Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
J Dermatolog Treat ; 34(1): 2161297, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2166064

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection does not appear to be increased for psoriasis patients using biologics compared to those on other treatments, but evidence is still limited. OBJECTIVES: (1) to estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with psoriasis, (2) to compare SARS-CoV-2 infection rates for different psoriasis treatments groups (biologic vs. systemic conventional vs. topical therapy) corrected for confounders and (3) to describe patients with severe COVID-19 for all treatment groups. METHODS: In this cross-sectional cohort study all patients received a questionnaire to gather data on psoriasis treatment, SARS-CoV-2 infections and related risk factors. Simultaneously, they underwent a blood test to screen for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections was calculated and logistic regression and Cox proportional-hazards models were performed to determine the association between treatment group and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk, corrected for confounders. Patients with severe COVID-19 disease were described and the mortality rate per treatment group was calculated for the target population. RESULTS: Patients were included between April 12 2021 and October 31 2021. Of 551 patients, 59 (10.7% (CI95% 8.3-13.6)) had experienced a SARS-CoV-2 infection, based on questionnaire data combined with serological data. In our study cohort, corrected for confounders, biologic or non-biologic systemic therapy users did not appear to have increased SARS-CoV-2 infection risk compared to patients using other treatment. Only 4 hospitalizations (0.7% (CI95% 0.2-1.0) were reported in our study population and no ICU admissions were reported. The rough mortality rate in the target cohort was 0.32% (CI95% 0.13-0.66) in all treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Corrected for risk-mitigating behavior and vaccination status, a higher SARS-CoV-2 incidence for biologics or non-biologics systemics compared to other treatments could not be proven. Severe cases were infrequent in all treatment groups. This finding further strengthens treatment recommendations that systemic therapies for patients with psoriasis do not require preventive cessation for reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psoriasis , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Prevalence , Pandemics , Psoriasis/drug therapy , Psoriasis/epidemiology , Cohort Studies
2.
Pathogens ; 11(10)2022 Sep 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2099690

ABSTRACT

Despite extensive vaccination and booster programs, SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in long-term care facilities (LTCF) continue to occur. We retrospectively describe a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak amongst a partially vaccinated LTCF population in The Netherlands which occurred in March 2021. The facility comprised three floors functioning as separate wards. Nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR were obtained from residents and staff presenting with COVID-19-like symptoms and from all residents and staff during two point prevalence screenings (PPS). Samples meeting technical criteria were included for phylogenetic analysis. Positive SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR were obtained from 11 (18%) of 61 residents and 8 (7%) of 110 staff members between March 8 and March 25. Seven (37%) cases and five (63%) vaccinated cases were diagnosed through PPS. Cases were found on all wards. Phylogenetic analysis (n = 11) showed a maximum difference of four nucleotides between sequences on the outer branches of the tree, but identified two identical sequences on the root differing maximum two nucleotides from all other sequences, suggesting all did belong to the same cluster. Our results imply that PPS is useful in containing SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks amongst (vaccinated) LTCF populations, as an entire LTCF might behave as a single epidemiological unit and it is preferable to maximize the number of samples included for phylogenetic analysis.

3.
Euro Surveill ; 27(42)2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2089697

ABSTRACT

BackgroundCountries worldwide are focusing to mitigate the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic by employing public health measures. Laboratories have a key role in the control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Serology for SARS-CoV-2 is of critical importance to support diagnosis, define the epidemiological framework and evaluate immune responses to natural infection and vaccine administration.AimThe aim of this study was the assessment of the actual capability among laboratories involved in sero-epidemiological studies on COVID-19 in EU/EEA and EU enlargement countries to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies through an external quality assessment (EQA) based on proficiency testing.MethodsThe EQA panels were composed of eight different, pooled human serum samples (all collected in 2020 before the vaccine roll-out), addressing sensitivity and specificity of detection. The panels and two EU human SARS-CoV-2 serological standards were sent to 56 laboratories in 30 countries.ResultsThe overall performance of laboratories within this EQA indicated a robust ability to establish past SARS-CoV-2 infections via detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, with 53 of 55 laboratories using at least one test that characterised all EQA samples correctly. IgM-specific test methods provided most incorrect sample characterisations (24/208), while test methods detecting total immunoglobulin (0/119) and neutralising antibodies (2/230) performed the best. The semiquantitative assays used by the EQA participants also showed a robust performance in relation to the standards.ConclusionOur EQA showed a high capability across European reference laboratories for reliable diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses. Serological tests that provide robust and reliable detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are available.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Laboratories , Antibodies, Viral , Sensitivity and Specificity , Immunoglobulin M , Antibodies, Neutralizing
4.
J Clin Microbiol ; 59(9): e0076721, 2021 08 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501529

ABSTRACT

In response to the worldwide pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the subsequent antibody tests that flooded the market, a nationwide collaborative approach in the Netherlands was employed. Forty-one Dutch laboratories joined forces and shared their evaluation data to allow for the evaluation of a quantity of serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 that exceeds the capacity of each individual laboratory. As of April 2020, these performance data had been aggregated and shared in regularly updated reports with other laboratories, Dutch government, public health organizations, and the public. This frequently updated overview of assay performance increased the efficiency of our national laboratory response, supporting laboratories in their choice and implementation of assays. Aggregated performance data for 47 immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 showed that none of the evaluated immunoassays that detect only IgM or IgA met the diagnostic criteria, indicating that they are not suitable for diagnosing acute infections. For the detection of IgG, only the Biozek Corona virus COVID rapid test, Euroimmun SARS-CoV-2 IgG, and Wantai SARS-CoV-2 antibody (Ab) ELISA met predefined performance criteria in hospitalized patients where samples were collected 14 days post-onset of symptoms (DPO), while for patients with mild or asymptomatic infections, only the Wantai SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA met the predefined performance criteria if samples were collected 14 days postonset. Here, we describe this unique nationwide collaboration during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic; the collected data and their results are an example of what can be accomplished when forces are joined during a public health crisis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Immunoassay , Immunoglobulin M , Laboratories , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pandemics , Sensitivity and Specificity
5.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(5): 695-700, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1340599

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of nasal mid-turbinate self-testing using rapid antigen detection tests (RDT) for persons with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the community. Self-testing for COVID-19 infection with lateral flow assay severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RDT, provides rapid results and could enable frequent and extensive testing in the community, thereby improving the control of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Participants visiting a municipal SARS-CoV-2 testing centre, received self-testing kits containing either the BD Veritor System (BD-RDT) or Roche SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection test (Roche-RDT). Oro-nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from the participants for quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) testing. As a proxy for contagiousness, viral culture was performed on a selection of qRT-PCR positive samples to determine the Ct-value at which the chance of a positive culture dropped below 0.5 (Ct-value cut-off). Sensitivity and specificity of self-testing were compared to qRT-PCR with a Ct-value below the Ct value cut-off. Determinants independently associated with a false-negative self-test result were determined. RESULTS: A total of 3201 participants were included (BD-RDT n = 1595; Roche-RDT n = 1606). Sensitivity and specificity of self-testing compared with the qRT-PCR results with a Ct-value below the Ct-value cut-off were 78.4% (95% CI 73.2%-83.5%) and 99.4% (95% CI 99.1%-99.7%), respectively. A higher age was independently associated with a false-negative self-testing result with an odds ratio of 1.024 (95% CI 1.003-1.044). CONCLUSIONS: Self-testing using currently available RDT has a high specificity and relatively high sensitivity to identify individuals with a high probability of contagiousness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Antigens, Viral/analysis , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Self-Testing , Sensitivity and Specificity
6.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 101(2): 115392, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1198686

ABSTRACT

Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on upper respiratory tract (URT) samples is the primary method to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infections and guide public health measures, with a supportive role for serology. We reinforce previous findings on limited sensitivity of PCR testing, and solidify this fact by statistically utilizing a firm basis of multiple tests per individual. We integrate stratifications with respect to several patient characteristics such as severity of disease and time since onset of symptoms. Bayesian statistical modelling was used to retrospectively determine the sensitivity of RT-PCR using SARS-CoV-2 serology in 644 COVID-19-suspected patients with varying degrees of disease severity and duration. The sensitivity of RT-PCR ranged between 80% - 95%; increasing with disease severity, it decreased rapidly over time in mild COVID-19 cases. Negative URT RT-PCR results should be interpreted in the context of clinical characteristics, especially with regard to containment of viral transmission based on 'test, trace and isolate'. Keywords: SARS-CoV-2, RT-PCR, serology, sensitivity, public health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Bayes Theorem , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Serological Testing , Contact Tracing , False Negative Reactions , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Quarantine , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Severity of Illness Index
7.
J Immunol ; 205(12): 3491-3499, 2020 12 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-895432

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2 infections often cause only mild disease that may evoke relatively low Ab titers compared with patients admitted to hospitals. Generally, total Ab bridging assays combine good sensitivity with high specificity. Therefore, we developed sensitive total Ab bridging assays for detection of SARS-CoV-2 Abs to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) and nucleocapsid protein in addition to conventional isotype-specific assays. Ab kinetics was assessed in PCR-confirmed, hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients (n = 41) and three populations of patients with COVID-19 symptoms not requiring hospital admission: PCR-confirmed convalescent plasmapheresis donors (n = 182), PCR-confirmed hospital care workers (n = 47), and a group of longitudinally sampled symptomatic individuals highly suspect of COVID-19 (n = 14). In nonhospitalized patients, the Ab response to RBD is weaker but follows similar kinetics, as has been observed in hospitalized patients. Across populations, the RBD bridging assay identified most patients correctly as seropositive. In 11/14 of the COVID-19-suspect cases, seroconversion in the RBD bridging assay could be demonstrated before day 12; nucleocapsid protein Abs emerged less consistently. Furthermore, we demonstrated the feasibility of finger-prick sampling for Ab detection against SARS-CoV-2 using these assays. In conclusion, the developed bridging assays reliably detect SARS-CoV-2 Abs in hospitalized and nonhospitalized patients and are therefore well suited to conduct seroprevalence studies.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antibody Formation , COVID-19/immunology , Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19 Serological Testing , Convalescence , Female , Humans , Immunologic Tests , Male , Middle Aged
8.
J Infect Dis ; 222(8): 1265-1269, 2020 09 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-811305

ABSTRACT

We determined and compared the humoral immune response in patients with severe (hospitalized) and mild (nonhospitalized) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients with severe disease (n = 38) develop a robust antibody response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), including immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin A antibodies. The geometric mean 50% virus neutralization titer is 1:240. SARS-CoV-2 infection was found in hospital personnel (n = 24), who developed mild symptoms necessitating leave of absence and self-isolation, but not hospitalization; 75% developed antibodies, but with low/absent virus neutralization (60% with titers <1:20). While severe COVID-19 patients develop a strong antibody response, mild SARS-CoV-2 infections induce a modest antibody response. Long-term monitoring will show whether these responses predict protection against future infections.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Betacoronavirus/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibody Formation , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Humans , Immunoglobulin A/blood , Immunoglobulin A/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Neutralization Tests , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
9.
Emerg Microbes Infect ; 9(1): 1965-1973, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-725731

ABSTRACT

Serology is a crucial part of the public health response to the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Here, we describe the development, validation and clinical evaluation of a protein micro-array as a quantitative multiplex immunoassay that can identify S and N-directed SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies with high specificity and sensitivity and distinguish them from all currently circulating human coronaviruses. The method specificity was 100% for SARS-CoV-2 S1 and 96% for N antigen based on extensive syndromic (n=230 cases) and population panel (n=94) testing that also confirmed the high prevalence of seasonal human coronaviruses. To assess its potential role for both SARS-CoV-2 patient diagnostics and population studies, we evaluated a large heterogeneous COVID-19 cohort (n=330) and found an overall sensitivity of 89% (≥ 21 days post onset symptoms (dps)), ranging from 86% to 96% depending on severity of disease. For a subset of these patients longitudinal samples were provided up to 56 dps. Mild cases showed absent or delayed, and lower SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses. Overall, we present the development and extensive clinical validation of a multiplex coronavirus serological assay for syndromic testing, to answer research questions regarding to antibody responses, to support SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics and to evaluate epidemiological developments efficiently and with high-throughput.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , Betacoronavirus/immunology , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Nucleocapsid Proteins/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/blood , Aged , Antigens, Viral/blood , Antigens, Viral/immunology , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus/immunology , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus/pathogenicity , Neutralization Tests , Nucleocapsid Proteins/immunology , Pandemics , Phosphoproteins , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Protein Array Analysis , Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus/immunology , Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus/pathogenicity , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Severity of Illness Index , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
10.
Euro Surveill ; 25(12)2020 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-19751

ABSTRACT

To rapidly assess possible community transmission in Noord-Brabant, the Netherlands, healthcare workers (HCW) with mild respiratory complaints and without epidemiological link (contact with confirmed case or visited areas with active circulation) were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Within 2 days, 1,097 HCW in nine hospitals were tested; 45 (4.1%) were positive. Of six hospitals with positive HCW, two accounted for 38 positive HCW. The results informed local and national risk management.


Subject(s)
Community-Acquired Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Personnel , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Community-Acquired Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Netherlands/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/diagnosis , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/transmission
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL