Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Commun Med (Lond) ; 2: 65, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1947557

ABSTRACT

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused millions of infections and fatalities globally since its emergence in late 2019. The virus was first detected in Finland in January 2020, after which it rapidly spread among the populace in spring. However, compared to other European nations, Finland has had a low incidence of SARS-CoV-2. To gain insight into the origins and turnover of SARS-CoV-2 lineages circulating in Finland in 2020, we investigated the phylogeographic and -dynamic history of the virus. Methods: The origins of SARS-CoV-2 introductions were inferred via Travel-aware Bayesian time-measured phylogeographic analyses. Sequences for the analyses included virus genomes belonging to the B.1 lineage and with the D614G mutation from countries of likely origin, which were determined utilizing Google mobility data. We collected all available sequences from spring and fall peaks to study lineage dynamics. Results: We observed rapid turnover among Finnish lineages during this period. Clade 20C became the most prevalent among sequenced cases and was replaced by other strains in fall 2020. Bayesian phylogeographic reconstructions suggested 42 independent introductions into Finland during spring 2020, mainly from Italy, Austria, and Spain. Conclusions: A single introduction from Spain might have seeded one-third of cases in Finland during spring in 2020. The investigations of the original introductions of SARS-CoV-2 to Finland during the early stages of the pandemic and of the subsequent lineage dynamics could be utilized to assess the role of transboundary movements and the effects of early intervention and public health measures.

3.
Research Square ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1786497

ABSTRACT

Multiple introductions of SARS-COV-2 Omicron variant BA.1. and BA.1.1. lineages to Finland were detected early December 2021, and comprised the majority over Delta variant in 3 weeks in the capital region. Our sequence analysis demonstrates emergence of a large cluster of BA.1.1 in community transmission.

4.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 28(6): 1229-1232, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775623

ABSTRACT

Multiple introductions of SARS-COV-2 Omicron variant BA.1 and BA.1.1. lineages to Finland were detected in early December 2021. Within 3 weeks, Omicron overtook Delta as the most common variant in the capital region. Sequence analysis demonstrated the emergence and spread through community transmission of a large cluster of BA.1.1 virus.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Finland/epidemiology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
5.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(12): 3137-3141, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1496966

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Alpha and Beta variants became dominant in Finland in spring 2021 but had diminished by summer. We used phylogenetic clustering to identify sources of spreading. We found that outbreaks were mostly seeded by a few introductions, highlighting the importance of surveillance and prevention policies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Finland/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Phylogeny
6.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251661, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1238764

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Understanding the false negative rates of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing is pivotal for the management of the COVID-19 pandemic and it has implications for patient management. Our aim was to determine the real-life clinical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. METHODS: This population-based retrospective study was conducted in March-April 2020 in the Helsinki Capital Region, Finland. Adults who were clinically suspected of SARS-CoV-2 infection and underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing, with sufficient data in their medical records for grading of clinical suspicion were eligible. In addition to examining the first RT-PCR test of repeat-tested individuals, we also used high clinical suspicion for COVID-19 as the reference standard for calculating the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. RESULTS: All 1,194 inpatients (mean [SD] age, 63.2 [18.3] years; 45.2% women) admitted to COVID-19 cohort wards during the study period were included. The outpatient cohort of 1,814 individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.4 [17.2] years; 69.1% women) was sampled from epidemiological line lists by systematic quasi-random sampling. The sensitivity (95% CI) for laboratory confirmed cases (repeat-tested patients) was 85.7% (81.5-89.1%) inpatients; 95.5% (92.2-97.5%) outpatients, 89.9% (88.2-92.1%) all. When also patients that were graded as high suspicion but never tested positive were included in the denominator, the sensitivity (95% CI) was: 67.5% (62.9-71.9%) inpatients; 34.9% (31.4-38.5%) outpatients; 47.3% (44.4-50.3%) all. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing was only moderate at best. The relatively high false negative rates of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing need to be accounted for in clinical decision making, epidemiological interpretations, and when using RT-PCR as a reference for other tests.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/standards , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , False Negative Reactions , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Random Allocation , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic/standards
8.
J Mol Diagn ; 23(4): 407-416, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1152514

ABSTRACT

Mitigation of the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires reliable and accessible laboratory diagnostic services. In this study, the performance of one laboratory-developed test (LDT) and two commercial tests, cobas SARS-CoV-2 (Roche) and Amplidiag COVID-19 (Mobidiag), were evaluated for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA in respiratory specimens. A total of 183 specimens collected from suspected COVID-19 patients were studied with all three methods to compare their performance. In relation to the reference standard, which was established as the result obtained by two of the three studied methods, the positive percent agreement was highest for the cobas test (100%), followed by the Amplidiag test and the LDT (98.9%). The negative percent agreement was lowest for the cobas test (89.4%), followed by the Amplidiag test (98.8%), and the highest value was obtained for the LDT (100%). The dilution series of positive specimens, however, suggests significantly higher sensitivity for the cobas assay in comparison with the other two assays, and the low negative percent agreement value may be due to the same reason. In general, all tested assays performed adequately. Clinical laboratories need to be prepared for uninterrupted high-throughput testing during the coming months to mitigate the pandemic. To ensure no interruption, it is critical that clinical laboratories maintain several simultaneous platforms in their SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/methods
10.
J Clin Virol ; 131: 104614, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-731821

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Rapid sample-to-answer tests for detection of SARS-CoV-2 are emerging and data on their relative performance is urgently needed. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the analytical performance of two rapid nucleic acid tests, Cepheid Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 and Mobidiag Novodiag® Covid-19, in comparison to a combination reference of three large-scale PCR tests. Moreover, utility of the Novodiag® test in tertiary care emergency departments was assessed. RESULTS: In the preliminary evaluation, analysis of 90 respiratory samples resulted in 100% specificity and sensitivity for Xpert®, whereas analysis of 107 samples resulted in 93.4% sensitivity and 100% specificity for Novodiag®. Rapid SARS-CoV-2 testing with Novodiag® was made available for four tertiary care emergency departments in Helsinki, Finland between 18 and 31 May, coinciding with a rapidly declining epidemic phase. Altogether 361 respiratory specimens, together with relevant clinical data, were analyzed with Novodiag® and reference tests: 355/361 of the specimens were negative with both methods, and 1/361 was positive in Novodiag® and negative by the reference method. Of the 5 remaining specimens, two were negative with Novodiag®, but positive with the reference method with late Ct values. On average, a test result using Novodiag® was available nearly 8 hours earlier than that obtained with the large-scale PCR tests. CONCLUSIONS: While the performance of novel sample-to-answer PCR tests need to be carefully evaluated, they may provide timely and reliable results in detection of SARS-CoV-2 and thus facilitate patient management including effective cohorting.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Finland , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Tertiary Healthcare/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL