A compilation answering 50 questions on monkeypox virus and the current monkeypox outbreak.

The current monkeypox disease (MPX) outbreak constitutes a new threat and challenge for our society. With more than 55,000 confirmed cases in 103 countries, World Health Organization declared the ongoing MPX outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on July 23, 2022. The current MPX outbreak is the largest, most widespread, and most serious since the diagnosis of the first case of MPX in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), a country where MPX is an endemic disease. Throughout history, there have only been sporadic and self-limiting outbreaks of MPX outside Africa, with a total of 58 cases described from 2003 to 2021. This figure contrasts with the current outbreak of 2022, in which more than 55,000 cases have been confirmed in just 4 months. MPX is, in most cases, self-limiting; however, severe clinical manifestations and complications have been reported. Complications are usually related to the extent of virus exposure and patient health status, generally affecting children, pregnant women, and immunocompromised patients. The expansive nature of the current outbreak leaves many questions that the scientific community should investigate and answer in order to understand this phenomenon better and prevent new threats in the future. In this review, 50 questions regarding monkeypox virus (MPXV) and the current MPX outbreak were answered in order to provide the most updated scientific information and to explore the potential causes and consequences of this new health threat.

External validation of unsupervised COVID-19 clinical phenotypes and their prognostic impact.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can be classified into different clinical phenotypes based on their demographic, clinical, radiology, and laboratory features. We aimed to validate in an external cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients the prognostic value of a previously described phenotyping system (FEN-COVID-19) and to assess the reproducibility of phenotypes development as a secondary analysis. METHODS: Patients were classified in phenotypes A, B or C according to the severity of oxygenation impairment, inflammatory response, hemodynamic and laboratory tests according to the FEN-COVID-19 method. RESULTS: Overall, 992 patients were included in the study, and 181 (18%), 757 (76%) and 54 (6%) of them were assigned to the FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes A, B, and C, respectively. An association with mortality was observed for phenotype C vs. A (hazard ratio [HR] 3.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.81-5.30, p < 0.001) and for phenotype C vs. B (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.50-3.23, p < 0.001). A non-statistically significant trend towards higher mortality was also observed for phenotype B vs. A (HR 1.41; 95% CI 0.92-2.15, p = 0.115). By means of cluster analysis, three different phenotypes were also identified in our cohort, with an overall similar gradient in terms of prognostic impact to that observed when patients were assigned to FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic impact of FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes was confirmed in our external cohort, although with less difference in mortality between phenotypes A and B than in the original study.

Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 can be classified into different clinical phenotypes based on their demographic, clinical, radiology, and laboratory featuresIn this study, we externally confirmed the prognostic impact of clinical phenotypes previously identified by Gutierrez-Gutierrez and colleagues in a Spanish cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and the usefulness of their simplified probabilistic model for phenotypes assignmentThis could indirectly support the validity of both phenotype's development and their extrapolation to other hospitals and countries for management decisions during other possible future viral pandemics.

Epidemiology and molecular characteristics of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) among italian community-dwelling adults, 2021/22 season.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of acute respiratory infections worldwide. While historically RSV research has been focused on children, data on RSV infection in adults are limited. The goal of this study was to establish the prevalence of RSV in community-dwelling Italian adults and analyze its genetic variability during the 2021/22 winter season. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, a random sample of naso-/oropharyngeal specimens from symptomatic adults seeking for SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing between December 2021 and March 2022 were tested for RSV and other respiratory pathogens by means of reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. RSV-positive samples were further molecularly characterized by sequence analysis. RESULTS: Of 1,213 samples tested, 1.6% (95% CI: 0.9-2.4%) were positive for RSV and subgroups A (44.4%) and B (55.6%) were identified in similar proportions. The epidemic peak occurred in December 2021, when the RSV prevalence was as high as 4.6% (95% CI: 2.2-8.3%). The prevalence of RSV detection was similar (p = 0.64) to that of influenza virus (1.9%). All RSV A and B strains belonged to the ON1 and BA genotypes, respectively. Most (72.2%) RSV-positive samples were also positive for other pathogens being SARS-CoV-2, Streptococcus pneumoniae and rhinovirus the most frequent. RSV load was significantly higher among mono-detections than co-detections. CONCLUSION: During the 2021/22 winter season, characterized by the predominant circulation of SARS-CoV-2 and some non-pharmaceutical containment measures still in place, a substantial proportion of Italian adults tested positive for genetically diversified strains of both RSV subtypes. In view of the upcoming registration of vaccines, establishment of the National RSV surveillance system is urgently needed.

Rapid differential diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial viruses: Validation of a novel RT-PCR assay.

BACKGROUND: Influenza and respiratory syncytial (RSV) viruses are expected to co-circulate with SARS-CoV-2 in the upcoming seasons and clinical differential diagnosis between them is difficult. Laboratory-based RT-PCR is a gold standard diagnostic method for influenza, RSV and SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to estimate the diagnostic performance of a novel point-of-care RT-PCR assay STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 (SD Biosensor) in a large number of clinical specimens with diversified (co)-infection patterns and viral loads. METHODS: This was a retrospective study, in which all samples were tested in both STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 index and Allplex SARS-CoV-2/Respiratory Panel 1 (Seegene) reference kits. Samples with discordant results were further processed in a third resolver test (Resp-4-Plex, Abbott). RESULTS: A total of 1,019 naso-/oropharyngeal samples (50.3% positive for at least one virus) were processed in both STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 and Allplex assays and the overall between-assay agreement was as high as 94.6%. Positive percent agreement of the STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 was 100%, 96.6%, 97.3% and 99.4% for influenza A, B, RSV and SARS-CoV-2, respectively. The corresponding negative percent agreement was 99.7%. 100%, 100% and 98.4%, respectively. The expected positive and negative predictive values for all viruses were constantly above 96% in a reasonable range of disease prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: STANDARD M10 Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 is a reliable RT-PCR assay able to detect influenza A, influenza B, RSV and SARS-CoV-2 in one hour or less, fostering a rapid differential diagnosis of common respiratory viruses.

Surveillance of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection and Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness among Hospitalized Italian Adults, 2021/22 Season.

Following an extremely low incidence of influenza during the first waves of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the 2021/22 Northern Hemisphere winter season saw a resurgence of influenza virus circulation. The aim of this study was to describe epidemiology of severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) among Italian adults and estimate the 2021/22 season influenza vaccine effectiveness. For this purpose, a test-negative case-control study was conducted in a geographically representative sample of Italian hospitals. Of 753 SARI patients analyzed, 2.5% (N = 19) tested positive for influenza, most of which belonged to the A(H3N2) subtype. Phylogenetic analysis showed that these belonged to the subclade 3C.2a1b.2a.2, which was antigenically different from the 2021/22 A(H3N2) vaccine component. Most (89.5%) cases were registered among non-vaccinated individuals, suggesting a protective effect of influenza vaccination. Due to a limited number of cases, vaccine effectiveness estimated through the Firth's penalized logistic regression was highly imprecise, being 83.4% (95% CI: 25.8-97.4%) and 83.1% (95% CI: 22.2-97.3%) against any influenza type A and A(H3N2), respectively. Exclusion of SARS-CoV-2-positive controls from the model did not significantly change the base-case estimates. Within the study limitations, influenza vaccination appeared to be effective against laboratory-confirmed SARI.

Case report: Sotrovimab, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir combination as salvage treatment option in two immunocompromised patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients is difficult to treat. SARS-CoV-2 interaction with the host immune system and the role of therapy still remains only partly understood. There are no data regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies and the combination of two antivirals in fighting viral replication and disease progression. We report the cases of two patients, both treated with rituximab for non-Hodgkin lymphoma and granulomatosis with polyangiitis, respectively, and both hospitalized for COVID-19 with positive SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia, who were successfully treated with a salvage combination therapy with sotrovimab, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir.

Case report: Sotrovimab, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir combination as salvage treatment option in two immunocompromised patients hospitalized for COVID-19

COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients is difficult to treat. SARS-CoV-2 interaction with the host immune system and the role of therapy still remains only partly understood. There are no data regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies and the combination of two antivirals in fighting viral replication and disease progression. We report the cases of two patients, both treated with rituximab for non-Hodgkin lymphoma and granulomatosis with polyangiitis, respectively, and both hospitalized for COVID-19 with positive SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia, who were successfully treated with a salvage combination therapy with sotrovimab, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir.

Monitoring influenza vaccination coverage among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a three-year survey in a large university hospital in North-Western Italy.

Introduction: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are one of the highest priority groups recommended for seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV). Greater awareness of the importance of influenza vaccination was observed among HCWs after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to analyze SIV coverage rates in the 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 seasons among HCWs employed at the IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino in Genoa, in order to observe how coverage has changed since the COVID-19 pandemic began. Methods: A retrospective, single-center study was conducted among HCWs working at the IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino in Genoa. The vaccinated population was stratified by gender, age, qualification and area of activity, and the characteristics of vaccinated HCWs were analyzed. Results: While SIV coverage was below the recommended target in all seasons, a sharp increase was observed in 2020/2021 (12.8%; 40.9% and 23% in 2019/2020, 2020/2021 and 2021/2022, respectively). The mean and median age of vaccinees also increased during the 2020/2021 vaccination campaign (46.7 and 49 years, respectively) in comparison with the 2019/2020 season (43.5 and 45, respectively). In the 2019/2020 and 2021/2022 seasons, a higher proportion of vaccinees were physicians. Vaccinated females outnumbered males, but the coverage rate resulted greater in males than females in all three seasons. While a higher proportion of vaccinated subjects worked in medical areas, the most evident increase over the three years was seen among subjects working in the services area. Conclusions: This survey highlights the importance of studying the determinants that influence vaccination adherence and how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected SIV coverage.

Evaluation of humoral and cellular response to four vaccines against COVID-19 in different age groups: A longitudinal study.

To date there has been limited head-to-head evaluation of immune responses to different types of COVID-19 vaccines. A real-world population-based longitudinal study was designed with the aim to define the magnitude and duration of immunity induced by each of four different COVID-19 vaccines available in Italy at the time of this study. Overall, 2497 individuals were enrolled at time of their first vaccination (T0). Vaccine-specific antibody responses induced over time by Comirnaty, Spikevax, Vaxzevria, Janssen Ad26.COV2.S and heterologous vaccination were compared up to six months after immunization. On a subset of Comirnaty vaccinees, serology data were correlated with the ability to neutralize a reference SARS-CoV-2 B strain, as well as Delta AY.4 and Omicron BA.1. The frequency of SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, and memory B cells induced by the four different vaccines was assessed six months after the immunization. We found that mRNA vaccines are stronger inducer of anti-Spike IgG and B-memory cell responses. Humoral immune responses are lower in frail elderly subjects. Neutralization of the Delta AY.4 and Omicron BA.1 variants is severely impaired, especially in older individuals. Most vaccinees display a vaccine-specific T-cell memory six months after the vaccination. By describing the immunological response during the first phase of COVID-19 vaccination campaign in different cohorts and considering several aspects of the immunological response, this study allowed to collect key information that could facilitate the implementation of effective prevention and control measures against SARS-CoV-2.

Who Is at Higher Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection? Results from a Northern Region of Italy.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues to spread worldwide, generating a high impact on healthcare systems. The aim of the study was to examine the epidemiological burden of SARS-CoV-2 reinfections and to identify potential related risk factors. A retrospective observational study was conducted in Liguria Region, combining data from National Vaccines Registry and Regional Chronic Condition Data Warehouse. In the study period (September 2021 to May 2022), 335,117 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were recorded in Liguria, of which 15,715 were reinfected once. During the Omicron phase (which predominated from 3 January 2022), the risk of reinfection was 4.89 times higher (p < 0.001) than during the Delta phase. Unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals with at least one dose for more than 120 days were at increased risk of reinfection compared with vaccinated individuals with at least one dose for ≤120 days, respectively (odds ratio (OR) of 1.26, p < 0.001; OR of 1.18, p < 0.001). Healthcare workers were more than twice as likely to be reinfected than non-healthcare workers (OR of 2.38, p < 0.001). Lower ORs were seen among people aged 60 to 79 years. Two doses or more of vaccination were found to be protective against the risk of reinfection rather than a single dose (mRNA vaccines: OR of 0.06, p < 0.0001, and OR of 0.1, p < 0.0001; vector vaccines: OR of 0.05, p < 0.0001). Patients with chronic renal failure, cardiovascular disease, bronchopneumopathy, neuropathy and autoimmune diseases were at increased risk of reinfection (OR of 1.38, p = 0.0003; OR of 1.09, p < 0.0296; OR of 1.14, p = 0.0056; OR of 1.78, p < 0.0001; OR of 1.18, p = 0.0205). Estimating the epidemiological burden of SARS-CoV-2 reinfections and the role played by risk factors in reinfections is relevant for identifying risk-based preventive strategies in a pandemic context characterized by a high circulation of the virus and a high rate of pathogen mutations.

Adverse Reactions after the Third Dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine among Medical School Residents in a Regional Reference University Hospital in Italy.

The recent emergence of new variants of concern (VOCs) of SARS-CoV-2 and the uncertain duration of protection provided by the primary immunization cycle have highlighted the need for COVID-19 booster vaccinations. However, only a few studies have assessed the safety and reactogenicity profile of mRNA booster doses. Therefore, we conducted an online survey with the aim of assessing the adverse reaction profile in the 7 days following a third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine in a population of resident physicians who had already been investigated after the primary vaccination. Among the 512 resident physicians (female = 53.2%, mean age = 29.8 years) invited to participate in the survey, 222 completed the survey (56.5% female, mean age of 29.9 years), with an average time from second to third dose of 8.6 months. The most common adverse reactions were local pain (88.3%), fatigue (58.1%), muscle/joint pain (44.1%), and headache (38.3%), all subsiding in 48-72 h. While the local reaction rate was similar to that following the first two doses, the systemic reactions were considerably less common and milder compared to the second vaccination. Nonetheless, over one third (36.1%) of participants reported interference with their normal activities. These results complement our previous findings and could aid occupational and public health professionals in the counselling of vaccinees.

Efficacy of the Sentinox Spray in Reducing Viral Load in Mild COVID-19 and Its Virucidal Activity against Other Respiratory Viruses: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial and an In Vitro Study.

Sentinox (STX) is an acid-oxidizing solution containing hypochlorous acid in spray whose virucidal activity against SARS-CoV-2 has been demonstrated. In this paper, results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on the efficacy of STX in reducing viral load in mild COVID-19 patients (NCT04909996) and a complementary in vitro study on its activity against different respiratory viruses are reported. In the RCT, 57 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive STX three (STX-3) or five (STX-5) times/day plus standard therapy or standard therapy only (controls). Compared with controls, the log10 load reduction in groups STX-3 and STX-5 was 1.02 (p = 0.14) and 0.18 (p = 0.80), respectively. These results were likely driven by outliers with extreme baseline viral loads. When considering subjects with baseline cycle threshold values of 20-30, STX-3 showed a significant (p = 0.016) 2.01 log10 reduction. The proportion of subjects that turned negative by the end of treatment (day 5) was significantly higher in the STX-3 group than in controls, suggesting a shorter virus clearance time. STX was safe and well-tolerated. In the in vitro study, ≥99.9% reduction in titers against common respiratory viruses was observed. STX is a safe device with large virucidal spectrum and may reduce viral loads in mild COVID-19 patients.

Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of the STANDARD M10 Assay for the Molecular Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in the Point-of-Care and Critical Care Settings.

Accurate and rapid molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 is a crucial step to tackle the ongoing pandemic. The primary objective of this study was to estimate the real-world performance of the novel RT-PCR STANDARD M10 SARS-CoV-2 assay in a large number of nasopharyngeal (NP) specimens eluted in universal transport medium. The secondary objective was to evaluate the compatibility of this kit in testing NP samples eluted in an inactivated transport medium (essential for point-of-care testing) and lower respiratory tract (LRT) specimens, which are commonly collected in critical care. A total of 591 samples were analyzed. Compared with the standard extraction-based RT-PCR Allplex 2019-nCoV (time-to-result of 270 min), the sensitivities of the STANDARD M10 were 100% (95% CI: 98.1-100%), 95.5% (95% CI: 91.7-97.6%), and 99.5% (95% CI: 97.2-99.9%) for ≥1 gene, the ORF1ab gene, and the E gene, respectively, while the specificity was 100% (95% CI: 98.7-100%). The diagnostic accuracy was 100% in testing both NP samples eluted in an inactivated transport medium and LRT specimens. STANDARD M10 reliably detects SARS-CoV-2 in 60 min, may be used as a POC tool, and is suitable for testing LRT specimens in the critical care setting.

Phylogeography and genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Italy and Europe with newly characterized Italian genomes between February-June 2020.

The aims of this study were to characterize new SARS-CoV-2 genomes sampled all over Italy and to reconstruct the origin and the evolutionary dynamics in Italy and Europe between February and June 2020. The cluster analysis showed only small clusters including < 80 Italian isolates, while most of the Italian strains were intermixed in the whole tree. Pure Italian clusters were observed mainly after the lockdown and distancing measures were adopted. Lineage B and B.1 spread between late January and early February 2020, from China to Veneto and Lombardy, respectively. Lineage B.1.1 (20B) most probably evolved within Italy and spread from central to south Italian regions, and to European countries. The lineage B.1.1.1 (20D) developed most probably in other European countries entering Italy only in the second half of March and remained localized in Piedmont until June 2020. In conclusion, within the limitations of phylogeographical reconstruction, the estimated ancestral scenario suggests an important role of China and Italy in the widespread diffusion of the D614G variant in Europe in the early phase of the pandemic and more dispersed exchanges involving several European countries from the second half of March 2020.

COVID-19 and Seasonal Influenza Vaccination: Cross-Protection, Co-Administration, Combination Vaccines, and Hesitancy.

SARS-CoV-2 and influenza are the main respiratory viruses for which effective vaccines are currently available. Strategies in which COVID-19 and influenza vaccines are administered simultaneously or combined into a single preparation are advantageous and may increase vaccination uptake. Here, we comprehensively review the available evidence on COVID-19/influenza vaccine co-administration and combination vaccine candidates from the standpoints of safety, immunogenicity, efficacy, policy and public acceptance. While several observational studies have shown that the trained immunity induced by influenza vaccines can protect against some COVID-19-related endpoints, it is not yet understood whether co-administration or combination vaccines can exert additive effects on relevant outcomes. In randomized controlled trials, co-administration has proved safe, with a reactogenicity profile similar to that of either vaccine administered alone. From the immunogenicity standpoint, the immune response towards four influenza strains and the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in co-administration groups is generally non-inferior to that seen in groups receiving either vaccine alone. Several public health authorities have advocated co-administration. Different combination vaccine candidates are in (pre)-clinical development. The hesitancy towards vaccine co-administration or combination vaccines is a multifaceted phenomenon and may be higher than the acceptance of either vaccine administered separately. Public health implications are discussed.

Weight of risk factors for mortality and short-term mortality displacement during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: We conducted a population-based cohort study to estimate mortality before, during and after the COVID-19 peak and to compare mortality in 2020 with rates reported in previous years, with a view to helping decision makers to apply containment measures for high-risk groups. Methods: All deaths were collected between 2015 and 2020 from municipal registry database. In 2020, weeks 1-26 were stratified in three periods: before, during and after the COVID mortality peak. The Poisson Generalized Linear regression Model showed the "harvesting effect". Three logistic regressions for 8 dependent variables (age and comorbidities) and a t-test of differences described all-cause mortality risk factors in 2019 and 2020 and differences between COVID and non-COVID patients. Results: A total of 47,876 deaths were collected. All-cause deaths increased by 38.5% during the COVID peak and decreased by 18% during the post-peak period in comparison with the average registered during the control period (2015-19), with significant mortality displacement in 2020. Except for chronic renal injuries in subjects aged 45-64 years, diabetes and chronic cardiovascular diseases in those aged 65-84 years, and neuropathies in those aged > 84 years, the weight of comorbidities in deaths was similar or lower in COVID subjects than in non-COVID subjects. Discussions: Surprisingly, the weight of comorbidities in death, compared to weight in non-COVID subjects allows you to highlight some surprising results such as COPD, IBD and Cancer. The excess mortality that we observed in the entire period were modest in comparison with initial estimates during the peak, owing to the mild influenza season and the harvesting effect starting from the second half of May.

Effect of the 2020/21 season influenza vaccine on SARS-CoV-2 infection in a cohort of Italian healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVES: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are a priority group for seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV). The 2020/21 SIV campaign was conducted during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccines, including SIV, may exert non-specific protective effects on other infectious diseases which may be ascribable to the concept of trained immunity. The aim of this study was to explore the association between 2020/21 SIV and SARS-CoV-2 positivity in a cohort of Italian HCWs. METHODS: In this observational study, a cohort of HCWs employed by a large (ca 5000 employees) referral tertiary acute-care university hospital was followed up retrospectively until the start of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. The independent variable of interest was the 2020/21 SIV uptake. Both egg-based and cell culture-derived quadrivalent SIVs were available. The study outcome was the incidence of new SARS-CoV-2 infections, as determined by RT-PCR. Multivariable Cox regression was applied in order to discern the association of interest. RESULTS: The final cohort consisted of 2561 HCWs who underwent ≥1 RT-PCR test and accounted for a total of 94,445 person-days of observation. SIV uptake was 35.6%. During the study period, a total of 290 new SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred. The incidence of new SARS-CoV-2 was 1.62 (95% CI: 1.22-2.10) and 3.91 (95% CI: 3.43-4.45) per 1000 person-days in vaccinated and non-vaccinated HCWs, respectively, with an adjusted non-proportional hazard ratio of 0.37 (95% CI: 0.22-0.62). E-values suggested that unmeasured confounding was unlikely to explain the association. CONCLUSIONS: A lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed among SIV recipients.

Comparative Analysis of Five Multiplex RT-PCR Assays in the Screening of SARS-CoV-2 Variants.

The rapid and presumptive detection of SARS-CoV-2 variants may be performed using multiplex RT-PCR assays. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of five qualitative RT-PCR tests as compared with next-generation sequencing (NGS). We retrospectively examined a multi-variant panel (n = 72) of SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swabs categorized as variants of concern (Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta), variants under monitoring (Iota and Kappa) and wild-type strains circulating in Liguria (Italy) from January to August 2021. First, NGS libraries of study samples were prepared and mapped to the reference genome. Then, specimens were screened for the detection of L452R, W152C, K417T, K417N, E484Q, E484K and N501Y mutations using the SARS-CoV-2 Variants II Assay Allplex, UltraGene Assay SARS-CoV-2 452R & 484K & 484Q Mutations V1, COVID-19 Ultra Variant Catcher, SARS-CoV-2 Extended ELITe MGB and Simplexa SARS-CoV-2 Variants Direct. The overall accuracy of these assays ranged from 96.9% to 100%. Specificity and sensitivity were 100% and 96-100%, respectively. We highly recommend the use of these assays as second-level tests in the routine workflow of SARS-CoV-2 laboratory diagnostics, as they are accurate, user friendly, low cost, may identify specific mutations in about 2-3 h and, therefore, optimize the surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Acceptance of COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccine Co-Administration: Insights from a Representative Italian Survey.

Co-administration of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and seasonal influenza vaccines has several advantages, has been advocated by various public health authorities and should be seen as an opportunity to increase the uptake of both vaccines. The objective of this survey was to quantify the acceptance of concomitant COVID-19/influenza vaccination and to identify its correlates in a representative sample of Italian adults. Of 2463 participants, a total of 22.9% were favorable to vaccine co-administration, while 16.6% declared their firm unwillingness to receive both vaccines simultaneously. The remaining 60.5% of subjects could be dubbed hesitant to some degree. Compliance with the primary COVID-19 vaccination schedule (adjusted proportional odds ratio (aOR) = 7.78), previous influenza vaccination (aOR = 1.89) and trust in public health institutions (aOR = 1.22) were the main determinants of positive attitudes toward vaccine co-administration. Other significant correlates included age, sex, perceived disease severity and vaccination risk-benefit, being offered a more personalized influenza vaccine and recent seeking for influenza-related information. In Italy, hesitancy toward COVID-19/influenza vaccine co-administration is common and appears to be higher than hesitancy toward either vaccine administered alone. This pattern is multifaceted and requires specific and tailored strategies, with public health institutions playing the central role.

Current Take on Systemic Sclerosis Patients' Vaccination Recommendations.

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease. The prevalence of SSc ranges from 7 to 700 cases per million worldwide. Due to multiple organ involvement and constant inflammatory state, this group of patients presents an increased risk of infectious diseases. This paper aimed to gather the up-to-date evidence on vaccination strategies for patients with SSc and to be a useful tool for the prevention and management of infectious diseases. The authors conducted a scoping review in which each paragraph presents data on a specific vaccine's safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy. The work deals with the following topics: SARS-CoV-2, seasonal influenza, S. pneumoniae, HAV, HBV, HZV, N. meningitidis, H. influenzae, HPV, and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.