SARS-CoV-2 sequencing with cloud-based analysis illustrates expedient co-ordinated surveillance of viral genomic epidemiology across six continents (preprint)

Viral sequencing has been critical in the COVID-19 pandemic response, but sequencing and bioinformatics capacity remain inconsistent. To examine the utility of a cloud-based sequencing analysis platform for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, we conducted a cross-sectional study incorporating seven countries in July 2022. Sites submitted sequential SARS-CoV-2 sequences over two weeks to the Global Pathogen Analysis Service (GPAS). The GPAS bioinformatics cloud platform performs sequence assembly plus lineage and related sample identification. Users can share information with collaborators while retaining data ownership. Seven sites contributed sequencing reads from 5,346 clinical samples, of which 4,799/5,346 (89.8%) had a lineage identified. Omicron lineages dominated, with the vast majority being BA.5, BA.4 and BA.2, commensurate with contemporary genomic epidemiological observations. Phylogenetic analysis demonstrated low within-lineage diversity, and highly similar sequences present in globally disparate sites. A cloud-based analysis platform like GPAS addresses bioinformatics bottlenecks and facilitates collaboration in pathogen surveillance, enhancing epidemic and pandemic preparedness.

Rapid turnaround multiplex sequencing of SARS-CoV-2: comparing tiling amplicon protocol performance (preprint)

Genome sequencing is pivotal to SARS-CoV-2 surveillance, elucidating the emergence and global dissemination of acquired genetic mutations. Amplicon sequencing has proven very effective for sequencing SARS-CoV-2, but prevalent mutations disrupting primer binding sites have necessitated the revision of sequencing protocols in order to maintain performance for emerging virus lineages. We compared the performance of Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) Midnight and ARTIC tiling amplicon protocols using 196 Delta lineage SARS-CoV-2 clinical specimens, and 71 mostly Omicron lineage samples with S gene target failure (SGTF), reflecting circulating lineages in the United Kingdom during December 2021. 96-plexed nanopore sequencing was used. For Delta lineage samples, ARTIC v4 recovered the greatest proportion of ≥90% complete genomes (81.1%; 159/193), followed by Midnight (71.5%; 138/193) and ARTIC v3 (34.1%; 14/41). Midnight protocol however yielded higher average genome recovery (mean 98.8%) than ARTIC v4 (98.1%) and ARTIC v3 (75.4%), resulting in less ambiguous final consensus assemblies overall. Explaining these observations were ARTIC v4’s superior genome recovery in low viral titre/high cycle threshold (Ct) samples and inferior performance in high titre/low Ct samples, where Midnight excelled. We evaluated Omicron sequencing performance using a revised Midnight primer mix alongside prototype ARTIC v4.1 primers, head-to-head with the existing commercially available Midnight and ARTIC v4 protocols. The revised protocols both improved considerably the recovery of Omicron genomes and exhibited similar overall performance to one another. Revised Midnight protocol recovered ≥90% complete genomes for 85.9% (61/71) of Omicron samples vs. 88.7% (63/71) for ARTIC v4.1. Approximate cost per sample for Midnight (£12) is lower than ARTIC (£16) while hands-on time is considerably lower for Midnight (∼7 hours) than ARTIC protocols (∼9.5 hours).

Enhancing epidemiological investigation of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection with whole genome sequencing: A retrospective cohort study across four hospitals in the UK. (preprint)

Background Despite robust efforts, patients and staff acquire SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitals. In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated whether whole-genome sequencing (WGS) could enhance the epidemiological investigation of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. Methods and findings From 17-November-2020 to 5-January-2021, 803 inpatients and 329 staff were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection across four teaching hospitals in Oxfordshire, UK. We classified cases according to epidemiological definitions, sought epidemiological evidence of a potential source for each nosocomial infection, and evaluated if epidemiologically-linked cases had genomic evidence supporting transmission. We compared epidemiological and genomic outbreak identification. Using national epidemiological definitions, 109/803(14%) inpatient infections were classified as definite/probable nosocomial, 615(77%) as community-acquired and 79(10%) as indeterminate. There was strong epidemiological evidence to support definite/probable cases as nosocomial: 107/109(98%) had a prior-negative PCR in the same hospital stay before testing positive, and 101(93%) shared time and space with known infected patients/staff. Many indeterminate cases were likely infected in hospital: 53/79(67%) had a prior-negative PCR and 75(95%) contact with a potential source. 89/615(11% of all 803 patients) with apparent community-onset had a recent hospital exposure. WGS highlighted SARS-CoV-2 is mainly imported into hospitals: within 764 samples sequenced 607 genomic clusters were identified (>1 SNP distinct). Only 43/607(7%) clusters contained evidence of onward transmission (subsequent cases within 1 SNP). 20/21 epidemiologically-identified outbreaks contained multiple genomic introductions. Most (80%) nosocomial acquisition occurred in rapid super-spreading events in settings with a mix of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Hospitals not routinely admitting COVID-19 patients had low rates of transmission. Undiagnosed/unsequenced individuals prevent genomic data from excluding nosocomial acquisition. Conclusions Our findings suggest current surveillance definitions underestimate nosocomial acquisition and reveal most nosocomial transmission occurs from a relatively limited number of highly infectious individuals.

An observational cohort study on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and B.1.1.7 variant infection in healthcare workers by antibody and vaccination status (preprint)

Background Natural and vaccine-induced immunity will play a key role in controlling the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 variants have the potential to evade natural and vaccine-induced immunity. Methods In a longitudinal cohort study of healthcare workers (HCWs) in Oxfordshire, UK, we investigated the protection from symptomatic and asymptomatic PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conferred by vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2, Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCOV-19) and prior infection (determined using anti-spike antibody status), using Poisson regression adjusted for age, sex, temporal changes in incidence and role. We estimated protection conferred after one versus two vaccinations and from infections with the B.1.1.7 variant identified using whole genome sequencing. Results 13,109 HCWs participated; 8285 received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (1407 two doses) and 2738 the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (49 two doses). Compared to unvaccinated seronegative HCWs, natural immunity and two vaccination doses provided similar protection against symptomatic infection: no HCW vaccinated twice had symptomatic infection, and incidence was 98% lower in seropositive HCWs (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.02 [95%CI <0.01-0.18]). Two vaccine doses or seropositivity reduced the incidence of any PCR-positive result with or without symptoms by 90% (0.10 [0.02-0.38]) and 85% (0.15 [0.08-0.26]) respectively. Single-dose vaccination reduced the incidence of symptomatic infection by 67% (0.33 [0.21-0.52]) and any PCR-positive result by 64% (0.36 [0.26-0.50]). There was no evidence of differences in immunity induced by natural infection and vaccination for infections with S-gene target failure and B.1.1.7. Conclusion Natural infection resulting in detectable anti-spike antibodies and two vaccine doses both provide robust protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, including against the B.1.1.7 variant.