Pregnant Women's Concerns Regarding COVID-19 and Their Willingness to Be Vaccinated.

Objectives: We investigated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) opinions, experiences, and willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy at two prenatal clinics in early 2021 and early 2022. Materials and Methods: Paper questionnaires were distributed to pregnant women at prenatal care facilities in Virginia and Florida between January and April 2021 and January and April 2022. Questions regarding acceptance and opinions of the influenza vaccine served as a baseline to assess COVID-19 vaccine opinions. Associations between demographic parameters and vaccine opinions and acceptance were examined using Chi-square. A COVID-19 concern score was constructed by principal component analysis with differences between groups assessed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Results: Many participants (40.6%) reported that the COVID pandemic had affected their pregnancy. Main themes were problems with social networks, increased stress/anxiety, and being more cautious. In 2021, 19.5% reported they would accept a COVID-19 vaccination during their pregnancy, which increased to 45.8% in 2022. Vaccine hesitancy did not vary by race or between sites, but educational attainment was significant (p < 0.001). Women with a higher concern score were more likely to report they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine. Women who would accept COVID vaccination had a positive opinion regarding the influenza vaccine. Main themes for refusing COVID-19 vaccination were concerns about side effects, lack of research/data, and mistrust of vaccines. Conclusions: The proportion of women willing to accept COVID-19 vaccination increased but remained below 50%. Willingness to accept vaccination during pregnancy was associated with higher education, higher concern about COVID-19, and a positive opinion of the influenza vaccine.

Design and Implementation of Improved SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic Assays To Mitigate the Impact of Genomic Mutations on Target Failure: the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Experience.

In 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) enabled manufacturers to request emergency use authorization (EUA) to facilitate the rapid authorization of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) platforms for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Uncommon SARS-CoV-2 point mutations could cause nucleocapsid (N) gene target failure (NGTF) when using first-generation Xpert Xpress assays, so improvements were designed and implemented. In response to NGTF reports and with consideration of viral genomic information in public databases, the Xpress assays were redesigned to mitigate the impact of SARS-CoV-2 mutations on qualitative assay performance. The second-generation assays include a third gene target (RNA-dependent RNA polymerase [RdRp]) and redundant oligonucleotide probes for the N2 target. First- and second-generation assay performances were evaluated using a challenge set of samples. A second-generation assay with updated oligonucleotide chemistry received FDA EUA in September 2021. A prototype assay with oligonucleotide chemistry similar to that of the second-generation assay with FDA EUA successfully detected all three gene targets (N2, envelope [E], and RdRp) in all challenge samples (100%; 50/50), including variants with N gene mutations (g.29197C>T or g.29200C>T), which caused NGTF in the first-generation assays. Investigation and reporting of IVD target failures, public sharing of viral genomic sequence data, and the FDA EUA pathway were essential components in facilitating a short cycle time from the identification of mutations that impact the performance of an IVD assay to the design and implementation of an improved IVD assay. IMPORTANCE The SARS-CoV-2 genome has mutated during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Some of these mutations have impacted the performance of nucleic acid amplification tests like PCR, which are commonly used as diagnostic tools to detect an infection. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA) process enables the rapid reformulation and regulatory authorization of improved PCRs. In our experience, the identification of SARS-CoV-2 mutations that impact PCR performance, the subsequent development of improved PCR chemistry, and the use of the FDA EUA regulatory pathway led to improved diagnostic performance during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic that is able to keep pace with the rapidly evolving genome of SARS-CoV-2.

Considerations regarding Interpretation of Positive SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Results with Late Cycle Threshold Values.

COVID-19 disease lies on a spectrum, ranging from completely asymptomatic to mild disease to severe and critical disease. Studies have shown that prolonged shedding or sporadic detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA can occur long after symptom resolution. Adding to these clinical complexities is the demand for testing for SARS-CoV-2 at all stages of diseases, frequently driven by screening of asymptomatic persons, something that traditionally has not been performed for other viral respiratory diseases. This can lead to positive results from nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), such as RT-PCR, with late cycle threshold (CT) values near the test's limit of detection. In this commentary, we review unique attributes of COVID-19 and causes of NAAT late CT values. We provide interpretation considerations as well as strategies to aid in test interpretation.

Performance of the Sofia SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Pediatric Patients.

The sensitivity and specificity of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests have not been widely assessed in children. We evaluated children presenting to outpatient care with Quidel Sofia SARS-CoV-2 antigen test (Sofia-Ag-RDT) compared against Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction test from November 2020 to April 2021. Sofia-Ag-RDT had the highest sensitivity in symptomatic (82%; 95% confidence interval, 68%-91%) children.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Viremia Is Associated With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Severity and Predicts Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral RNA (vRNA) is detected in the bloodstream of some patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but it is not clear whether this RNAemia reflects viremia (ie, virus particles) and how it relates to host immune responses and outcomes. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 vRNA was quantified in plasma samples from observational cohorts of 51 COVID-19 patients including 9 outpatients, 19 hospitalized (non-intensive care unit [ICU]), and 23 ICU patients. vRNA levels were compared with cross-sectional indices of COVID-19 severity and prospective clinical outcomes. We used multiple imaging methods to visualize virions in plasma. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 vRNA was detected in plasma of 100%, 52.6%, and 11.1% of ICU, non-ICU, and outpatients, respectively. Virions were detected in plasma pellets using electron tomography and immunostaining. Plasma vRNA levels were significantly higher in ICU > non-ICU > outpatients (P < .0001); for inpatients, plasma vRNA levels were strongly associated with higher World Health Organization (WHO) score at admission (P = .01), maximum WHO score (P = .002), and discharge disposition (P = .004). A plasma vRNA level >6000 copies/mL was strongly associated with mortality (hazard ratio, 10.7). Levels of vRNA were significantly associated with several inflammatory biomarkers (P < .01) but not with plasma neutralizing antibody titers (P = .8). CONCLUSIONS: Visualization of virus particles in plasma indicates that SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia is due, at least in part, to viremia. The levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia correlate strongly with disease severity, patient outcome, and specific inflammatory biomarkers but not with neutralizing antibody titers.

Multi-disciplinary Leadership to Mitigate COVID-19 in an Austere West African Military Environment.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic created challenges for forward-deployed military units to Western Africa. Austere military environments afford multiple avenues to transmit COVID-19 amongst service members. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A COVID-19 outbreak on a military base in Western Africa spanning over 100 days is statistically analyzed using a Pearson's correlation coefficient. Furthermore, a COVID-19 reproductive number (R0) is evaluated to examine the relationship between specific command-directed policies to mitigate COVID-19 transmission. RESULTS: The multidisciplinary partnership of military command, medical, and public health leadership implemented evidence-based and epidemiologically informed COVID-19 preventive base-wide policies, including appropriate isolation/quarantine policies. The R0 for the outbreak was 0.03 and remained <1 for the outbreak duration. This base remained COVID-19 free for multiple weeks after policy implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of practical mitigating base-wide policies through seamless communication between military command/medical/public health leadership resolved the COVID-19 outbreak while maintaining mission readiness. Weekly COVID-19 testing epidemiological data may be utilized by commanders to direct further decision-making on tightening/loosening base-wide policy restrictions for continued mission-essential operations, e.g., security, food service, or airfield operations.

Performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing in symptomatic and asymptomatic adults: a single-center evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Antigen testing offers rapid and inexpensive testing for SARS-CoV-2 but concerns regarding performance, especially sensitivity, remain. Limited data exists for use of antigen testing in asymptomatic patients; thus, performance and reliability of antigen testing remains unclear. METHODS: 148 symptomatic and 144 asymptomatic adults were included. A nasal swab was collected for testing by Quidel Sofia SARS IFA (Sofia) as point of care. A nasopharyngeal swab was also collected and transported to the laboratory for testing by Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV RT-PCR (Cepheid). RESULTS: Overall, Sofia had good agreement with Cepheid (> 95%) in adults, however was less sensitive. Sofia had a sensitivity of 87.8% and 33.3% for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, respectively. Among symptomatic patients, testing > 5 days post symptom onset resulted in lower sensitivity (82%) when compared with testing within 5 days of symptom onset (90%). Of the four Sofia false-negative results in the asymptomatic cohort, 50% went on to develop COVID-19 disease within 5 days of testing. Specificity in both symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Sofia has acceptable performance in symptomatic adults when tested < 5 days of symptom onset. Caution should be taken when testing patients with ≥ 5 days of symptoms. The combination of low prevalence and reduced sensitivity results in relatively poor performance of in asymptomatic patients. NAAT-based diagnostic assays should be considered in when antigen testing is unreliable, particularly in symptomatic patients with > 5 days of symptom onset and asymptomatic patients.

SARS-CoV-2 N gene mutations impact detection by clinical molecular diagnostics: reports in two cities in the United States.

Nasal and nasopharyngeal swab specimens tested by the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 were analyzed by whole-genome sequencing based on impaired detection of the N2 target. Each viral genome had at least one mutation in the N gene, which likely arose independently in the New York City and Pittsburgh study sites.

Preprocedural SARS-CoV-2 Testing to Sustain Medically Needed Health Care Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: We implemented a preprocedural severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) screening initiative designed to sustain health care during a time when the extent of SARS-CoV-2 infection was unknown. METHODS: This was a prospective study of patients undergoing procedures at 3 academic hospitals in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (April 21-June 11), and 19 community hospitals across Middle/Western Pennsylvania and Southwestern New York (May 1-June 11). Patients at academic hospitals underwent symptom screening ≤7 days preprocedure, then SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing 1-4 days preprocedure. A subset also underwent day-of-procedure testing. Community hospital patients underwent testing per local protocols. We report SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rates, impact, and barriers to testing encountered through June 11. PCR positivity rates of optional preprocedural SARS-CoV-2 testing for 2 consecutive periods following the screening initiative are also reported. RESULTS: Of 5881 eligible academic hospital patients, 2415 (41.1%) were tested (April 21-June 11). Lack of interest, distance, self-isolation, and nursing home/incarceration status were barriers. There were 11 PCR-positive patients (10 asymptomatic) among 10 539 patients tested (0.10%; 95% CI, 0.05%-0.19%): 3/2415 (0.12%; 95% CI, 0.02%-0.36%) and 8/8124 (0.10%; 95% CI, 0.04%-0.19%) at academic and community hospitals, respectively. Procedures were performed as scheduled in 40% (4/10) of asymptomatic PCR-positive patients. Positivity increased during subsequent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) surges: 54/34 948 (0.15%; 95% CI, 0.12%-0.20%) and 101/24 741 (0.41%; 95% CI, 0.33%-0.50%) PCR-positive patients from June 12-September 10 and September 11-December 15, respectively (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing preprocedural PCR testing was complex and revealed low infection rates (0.24% overall), which increased during COVID-19 surges. Additional studies are needed to define the COVID-19 prevalence threshold at which universal preprocedural screening is warranted.

Understanding, Verifying, and Implementing Emergency Use Authorization Molecular Diagnostics for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has brought a new wave of challenges to health care, particularly in the area of rapid diagnostic test development and implementation. The diagnosis of acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is critically dependent on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from clinical specimens (e.g., nasopharyngeal swabs). While laboratory-developed testing for SARS-CoV-2 is an essential component of diagnostic testing for this virus, the majority of clinical microbiology laboratories are dependent on commercially available SARS-CoV-2 molecular assays. In contrast to assays approved or cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for in vitro diagnostic use, assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids have emergency use authorization (EUA) from the FDA. Outside of highly specialized academic and commercial laboratory settings, clinical microbiology laboratories are likely unfamiliar with the EUA classification, and thus, assay verification can be daunting. Further compounding anxiety for laboratories are major issues with the supply chain that are dramatically affecting the availability of test reagents and requiring laboratories to implement multiple commercial EUA tests. Here, we describe guidance for the verification of assays with EUA for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid from clinical specimens.