaborations, laboratory and manufacturing capacity, diagnostics, clinical trial networks, and regulatory enhancements-notably, in low-to-middle income countries-must be maintained and strengthened to enable quick, concerted responses to future threats, especially to zoonotic pathogens.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in exhaled air using non-invasive embedded strips in masks.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 emerged in 2019 and resulted in a pandemic causing millions of infections worldwide. Gold-standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection uses quantitative RT-qPCR on respiratory secretions to detect viral RNA (vRNA). Acquiring these samples is invasive, can be painful for those with xerostomia and other health conditions, and sample quality can vary greatly. Frequently only symptomatic individuals are tested even though asymptomatic individuals can have comparable viral loads and efficiently transmit virus. METHODS: We utilized a non-invasive approach to detect SARS-CoV-2 in individuals, using polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) strips embedded in KN95 masks. PVA strips were tested for SARS-CoV-2 vRNA via qRT-PCR and infectious virus. RESULTS: We show efficient recovery of vRNA and infectious virus from virus-spiked PVA with detection limits comparable to nasal swab samples. In infected individuals, we detect both human and SARS-CoV-2 RNA on PVA strips, however, these levels are not correlated with length of time mask was worn, number of times coughed or sneezed, or level of virus in nasal swab samples. We successfully cultured and deep-sequenced PVA-associated virus. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the feasibility of using PVA-embedded masks as a non-invasive platform for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in exhaled air in COVID-positive individuals regardless of symptom status.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 on pregnancy and neonatal outcomes: An open prospective study of pregnant women in Brazil.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence and risk of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes according to SARS-CoV-2 infection severity in pregnant women. METHOD: Open prospective study of pregnant women tested for SARS-CoV-2 by serological and molecular assays during pregnancy or delivery in two hospitals in Sao Paulo, Brazil from April 12, 2020, to February 28, 2021. Five groups were considered for analysis: C0, negative COVID-19 results and no COVID-19 symptoms; C1, positive COVID-19 results, and no symptoms; C2, positive COVID-19 results with mild symptoms; C3, positive COVID-19 results with moderate symptoms; and C4, positive COVID-19 results with severe symptoms. The association between obstetric and neonatal outcomes and COVID-19 severity was determined using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: 734 eligible pregnant women were enrolled as follows: C0 (n = 357), C1 (n = 127), C2 (n = 174), C3 (n = 37), and C4 (n = 39). The following pregnancy and neonatal outcomes were associated with severe COVID-19: oligohydramnios (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] = 6.18; 95% CI 1.87‒20.39), fetal distress (aOR = 4.01; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.84‒8.75), preterm birth (aOR = 5.51; 95% CI 1.47‒20.61), longer hospital stay (aOR = 1.66; 95% CI 1.36‒2.02), and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (aOR = 19.36; 95% CI, 5.86‒63.99). All maternal (n = 6, 15.4%, p < 0.001) and neonatal (n = 5, 12.5%, p < 0.001) deaths and most fetal deaths (n = 4, 9.8%, p < 0.001) occurred in C4 group. Moderate COVID-19 was associated with oligohydramnios (aOR = 6.23; 95% CI 1.93‒20.13) and preterm birth (aOR = 3.60; 95% CI 1.45‒9.27). Mild COVID-19 was associated with oligohydramnios (aOR = 3.77; 95% CI 1.56‒9.07). CONCLUSION: Adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes were associated with maternal symptomatic COVID-19 status, and risk increased with disease severity.

COVID-19 and newborn health: systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To describe perinatal and neonatal outcomes in newborns exposed to SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed Central, LILACS, and Google Scholar using the keywords 'covid ' AND 'newborn' OR 'child' OR 'infant,' on 18 March 2020, and again on 17 April 2020. One researcher conducted the search and extracted data on demographics, maternal outcomes, diagnostic tests, imaging, and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: Of 256 publications identified, 20 met inclusion criteria and comprised neonatal outcome data for 222 newborns whose mothers were suspected or confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2 positive perinatally (17 studies) or of newborns referred to hospital with infection/pneumonia (3 studies). Most (12 studies) were case-series reports; all were from China, except three (Australia, Iran, and Spain). Of the 222 newborns, 13 were reported as positive for SARS-CoV-2; most of the studies reported no or mild symptoms and no adverse perinatal outcomes. Two papers among those from newborns who tested positive reported moderate or severe clinical characteristics. Five studies using data on umbilical cord blood, placenta, and/or amniotic fluid reported no positive results. Nine studies reported radiographic imaging, including 5 with images of pneumonia, increased lung marking, thickened texture, or high-density nodular shadow. Minor, non-specific changes in biochemical variables were reported. Studies that tested breast milk reported negative SARS-CoV-2 results. CONCLUSIONS: Given the paucity of studies at this time, vertical transmission cannot be confirmed or denied. Current literature does not support abstaining from breastfeeding nor separating mothers and newborns. Further evidence and data collection networks, particularly in the Americas, are needed for establishing definitive guidelines and recommendations.

Vertical transmission of SARS-CoV2 during pregnancy: A high-risk cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Identify the potential for and risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 vertical transmission. METHODS: Symptomatic pregnant women with COVID-19 diagnosis in whom PCR for SARS-CoV-2 was performed at delivery using maternal serum and at least one of the biological samples: cord blood (CB), amniotic fluid (AF), colostrum and/or oropharyngeal swab (OPS) of the neonate. The association of parameters with maternal, AF and/or CB positivity and the influence of SARS-CoV-2 positivity in AF and/or CB on neonatal outcomes were investigated. RESULTS: Overall 73.4% (80/109) were admitted in hospital due to COVID-19, 22.9% needed intensive care and there were four maternal deaths. Positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 was observed in 14.7% of maternal blood, 13.9% of AF, 6.7% of CB, 2.1% of colostrum and 3.7% of OPS samples. The interval between COVID-19 symptoms and delivery was inversely associated with SARS-CoV-2 positivity in the maternal blood (p = 0.002) and in the AF and/or CB (p = 0.049). Maternal viremia was associated with positivity for SARS-CoV-2 in AF and/or CB (p = 0.001). SARS-CoV-2 positivity in the compartments was not associated with neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Vertical transmission is possible in pregnant women with COVID-19 and a shorter interval between maternal symptoms and delivery is an influencing factor.

Risk Factors of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Arapahoe County First Responders-The COVID-19 Arapahoe SErosurveillance Study (CASES) Project.

OBJECTIVES: Define the seroprevalence and risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Arapahoe County, Colorado first responders (eg, law enforcement, human services, fire departments). METHODS: Two hundred sixty four first responders were enrolled June to July 2020. SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was defined as detection of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to both spike receptor binding domain and nucleocapsid in venous blood by validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. We compared risk factors for being seropositive versus seronegative. RESULTS: 4% (11/264) were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive. Seropositive participants were significantly more likely to have lung disease (% seropositive, % seronegative; P-value) (36%, 8%; P = 0.01), prior SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 testing (36%, 8%; P ≤ 0.01), a prior positive result (18%, less than 1%), and to believe they previously had COVID-19 (64%, 15%; P < 0.01). Only 15% of those believing they had COVID-19 had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: Human services employees and individuals with lung disease are at SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk. Few individuals believed they had COVID-19 had prior exposure.

Development and Validation of a Multiplex Microsphere Immunoassay Using Dried Blood Spots for SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence: Application in First Responders in Colorado, USA.

Serological testing of large representative populations for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is needed to estimate seroprevalence, transmission dynamics, and the duration of antibody responses from natural infection and vaccination. In this study, a high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 multiplex microsphere immunoassay (MMIA) was developed for the receptor binding domain (RBD) and nucleocapsid (N) that was more sensitive than enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (98% versus 87%). The MMIA was then applied and validated in 264 first responders in Colorado using serum and dried blood spot (DBS) eluates, compared to ELISA, and evaluated for neutralizing antibodies. Four percent (11/264) of first responders were seropositive in July to August 2020. Serum and DBS were highly correlated for anti-RBD and anti-N antibodies (R = 0.83, P < 0.0001 and R = 0.87, P < 0.0001, respectively) by MMIA. The MMIA accurately predicted SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies using DBS (R = 0.76, P = 0.037). On repeat antibody testing 3 months later, anti-RBD IgG decreased less rapidly than anti-N IgG measured by MMIA, with a median change in geometric median fluorescence intensity of 62% versus 79% (P < 0.01) for anti-RBD and anti-N IgG, respectively. This novel MMIA using DBS could be scalable for rapid and affordable SARS-CoV-2 serosurveillance in the United States and globally.

Current trends in the application of causal inference methods to pooled longitudinal observational infectious disease studies-A protocol for a methodological systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Pooling (or combining) and analysing observational, longitudinal data at the individual level facilitates inference through increased sample sizes, allowing for joint estimation of study- and individual-level exposure variables, and better enabling the assessment of rare exposures and diseases. Empirical studies leveraging such methods when randomization is unethical or impractical have grown in the health sciences in recent years. The adoption of so-called "causal" methods to account for both/either measured and/or unmeasured confounders is an important addition to the methodological toolkit for understanding the distribution, progression, and consequences of infectious diseases (IDs) and interventions on IDs. In the face of the Covid-19 pandemic and in the absence of systematic randomization of exposures or interventions, the value of these methods is even more apparent. Yet to our knowledge, no studies have assessed how causal methods involving pooling individual-level, observational, longitudinal data are being applied in ID-related research. In this systematic review, we assess how these methods are used and reported in ID-related research over the last 10 years. Findings will facilitate evaluation of trends of causal methods for ID research and lead to concrete recommendations for how to apply these methods where gaps in methodological rigor are identified. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will apply MeSH and text terms to identify relevant studies from EBSCO (Academic Search Complete, Business Source Premier, CINAHL, EconLit with Full Text, PsychINFO), EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science. Eligible studies are those that apply causal methods to account for confounding when assessing the effects of an intervention or exposure on an ID-related outcome using pooled, individual-level data from 2 or more longitudinal, observational studies. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles, will be independently screened by two reviewers using Covidence software. Discrepancies will be resolved by a third reviewer. This systematic review protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020204104).

Rapid Response to Pandemic Threats: Immunogenic Epitope Detection of Pandemic Pathogens for Diagnostics and Vaccine Development Using Peptide Microarrays.

Emergence and re-emergence of pathogens bearing the risk of becoming a pandemic threat are on the rise. Increased travel and trade, growing population density, changes in urbanization, and climate have a critical impact on infectious disease spread. Currently, the world is confronted with the emergence of a novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, responsible for yet more than 800 000 deaths globally. Outbreaks caused by viruses, such as SARS-CoV-2, HIV, Ebola, influenza, and Zika, have increased over the past decade, underlining the need for a rapid development of diagnostics and vaccines. Hence, the rational identification of biomarkers for diagnostic measures on the one hand, and antigenic targets for vaccine development on the other, are of utmost importance. Peptide microarrays can display large numbers of putative target proteins translated into overlapping linear (and cyclic) peptides for a multiplexed, high-throughput antibody analysis. This enabled for example the identification of discriminant/diagnostic epitopes in Zika or influenza and mapping epitope evolution in natural infections versus vaccinations. In this review, we highlight synthesis platforms that facilitate fast and flexible generation of high-density peptide microarrays. We further outline the multifaceted applications of these peptide array platforms for the development of serological tests and vaccines to quickly encounter pandemic threats.