Clinical Features and Outcomes of 105 Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in Seattle, Washington.

BACKGROUND: Washington State served as the initial epicenter of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic in the United States. An understanding of the risk factors and clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may provide guidance for management. METHODS: All laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases in adults admitted to an academic medical center in Seattle, Washington, between 2 March and 26 March 2020 were included. We evaluated individuals with and without severe disease, defined as admission to the intensive care unit or death. RESULTS: One hundred five COVID-19 patients were hospitalized. Thirty-five percent were admitted from a senior home or skilled nursing facility. The median age was 69 years, and half were women. Three or more comorbidities were present in 55% of patients, with hypertension (59%), obesity (47%), cardiovascular disease (38%), and diabetes (33%) being the most prevalent. Most (63%) had symptoms for ≥5 days prior to admission. Only 39% had fever in the first 24 hours, whereas 41% had hypoxia at admission. Seventy-three percent of patients had lymphopenia. Of 50 samples available for additional testing, no viral coinfections were identified. Severe disease occurred in 49%. Eighteen percent of patients were placed on mechanical ventilation, and the overall mortality rate was 33%. CONCLUSIONS: During the early days of the COVID-19 epidemic in Washington State, the disease had its greatest impact on elderly patients with medical comorbidities. We observed high rates of severe disease and mortality in our hospitalized patients.

Direct RT-qPCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from patient nasopharyngeal swabs without an RNA extraction step.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented need for rapid diagnostic testing. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a standard assay that includes an RNA extraction step from a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab followed by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) to detect the purified SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The current global shortage of RNA extraction kits has caused a severe bottleneck to COVID-19 testing. The goal of this study was to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 RNA could be detected from NP samples via a direct RT-qPCR assay that omits the RNA extraction step altogether. The direct RT-qPCR approach correctly identified 92% of a reference set of blinded NP samples (n = 155) demonstrated to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by traditional clinical diagnostic RT-qPCR that included an RNA extraction. Importantly, the direct method had sufficient sensitivity to reliably detect those patients with viral loads that correlate with the presence of infectious virus. Thus, this strategy has the potential to ease supply choke points to substantially expand COVID-19 testing and screening capacity and should be applicable throughout the world.

Cryptic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Washington state.

After its emergence in Wuhan, China, in late November or early December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus rapidly spread globally. Genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 allows the reconstruction of its transmission history, although this is contingent on sampling. We analyzed 453 SARS-CoV-2 genomes collected between 20 February and 15 March 2020 from infected patients in Washington state in the United States. We find that most SARS-CoV-2 infections sampled during this time derive from a single introduction in late January or early February 2020, which subsequently spread locally before active community surveillance was implemented.

Multiplexing primer/probe sets for detection of SARS-CoV-2 by qRT-PCR.

BACKGROUND: The novel respiratory virus SARS-CoV-2, responsible for over 380,000 COVID-19 related deaths, has caused significant strain on healthcare infrastructure and clinical laboratories globally. The pandemic's initial challenges include broad diagnostic testing, consistent reagent supply lines, and access to laboratory instruments and equipment. In early 2020, primer/probe sets distributed by the CDC utilized the same fluorophore for molecular detection - requiring multiple assays to be run in parallel - consuming valuable and limited resources. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs submitted to UW Virology for SARS-CoV-2 clinical testing were extracted, amplified by our laboratory developed test (LDT) - a CDC-based quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR reaction - and analyzed for agreement between the multiplexed assay. Laboratory- confirmed respiratory infection samples were included to evaluate assay cross-reaction specificity. RESULTS: Triplexing correctly identified SARS-CoV-2 in 98.4% of confirmed positive or inconclusive patient samples by single-plex LDT (n = 183/186). All 170 SARS-CoV-2 negative samples tested by single-plex LDT were negative by triplexing. Other laboratory-confirmed respiratory infections did not amplify for SARS-CoV-2 in the triplex reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Multiplexing two virus-specific gene targets and an extraction control was found to be comparable to running parallel assays independently, while significantly improving assay throughput.

Validation of SARS-CoV-2 detection across multiple specimen types.

BACKGROUND: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused considerable disruption across the world, resulting in more than 235,000 deaths since December 2019. SARS-CoV-2 has a wide tropism and detection of the virus has been described in multiple specimen types, including various respiratory secretions, cerebrospinal fluid, and stool. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy and sensitivity of a laboratory modified CDCbased SARS-CoV-2 N1 and N2 assay across a range of sample types. Study Design We compared the matrix effect on the analytical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection by qRT-PCR in nasal swabs collected in viral transport medium (VTM), bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), sputum, plasma, cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), stool, VTM, phosphate buffered saline (PBS), and Hanks' Balanced Salt Solution (HBSS). Initial limits of detection (LoD) were subsequently narrowed to confirm an LoD for each specimen type and target gene. RESULTS: LoDs were established using a modified CDC-based laboratory developed test and ranged from a mean CT cut-off of 33.8-35.7 (10-20 copies/reaction) for the N1 gene target, and 34.0-36.2 (1-10 copies/reaction) for N2. Alternatives to VTM such as PBS and HBSS had comparable LoDs. The N2 gene target was found to be most sensitive in CSF. CONCLUSION: A modified CDC-based laboratory developed test is able to detect SARSCoV- 2 accurately with similar sensitivity across all sample types tested.

Metagenomic Analysis Reveals Clinical SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Bacterial or Viral Superinfection and Colonization.

BACKGROUND: More than 2 months separated the initial description of SARS-CoV-2 and discovery of its widespread dissemination in the United States. Despite this lengthy interval, implementation of specific quantitative reverse transcription (qRT)-PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 tests in the US has been slow, and testing is still not widely available. Metagenomic sequencing offers the promise of unbiased detection of emerging pathogens, without requiring prior knowledge of the identity of the responsible agent or its genomic sequence. METHODS: To evaluate metagenomic approaches in the context of the current SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, laboratory-confirmed positive and negative samples from Seattle, WA were evaluated by metagenomic sequencing, with comparison to a 2019 reference genomic database created before the emergence of SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Within 36 h our results showed clear identification of a novel human Betacoronavirus, closely related to known Betacoronaviruses of bats, in laboratory-proven cases of SARS-CoV-2. A subset of samples also showed superinfection or colonization with human parainfluenza virus 3 or Moraxella species, highlighting the need to test directly for SARS-CoV-2 as opposed to ruling out an infection using a viral respiratory panel. Samples negative for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR were also negative by metagenomic analysis, and positive for Rhinovirus A and C. Unlike targeted SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR testing, metagenomic analysis of these SARS-CoV-2 negative samples identified candidate etiological agents for the patients' respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSION: Taken together, these results demonstrate the value of metagenomic analysis in the monitoring and response to this and future viral pandemics.

Comparative Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Seven Different Primer-Probe Sets and One Assay Kit.

Nearly 400,000 people worldwide are known to have been infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) beginning in December 2019. The virus has now spread to over 168 countries including the United States, where the first cluster of cases was observed in the Seattle metropolitan area in Washington. Given the rapid increase in the number of cases in many localities, the availability of accurate, high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 testing is vital to efforts to manage the current public health crisis. In the course of optimizing SARS-CoV-2 testing performed by the University of Washington Clinical Virology Lab (UW Virology Lab), we evaluated assays using seven different primer-probe sets and one assay kit. We found that the most sensitive assays were those that used the E-gene primer-probe set described by Corman et al. (V. M. Corman, O. Landt, M. Kaiser, R. Molenkamp, et al., Euro Surveill 25:2000045, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045) and the N2 set developed by the CDC (Division of Viral Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020, https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/downloads/rt-pcr-panel-primer-probes.pdf). All assays tested were found to be highly specific for SARS-CoV-2, with no cross-reactivity with other respiratory viruses observed in our analyses regardless of the primer-probe set or kit used. These results will provide valuable information to other clinical laboratories who are actively developing SARS-CoV-2 testing protocols at a time when increased testing capacity is urgently needed worldwide.

Covid-19 in Critically Ill Patients in the Seattle Region - Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Community transmission of coronavirus 2019 (Covid-19) was detected in the state of Washington in February 2020. METHODS: We identified patients from nine Seattle-area hospitals who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Clinical data were obtained through review of medical records. The data reported here are those available through March 23, 2020. Each patient had at least 14 days of follow-up. RESULTS: We identified 24 patients with confirmed Covid-19. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 64±18 years, 63% were men, and symptoms began 7±4 days before admission. The most common symptoms were cough and shortness of breath; 50% of patients had fever on admission, and 58% had diabetes mellitus. All the patients were admitted for hypoxemic respiratory failure; 75% (18 patients) needed mechanical ventilation. Most of the patients (17) also had hypotension and needed vasopressors. No patient tested positive for influenza A, influenza B, or other respiratory viruses. Half the patients (12) died between ICU day 1 and day 18, including 4 patients who had a do-not-resuscitate order on admission. Of the 12 surviving patients, 5 were discharged home, 4 were discharged from the ICU but remained in the hospital, and 3 continued to receive mechanical ventilation in the ICU. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 3 weeks of the Covid-19 outbreak in the Seattle area, the most common reasons for admission to the ICU were hypoxemic respiratory failure leading to mechanical ventilation, hypotension requiring vasopressor treatment, or both. Mortality among these critically ill patients was high. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health.).