ABSTRACT
Background Patients with chronic kidney disease and undergoing hemodialysis are at greater risk of developing COVID-19. In spite of vaccine efficacy, SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection has been reported in several studies. This study was carried out to assess if seroconversion could predict SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection in a cohort of vaccinated patients undergoing hemodialysis. Methodology Patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis for at least three months and who had received two doses of BBV152 or AZD1222 vaccine were included in the study. Their baseline IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were measured and followed up for a median of three months during the third wave of COVID-19 in India with SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to detect breakthrough infections. Results Of 80 patients enrolled, seroconversion was seen in 81% of the cases, and SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough cases have been detected in 16% (13/80; 95% CI 8.95-26.18) patients undergoing hemodialysis. Of the 13 patients, seven patients required hospitalization and others had a mild outcome. There was no correlation of baseline seropositivity with breakthrough infections or hospitalization. Conclusions A majority of patients who underwent hemodialysis are seropositive post-vaccination. The breakthrough infection did not correlate with baseline seroconversion. Thus, there would be other predictors of breakthrough COVID-19 infections that need to be recognized in this susceptible population.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The gold standard test for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) recommended by WHO is real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), which has a turnaround time of five to six hours. Abbott ID NOW (Abbott Diagnostics Scarborough, Inc., Scarborough, ME, USA), the cartridge-based loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay, was approved by FDA for Emergency Use Authorization as rapid point of care testing. The present study was planned to evaluate the performance of the cartridge-based Abbott ID NOW test by comparing it to the currently used standard probe-based real-time RT-PCR method for detection of SARS-CoV-2. METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital in the eastern part of India after getting institutional ethics committee (IEC) approval. Two hundred fifty-nine cases of various age groups of both sexes who were advised for testing for SARS-CoV-2 were included in the study. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected according to protocol advisory by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), India. Dry swabs were sent for Abbott ID NOW testing and swabs in viral transport medium were sent for probe-based RT-PCR assay using the CoviPath kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Bangalore, India). The data were collected and statistical analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for ID NOW were calculated taking RT-PCR as the gold standard. Results: Out of 259 patients enrolled in the study, 49% were symptomatic for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The prevalence rate of SARS-CoV-2 was 20.84% among the study population. Sensitivity and specificity, positive and negative predictive values of ID NOW test in comparison to RT-PCR assay was found to be 87%, 98%, 92.1% and 96.8% respectively. ID NOW detected seven out of 54 (12.9%) cases as false negative who were found to be positive with RT-PCR, with mean Ct value of the target genes >34. CONCLUSIONS: In this study the overall sensitivity for ID NOW assay was found to be lower, but specificity, positive and negative predictive values were found to be higher. It had the highest correlation to RT-PCR among symptomatic patients and at higher viral loads. Due to the ease of use and shortest result time for detecting COVID-19, ID NOW test could be used as a point-of-care test. But for all tests, the results should be interpreted according to the clinical and epidemiological context.