ABSTRACT
We adapted an existing, spaceflight-proven, robust "electronic nose" (E-Nose) that uses an array of electrical resistivity-based nanosensors mimicking aspects of mammalian olfaction to conduct on-site, rapid screening for COVID-19 infection by measuring the pattern of sensor responses to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled human breath. We built and tested multiple copies of a hand-held prototype E-Nose sensor system, composed of 64 chemically sensitive nanomaterial sensing elements tailored to COVID-19 VOC detection; data acquisition electronics; a smart tablet with software (App) for sensor control, data acquisition and display; and a sampling fixture to capture exhaled breath samples and deliver them to the sensor array inside the E-Nose. The sensing elements detect the combination of VOCs typical in breath at parts-per-billion (ppb) levels, with repeatability of 0.02% and reproducibility of 1.2%; the measurement electronics in the E-Nose provide measurement accuracy and signal-to-noise ratios comparable to benchtop instrumentation. Preliminary clinical testing at Stanford Medicine with 63 participants, their COVID-19-positive or COVID-19-negative status determined by concomitant RT-PCR, discriminated between these two categories of human breath with a 79% correct identification rate using "leave-one-out" training-and-analysis methods. Analyzing the E-Nose response in conjunction with body temperature and other non-invasive symptom screening using advanced machine learning methods, with a much larger database of responses from a wider swath of the population, is expected to provide more accurate on-the-spot answers. Additional clinical testing, design refinement, and a mass manufacturing approach are the main steps toward deploying this technology to rapidly screen for active infection in clinics and hospitals, public and commercial venues, or at home.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Nanostructures , Volatile Organic Compounds , Animals , Humans , Electronic Nose , Reproducibility of Results , COVID-19/diagnosis , Breath Tests/methods , Volatile Organic Compounds/analysis , MammalsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: An immunodiagnostic assay that sensitively detects a cell-mediated immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is needed for epidemiological investigation and for clinical assessment of T- cell-mediated immune response to vaccines, particularly in the context of emerging variants that might escape antibody responses. METHODS: The performance of a whole blood interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) release assay (IGRA) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-specific T cells was evaluated in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescents tested serially up to 10 months post-infection and in healthy blood donors. SARS-CoV-2 IGRA was applied in contacts of households with index cases. Freshly collected blood in the lithium heparin tube was left unstimulated, stimulated with a SARS-CoV-2 peptide pool, and stimulated with mitogen. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity and specificity of IGRA were 84.5% (153/181; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 79.0-89.0) and 86.6% (123/142; 95% CI: 80.0-91.2), respectively. The sensitivity declined from 100% (16/16; 95% CI: 80.6-100) at 0.5-month post-infection to 79.5% (31/39; 95% CI: 64.4-89.2) at 10 months post-infection (Pâ <â .01). The IFN-γ response remained relatively robust at 10 months post-infection (3.8 vs 1.3 IU/mL, respectively). In 14 households, IGRA showed a positivity rate of 100% (12/12) and 65.2% (15/23), and IgG of 50.0% (6/12) and 43.5% (10/23) in index cases and contacts, respectively, exhibiting a difference ofâ +â 50% (95% CI:â +25.4 to +74.6) andâ +21.7% (95% CI: +9.23 to +42.3), respectively. Either IGRA or IgG was positive in 100% (12/12) of index cases and 73.9% (17/23) of contacts. CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 IGRA is a useful clinical diagnostic tool for assessing cell-mediated immune response to SARS-CoV-2.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , Interferon-gamma Release Tests , Sensitivity and SpecificitySubject(s)
COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Vaccines , Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , VaccinationSubject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Measles/epidemiology , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Refusal , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cluster Analysis , Humans , Measles/transmission , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
Since the first case of COVID-19 was identified in the USA in January, 2020, over 46 million people in the country have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Several COVID-19 vaccines have received emergency use authorisations from the US Food and Drug Administration, with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine receiving full approval on Aug 23, 2021. When paired with masking, physical distancing, and ventilation, COVID-19 vaccines are the best intervention to sustainably control the pandemic. However, surveys have consistently found that a sizeable minority of US residents do not plan to get a COVID-19 vaccine. The most severe consequence of an inadequate uptake of COVID-19 vaccines has been sustained community transmission (including of the delta [B.1.617.2] variant, a surge of which began in July, 2021). Exacerbating the direct impact of the virus, a low uptake of COVID-19 vaccines will prolong the social and economic repercussions of the pandemic on families and communities, especially low-income and minority ethnic groups, into 2022, or even longer. The scale and challenges of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign are unprecedented. Therefore, through a series of recommendations, we present a coordinated, evidence-based education, communication, and behavioural intervention strategy that is likely to improve the success of COVID-19 vaccine programmes across the USA.
Subject(s)
Behavior Therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/transmission , Communication , Immunization Programs , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Politics , United States , Vaccination Refusal/psychologySubject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocarditis , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Myocarditis/etiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/adverse effectsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We assessed the magnitude of unidentified coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in our healthcare personnel (HCP) early in the COVID-19 pandemic, and we evaluated risk factors for infection to identify areas for improvement in infection control practice in a northern California academic medical center. METHODS: We reviewed anti-severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG serologic test results and self-reported risk factors for seropositivity among 10,449 asymptomatic HCP who underwent voluntary serology testing between April 20 and May 20, 2020. RESULTS: In total, 136 employees (1.3%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG. This included 41 individuals (30.1%) who had previously tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) between March 13 and April 16, 2020. In multivariable analysis, employees of Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-3.46) and those working in environmental services, food services, or patient transport (OR, 4.81; 95% CI, 2.08-10.30) were at increased risk for seropositivity compared to other groups. Employees reporting a household contact with COVID-19 were also at higher risk for seropositivity (OR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.47-6.44), but those with a work, exposure alone were not (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.58-2.47). Importantly, one-third of seropositive individuals reported no prior symptoms, no suspected exposures, and no prior positive RT-PCR test. CONCLUSION: In this study, SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among HCP early in the northern California epidemic appeared to be quite low and was more likely attributable to community rather than occupational exposure.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , California/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic StudiesABSTRACT
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a group of medical and public health experts, normally meets 3 times per year to develop recommendations for vaccine use in the United States. Because of the severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, there are several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines currently in late-stage clinical trials, so the ACIP is now meeting monthly for single day meetings, with plans to continue standard 2- to 3-day meetings as per usual (February, June, and October). Emergency meetings of ACIP may occur if a vaccine candidate receives an Emergency Use Authorization from the food and drug administration (FDA). This Update provides a combined summary of the August 26 and September 22, 2020, meetings, both of which focused completely on Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. The representatives from the American Academy of Pediatrics (Y. A. M. and D. W. K.) and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (S. T. O.) are present as liaisons to the ACIP.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/standards , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Advisory Committees , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Humans , United StatesABSTRACT
Recurrence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive detection in infected but recovered individuals has been reported. Patients who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) could profoundly impact the health care system. We sought to define the kinetics and relevance of PCR-positive recurrence during recovery from acute COVID-19 to better understand risks for prolonged infectivity and reinfection. A series of 414 patients with confirmed SARS-Cov-2 infection, at The Second Affiliated Hospital of Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China from January 11 to April 23, 2020. Statistical analyses were performed of the clinical, laboratory, radiologic image, medical treatment, and clinical course of admission/quarantine/readmission data, and a recurrence predictive algorithm was developed. 16.7% recovered patients with PCR positive recurring one to three times, despite being in strict quarantine. Younger patients with mild pulmonary respiratory syndrome had higher risk of PCR positivity recurrence. The recurrence prediction model had an area under the ROC curve of 0.786. This case series provides characteristics of patients with recurrent SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Use of a prediction algorithm may identify patients at high risk of recurrent SARS-CoV-2 positivity and help to establish protocols for health policy.