Disease relapse rate in children with autoimmune rheumatic diseases after COVID-19 infection and vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Paediatric patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (pARD) are often immunocompromised because of the disease and/or the therapy they receive. At the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic there was a great concern about the possibility of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in these patients. The best method of protection is vaccination, so as soon as vaccine was licenced, we aimed to vaccinate them. Data on disease relapse rate after COVID-19 infection and vaccination are scarce, but they play important role in everyday clinical decisions. METHODS: The aim of this study was to determine the relapse rate of autoimmune rheumatic disease (ARD) after COVID-19 infection and vaccination. Data on demographic, diagnosis, disease activity, therapy, clinical presentation of the infection and serology were collected from pARD who had COVID-19 and from pARD who were vaccinated against COVID-19, from March 2020 to April 2022. All vaccinated patients received two doses of the BNT162b2 BioNTech vaccine, on average, 3.7 (S.D.=1.4) weeks apart. Activity of the ARD was followed prospectively. Relapse was defined as a worsening of the ARD in a time frame of 8 weeks after infection or vaccination. For statistical analysis, Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U test were used. RESULTS: We collected data from 115 pARD, which we divided into two groups. We included 92 pARD after infection and 47 after vaccination, with 24 in both groups (they were infected before/after vaccination). In 92 pARD we registered 103 SARS-CoV-2 infections. Infection was asymptomatic in 14%, mild in 67% and moderate in 18%, 1% required hospitalization; 10% had a relapse of ARD after infection and 6% after vaccination. There was a trend towards higher disease relapse rate after infection compared to vaccination, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.76). No statistically significant difference was detected in the relapse rate depending on the clinical presentation of the infection (p = 0.25) or the severity of the clinical presentation of COVID-19 between vaccinated and unvaccinated pARD (p = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: There is a trend towards a higher relapse rate in pARD after infection compared to vaccination and connection between the severity of COVID-19 and vaccination status is plausible. Our results were, however, not statistically significant.

Milder outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 genetically confirmed reinfections compared to primary infections with the delta variant: A retrospective case-control study.

Background: SARS-CoV-2 infection does not confer long immunity. However, studies suggest that prior infection is associated with lower risk of reinfection and milder outcomes of recurrent infections. The aims of this retrospective observational case-control study were to describe the clinical and molecular characteristics of genetically confirmed Delta reinfection cases and to assess the potential protective role of preceding infection on the severity of reinfection. Methods: We used next generation sequencing (NGS) to explore if cases with two positive real time RT-PCR tests > 90 days apart were infected with a different SARS-CoV-2 variant. Cases with confirmed reinfection between August 1st and October 31st, 2021 (the Delta wave) in Slovenia were matched 1:4 by age, sex and timeframe (week of positive test) with individuals with primary infection. Sociodemographic and epidemiologic data, vaccination status, and data on hospitalization and outcome of infection were retrieved from several centralized and standardized national databases. Additional epidemiologic surveys were performed on a limited number of cases and controls. Results: We identified 628 cases of genetically confirmed reinfection during the study period and matched them with 2,512 control subjects with Delta primary infection. Primary infections in individuals with reinfection were mainly caused by B.1.258.17 (51.1%), followed by B.1.1.7 (15.1%) and reinfection was detected on average 271 days after primary infection (range 101-477 days). Our results show a substantially lower probability of hospitalization in cases with reinfection compared with controls (OR: 0.21, p = 0.017), but no significant difference was observed in intensive care unit admission and deaths. We observed a significantly lower proportion of vaccinated individuals among cases compared to controls (4.5% vs. 28.2%), suggesting that hybrid immunity leads to lower probability of reinfection. Detailed analysis of the temporal distribution of variants, responsible for reinfections, showed no significant differences in reinfection potential. Conclusion: Reinfection with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant resulted in fewer hospitalizations compared to the primary Delta infection, suggesting that primary infection may, to some extent, produce at least short lasting protective immunity. This study provides additional insight into the reinfection dynamics that may allow appropriate public health measures to be taken in subsequent waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Evaluation of Two Broadly Used Commercial Methods for Detection of Respiratory Viruses with a Recently Added New Target for Detection of SARS-CoV-2.

The clinical symptoms caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are nonspecific and can be associated with most other respiratory viruses that cause acute respiratory tract infections (ARI). Because the clinical differentiation of COVID-19 patients from those with other respiratory viruses is difficult, the evaluation of automated methods to detect important respiratory viruses together with SARS-CoV-2 seems necessary. Therefore, this study compares two molecular assays for the detection of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2: the Respiratory Viruses 16-Well Assay (AusDiagnostics, Pty Ltd., Mascot, Australia) and the Allplex™ RV Essential Assay coupled with the Allplex™-nCoV Assay (Seegene Inc., Seoul, Korea). The two methods (AusDiagnostics and AlplexTM-nCoV Assay SARS-CoV-2) had 98.6% agreement with the reference method, cobas 6800, for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Agreement between the AusDiagnostics assay and the AlplexTM RV Essential Assay for the detection of seven respiratory viruses was 99%. In our experience, the Respiratory Viruses 16-Well Assay proved to be the most valuable and useful medium-throughput method for simultaneous detection of important respiratory viruses and SARS-CoV-2. The main advantages of the method are high specificity for all targets included and their simultaneous detection and medium throughput with the option of having multiple instruments provide a constant run.

Comparative Evaluation of Six SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Approaches Shows Substantial Genomic Variant-Dependent Intra- and Inter-Test Variability, Poor Interchangeability of Cycle Threshold and Complementary Turn-Around Times.

Several professional societies advise against using real-time Reverse-Transcription PCR (rtRT-PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values to guide clinical decisions. We comparatively assessed the variability of Ct values generated by six diagnostic approaches by testing serial dilutions of well-characterized isolates of 10 clinically most relevant SARS-CoV-2 genomic variants: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Eta, Iota, Omicron, A.27, B.1.258.17, and B.1 with D614G mutation. Comparison of three fully automated rtRT-PCR analyzers and a reference manual rtRT-PCR assay using RNA isolated with three different nucleic acid isolation instruments showed substantial inter-variant intra-test and intra-variant inter-test variability. Ct value differences were dependent on both the rtRT-PCR platform and SARS-CoV-2 genomic variant. Differences ranging from 2.0 to 8.4 Ct values were observed when testing equal concentrations of different SARS-CoV-2 variants. Results confirm that Ct values are an unreliable surrogate for viral load and should not be used as a proxy of infectivity and transmissibility, especially when different rtRT-PCR assays are used in parallel and multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants are circulating. A detailed turn-around time (TAT) comparative assessment showed substantially different TATs, but parallel use of different diagnostic approaches was beneficial and complementary, allowing release of results for more than 81% of non-priority samples within 8 h after admission.

Real-Life Head-to-Head Comparison of Performance of Two High-Throughput Automated Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Nasopharyngeal Swabs: The Alinity m and cobas 6800 SARS-CoV-2 Assays.

The Alinity m (Abbott Molecular, Des Plaines, IL) automated molecular analyzer allows continuous loading of samples and sample-to-result molecular detection of several microorganisms. The detection of SARS-CoV-2 by the Alinity m was compared with that of the cobas 6800 (Roche Molecular Systems, Branchburg, NJ; standard comparator) in a manufacturer-independent clinical evaluation on 2157 consecutive nasopharyngeal swab samples. Valid initial results on Alinity m and cobas 6800 were obtained from 2129 (98.7%) and 2157 (100%) samples, respectively. The overall percent agreement (95% CI) was 98.3% (2092/2129 [97.6%-98.7%]); positive percent agreement, 100% (961/961 [99.6%-100%]); negative percent agreement, 96.8% (1131/1168 [95.7%-97.7%]); and high κ value, 0.965 (0.954-0.976). There were 37 discordant results on Alinity m and, based on discordant analyses, including previous and/or follow-up PCR results, 22 could be considered analytically true positive with high probability. Due to a lack of additional information and an inability to perform repeated/further testing, the status of the remaining 15 discordant results remained unresolved. The throughput of the two analyzers was compared using testing on 564 samples in parallel across two 8-hour shifts in clinical practice. The turnaround times were compared using processing of 94 routine samples in parallel on each working day for 5 consecutive days. The two analyzers showed similar performance, with certain differences that have potential importance in some laboratory settings.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from Human to Domestic Ferret.

We report a case of natural infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmitted from an owner to a pet ferret in the same household in Slovenia. The ferret had onset of gastroenteritis with severe dehydration. Whole-genome sequencing of the viruses isolated from the owner and ferret revealed a 2-nt difference.

Seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in Slovenia: results of two rounds of a nationwide population study on a probability-based sample, challenges and lessons learned.

OBJECTIVES: Seroprevalence surveys provide crucial information on cumulative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exposure. This Slovenian nationwide population study is the first longitudinal 6-month serosurvey using probability-based samples across all age categories. METHODS: Each participant supplied two blood samples: 1316 samples in April 2020 (first round) and 1211 in October/November 2020 (second round). The first-round sera were tested using Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA IgG (ELISA) and, because of uncertain estimates, were retested using Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 (Elecsys-N) and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (Elecsys-S). The second-round sera were concomitantly tested using Elecsys-N/Elecsys-S. RESULTS: The populations of both rounds matched the overall population (n = 3000), with minor settlement type and age differences. The first-round seroprevalence corrected for the ELISA manufacturer's specificity was 2.78% (95% highest density interval [HDI] 1.81%-3.80%), corrected using pooled ELISA specificity calculated from published data 0.93% (95% CI 0.00%-2.65%), and based on Elecsys-N/Elecsys-S results 0.87% (95% HDI 0.40%-1.38%). The second-round unadjusted lower limit of seroprevalence on 11 November 2020 was 4.06% (95% HDI 2.97%-5.16%) and on 3 October 2020, unadjusted upper limit was 4.29% (95% HDI 3.18%-5.47%). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Slovenia increased four-fold from late April to October/November 2020, mainly due to a devastating second wave. Significant logistic/methodological challenges accompanied both rounds. The main lessons learned were a need for caution when relying on manufacturer-generated assay evaluation data, the importance of multiple manufacturer-independent assay performance assessments, the need for concomitant use of highly-specific serological assays targeting different SARS-CoV-2 proteins in serosurveys conducted in low-prevalence settings or during epidemic exponential growth and the usefulness of a Bayesian approach for overcoming complex methodological challenges.

Performance of the rapid high-throughput automated electrochemiluminescence immunoassay targeting total antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor binding domain in comparison to the neutralization assay.

BACKGROUND: Neutralization tests (NT) are the gold standard for detecting and quantifying anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAb), but their complexity restricts them to research settings or reference laboratories. Antibodies against S protein receptor binding domain (RBD) have been shown to confer a neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2. Assays quantitatively measuring anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could be of great value for NAb screening of potential donors for convalescent-phase plasma therapy, assessing natural or vaccine-induced immunity, stratifying individuals for vaccine receipt, and documenting vaccine response. METHODS: Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (Elecsys-S), a high-throughput automated electrochemiluminescence double-antigen sandwich immunoassay for quantitative measurement of pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, was evaluated against NT on 357 patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. NT was performed in a BSL-3 laboratory using a Slovenian SARS-CoV-2 isolate; the NT titer ≥1:20 was considered positive. RESULTS: Elecsys-S detected pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in 352/357 (98.6 %) samples. NAb were identified by NT in 257/357 (72 %) samples. The Elecsys-S/NT agreement was moderate (Cohen's kappa 0.56). High NT titer antibodies (≥1:160) were detected in 106/357 (30 %) samples. Elecsys-S's pan-anti-S1-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations correlated with individual NT titer categories (the lowest concentrations were identified in NT-negative samples and the highest in samples with NT titer 1:1,280), and the Elecsys-S cutoff value for reasonable prediction of NAb generated after natural infection was established (133 BAU/mL). CONCLUSION: Although NT should remain the gold standard for assessing candidates for convalescent-phase plasma donors, selected commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays with optimized cutoff, like Elecsys-S, could be used for rapid, automated, and large-scale screening of individuals with clinically relevant NAb levels as suitable donors.

Neurotropic Viruses, Astrocytes, and COVID-19.

At the end of 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was discovered in China, causing a new coronavirus disease, termed COVID-19 by the WHO on February 11, 2020. At the time of this paper (January 31, 2021), more than 100 million cases have been recorded, which have claimed over 2 million lives worldwide. The most important clinical presentation of COVID-19 is severe pneumonia; however, many patients present various neurological symptoms, ranging from loss of olfaction, nausea, dizziness, and headache to encephalopathy and stroke, with a high prevalence of inflammatory central nervous system (CNS) syndromes. SARS-CoV-2 may also target the respiratory center in the brainstem and cause silent hypoxemia. However, the neurotropic mechanism(s) by which SARS-CoV-2 affects the CNS remain(s) unclear. In this paper, we first address the involvement of astrocytes in COVID-19 and then elucidate the present knowledge on SARS-CoV-2 as a neurotropic virus as well as several other neurotropic flaviviruses (with a particular emphasis on the West Nile virus, tick-borne encephalitis virus, and Zika virus) to highlight the neurotropic mechanisms that target astroglial cells in the CNS. These key homeostasis-providing cells in the CNS exhibit many functions that act as a favorable milieu for virus replication and possibly a favorable environment for SARS-CoV-2 as well. The role of astrocytes in COVID-19 pathology, related to aging and neurodegenerative disorders, and environmental factors, is discussed. Understanding these mechanisms is key to better understanding the pathophysiology of COVID-19 and for developing new strategies to mitigate the neurotropic manifestations of COVID-19.

Clinical Evaluation of the cobas SARS-CoV-2 Test and a Diagnostic Platform Switch during 48 Hours in the Midst of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Laboratories are currently witnessing extraordinary demand globally for sampling devices, reagents, consumables, and diagnostic instruments needed for timely diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. To meet diagnostic needs as the pandemic grows, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently granted several commercial SARS-CoV-2 tests Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), but manufacturer-independent evaluation data are scarce. We performed the first manufacturer-independent evaluation of the fully automated sample-to-result two-target test cobas 6800 SARS-CoV-2 (cobas) (Roche Molecular Systems, Branchburg, NJ), which received U.S. FDA EUA on 12 March 2020. The comparator was a standardized 3-h SARS-CoV-2 protocol, consisting of RNA extraction using an automated portable instrument, followed by a two-target reverse transcription real-time PCR (RT-PCR), which our laboratory has routinely used since January 2020 [V. M. Corman, O. Landt, M. Kaiser, R. Molenkamp, et al., Euro Surveill 25(3):pii=2000045, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045]. cobas and the comparator showed overall agreement of 98.1% and a kappa value of 0.95 on an in-house validation panel consisting of 217 well-characterized retrospective samples. Immediate prospective head-to-head comparative evaluation followed on 502 samples, and the diagnostic approaches showed overall agreement of 99.6% and a kappa value of 0.98. A good correlation (r2 = 0.96) between cycle threshold values for SARS-CoV-2-specific targets obtained by cobas and the comparator was observed. Our results showed that cobas is a reliable assay for qualitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab samples collected in the Universal Transport Medium System (UTM-RT) (Copan, Brescia, Italy). Under the extraordinary circumstances that laboratories are facing worldwide, a safe diagnostic platform switch is feasible in only 48 h and in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic if carefully planned and executed.