Performance and correlation of ten commercial immunoassays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Accurate immunoassays with a good correlation to neutralizing antibodies are required to support SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, management, vaccine deployment, and epidemiological investigation. We conducted a study to evaluate the performance and correlation of the surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) and other commercial immunoassays. We tested 107 sera of COVID-19 confirmed cases from three different time points, 58 confirmed non-COVID-19 sera, and 52 sera collected before the pandemic with two sVNTs, seven chemiluminescent assays, and one fluorescein assay. All assays achieved excellent sensitivity (95%-100%, ≥15 days after onset of illness), specificity (95.5%-100%), and showed moderate to high correlation with GenScript sVNT (r = 0.58 to r = 0.98), except Roche total antibodies (r = 0.48). Vazyme sVNT and Siemens total antibodies showed the highest correlation with GenScript sVNT (r = 0.98 and 0.88, respectively). Median indexes that may be used to estimate sera with the highest ability to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 and ACE-2 receptor attachment (GenScript sVNT inhibition 90%-100%) were 6.9 S/C (Abbott IgG), 161.9 COI (FREND™ IgG), 16.8 AU/ml (Snibe IgG), 40.1 S/CO (Beckman IgG), 281.9 U/ml (Mindray IgG), 712.2 U/ml (Mindray total antibodies), >10 index (Siemens total antibodies), and 95.3% inhibition (Vazyme sVNT). All ten commercial COVID-19 serology assays, with different targeting antigens, demonstrated a reliable performance, supporting the utility of those assays in clinical and research settings. However, further studies using more samples are needed to refine the results of evaluating the performances of these marketed serological assays. Reliable serological assays would be useful for clinicians, researchers and epidemiologists in confirming SARS-CoV-2 infections, observing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and immune response post infection and vaccination, leading to better management and control of the disease.

Epidemiology of community-acquired pneumonia among hospitalised children in Indonesia: a multicentre, prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify aetiologies of childhood community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) based on a comprehensive diagnostic approach. DESIGN: 'Partnerships for Enhanced Engagement in Research-Pneumonia in Paediatrics (PEER-PePPeS)' study was an observational prospective cohort study conducted from July 2017 to September 2019. SETTING: Government referral teaching hospitals and satellite sites in three cities in Indonesia: Semarang, Yogyakarta and Tangerang. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalised children aged 2-59 months who met the criteria for pneumonia were eligible. Children were excluded if they had been hospitalised for >24 hours; had malignancy or history of malignancy; a history of long-term (>2 months) steroid therapy, or conditions that might interfere with compliance with study procedures. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Causative bacterial, viral or mixed pathogen(s) for pneumonia were determined using microbiological, molecular and serological tests from routinely collected specimens (blood, sputum and nasopharyngeal swabs). We applied a previously published algorithm (PEER-PePPeS rules) to determine the causative pathogen(s). RESULTS: 188 subjects were enrolled. Based on our algorithm, 48 (25.5%) had a bacterial infection, 31 (16.5%) had a viral infection, 76 (40.4%) had mixed bacterial and viral infections, and 33 (17.6%) were unable to be classified. The five most common causative pathogens identified were Haemophilus influenzae non-type B (N=73, 38.8%), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) (N=51, 27.1%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (N=43, 22.9%), Streptococcus pneumoniae (N=29, 15.4%) and Influenza virus (N=25, 13.3%). RSV and influenza virus diagnoses were highly associated with Indonesia's rainy season (November-March). The PCR assays on induced sputum (IS) specimens captured most of the pathogens identified in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that H. influenzae non-type B and RSV were the most frequently identified pathogens causing hospitalised CAP among Indonesian children aged 2-59 months old. Our study also highlights the importance of PCR for diagnosis and by extension, appropriate use of antimicrobials. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03366454.

Etiologies of severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) and misdiagnosis of influenza in Indonesia, 2013-2016.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) accounts for a large burden of illness in Indonesia. However, epidemiology of SARI in tertiary hospitals in Indonesia is unknown. This study sought to assess the burden, clinical characteristics, and etiologies of SARI and concordance of clinical diagnosis with confirmed etiology. METHODS: Data and samples were collected from subjects presenting with SARI as part of the acute febrile Illness requiring hospitalization study (AFIRE). In tertiary hospitals, clinical diagnosis was ascertained from chart review. Samples were analyzed to determine the "true" etiology of SARI at hospitals and Indonesia Research Partnership on Infectious Diseases (INA-RESPOND) laboratory. Distribution and characteristics of SARI by true etiology and accuracy of clinical diagnosis were assessed. RESULTS: Four hundred and twenty of 1464 AFIRE subjects presented with SARI; etiology was identified in 242 (57.6%), including 121 (28.8%) viruses and bacteria associated with systemic infections, 70 (16.7%) respiratory bacteria and viruses other than influenza virus, and 51 (12.1%) influenza virus cases. None of these influenza patients were accurately diagnosed as having influenza during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza was misdiagnosed among all patients presenting with SARI to Indonesian tertiary hospitals in the AFIRE study. Diagnostic approaches and empiric management should be guided by known epidemiology. Public health strategies to address the high burden of influenza should include broad implementation of SARI screening, vaccination programs, clinician education and awareness campaigns, improved diagnostic capacity, and support for effective point-of-care tests.

Diagnosis of COVID-19 in a Dengue-Endemic Area.

Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in dengue virus (DENV)-endemic areas complicates the diagnosis of both infections. COVID-19 cases may be misdiagnosed as dengue, particularly when relying on DENV IgM, which can remain positive months after infection. To estimate the extent of this problem, we evaluated sera from 42 confirmed COVID-19 patients for evidence of DENV infection. No cases of SARS-CoV-2 and DENV coinfection were identified. However, recent DENV infection, indicated by the presence of DENV IgM and/or high level of IgG antibodies, was found in seven patients. Dengue virus IgM and/or high IgG titer should not exclude COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing is appropriate when dengue nonstructural protein 1 (NS1) or RT-PCR is negative. Given the possibility of coinfection, testing for both DENV and SARS-CoV-2 is merited in the setting of the current pandemic.