Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by canine olfaction.

BACKGROUND: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, testing individuals remains a key action. One approach to rapid testing is to consider the olfactory capacities of trained detection dogs. METHODS: Prospective cohort study in two community COVID-19 screening centers. Two nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), one saliva and one sweat samples were simultaneously collected. The dog handlers (and the dogs…) were blinded with regards to the Covid status. The diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by canine olfaction was assessed as compared to nasopharyngeal RT-PCR as the reference standard, saliva RT-PCR and nasopharyngeal antigen testing. RESULTS: 335 ambulatory adults (143 symptomatic and 192 asymptomatic) were included. Overall, 109/335 participants tested positive on nasopharyngeal RT-PCR either in symptomatic (78/143) or in asymptomatic participants (31/192). The overall sensitivity of canine detection was 97% (95% CI, 92 to 99) and even reached 100% (95% CI, 89 to 100) in asymptomatic individuals compared to NPS RT-PCR. The specificity was 91% (95% CI, 72 to 91), reaching 94% (95% CI, 90 to 97) for asymptomatic individuals. The sensitivity of canine detection was higher than that of nasopharyngeal antigen testing (97% CI: 91 to 99 versus 84% CI: 74 to 90, p = 0.006), but the specificity was lower (90% CI: 84 to 95 versus 97% CI: 93 to 99, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Non-invasive detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by canine olfaction could be one alternative to NPS RT-PCR when it is necessary to obtain a result very quickly according to the same indications as antigenic tests in the context of mass screening.

Association study between herpes zoster reporting and mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273).

Several cases of herpes zoster (HZ) following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) have been reported, and the first epidemiological evidence suggests an increased risk. We used the worldwide pharmacovigilance database VigiBase to describe HZ cases following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. We performed disproportionality analyses (case/non-case statistical approach) to assess the relative risk of HZ reporting in mRNA COVID-19 vaccine recipients compared to influenza vaccine recipients and according to patient age. To 30 June 2021, of 716 928 reports with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, we found 7728 HZ cases. When compared to influenza vaccines, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with a significantly higher reporting of HZ (reporting odds ratio 1.9, 95% CI 1.8-2.1). Furthermore, we found a reduced risk of reporting HZ among under 40-year-old persons compared to older persons (reporting odds ratio 0.39, 95% CI 0.36-0.41). Mild and infrequent HZ reactions may occur shortly after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, at higher frequency than reported with influenza vaccination, especially in patients over 40 years old. Further analyses are needed to confirm this risk.

Features of Inflammatory Heart Reactions Following mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination at a Global Level.

Myocarditis and pericarditis may constitute adverse reactions of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. This study aimed to document these reactions and to assess the association with patient sex and age. This is as an observational retrospective study using a case-non-case design (also called disproportionality study) on inflammatory heart reactions reported with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines within the World Health Organization (WHO) global safety database (VigiBase), up to June 30, 2021. Results are expressed using reporting odds ratios (RORs) and their 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Of 716,576 reports related to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, 2,277 were cases of inflammatory heart reactions, including 1241 (55%) myocarditis and 851 (37%) pericarditis. The main age group was 18-29 years (704, 31%), and mostly male patients (1,555, 68%). Pericarditis onset was delayed compared with myocarditis with a median time to onset of 8 (3-21) vs. 3 (2-6) days, respectively (P = 0.001). Regarding myocarditis, an important disproportionate reporting was observed in adolescents (ROR, 22.3, 95% CI 19.2-25.9) and in 18-29 years old (ROR, 6.6, 95% CI 5.9-7.5) compared with older patients, as well as in male patients (ROR, 9.4, 95% CI 8.3-10.6). Reporting rate of myocarditis was increased in young adults and adolescents. Inflammatory heart reactions may rarely occur shortly following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Although an important disproportionate reporting of myocarditis was observed among adolescents and young adults, particularly in male patients, reporting rates support a very rare risk, that does not seem to compromise the largely positive benefit-risk balance of these vaccines. Furthermore, this study confirmed the value of disproportionality analyses for estimation of relative risks among subgroups of patients.

Prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during a large, live, indoor gathering (SPRING): a non-inferiority, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Mass indoor gatherings were banned in early 2020 to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to assess, under controlled conditions, whether infection rates among attendees at a large, indoor gathering event would be similar to those in non-attendees, given implementation of a comprehensive prevention strategy including antigen-screening within 3 days, medical mask wearing, and optimised ventilation. METHODS: The non-inferiority, prospective, open-label, randomised, controlled SPRING trial was done on attendees at a live indoor concert held in the Accor Arena on May 29, 2021 in Paris, France. Participants, aged 18-45 years, recruited via a dedicated website, had no comorbidities, COVID-19 symptoms, or recent case contact, and had had a negative rapid antigen diagnostic test within 3 days before the concert. Participants were randomly allocated in a 2:1 ratio to the experimental group (attendees) or to the control group (non-attendees). The allocation sequence was computer-generated by means of permuted blocks of sizes three, six, or nine, with no stratification. The primary outcome measure was the number of patients who were SARS-CoV-2-positive by RT-PCR test on self-collected saliva 7 days post-gathering in the per-protocol population (non-inferiority margin <0·35%). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04872075. FINDINGS: Between May 11 and 25, 2021, 18 845 individuals registered on the dedicated website, and 10 953 were randomly selected for a pre-enrolment on-site visit. Among 6968 who kept the appointment and were screened, 6678 participants were randomly assigned (4451 were assigned to be attendees and 2227 to be non-attendees; median age 28 years; 59% women); 88% (3917) of attendees and 87% (1947) of non-attendees complied with follow-up requirements. The day 7 RT-PCR was positive for eight of the 3917 attendees (observed incidence, 0·20%; 95% CI 0·09-0·40) and three of the 1947 non-attendees (0·15%; 0·03-0·45; absolute difference, 95% CI -0·26% to 0·28%), findings that met the non-inferiority criterion for the primary endpoint. INTERPRETATION: Participation in a large, indoor, live gathering without physical distancing was not associated with increased SARS-CoV-2-transmission risk, provided a comprehensive preventive intervention was implemented. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Evaluation of a saliva molecular point of care for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in ambulatory care.

Rapid identification of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals is a cornerstone for the control of virus spread. The sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection by RT-PCR is similar in saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs. Rapid molecular point-of-care tests in saliva could facilitate, broaden and speed up the diagnosis. We conducted a prospective study in two community COVID-19 screening centers to evaluate the performances of a CE-marked RT-LAMP assay (EasyCoV) designed for the detection of SARS-CoV2 RNA from fresh saliva samples, compared to nasopharyngeal RT-PCR, to saliva RT-PCR and to nasopharyngeal antigen testing. Overall, 117 of the 1718 participants (7%) tested positive with nasopharyngeal RT-PCR. Compared to nasopharyngeal RT-PCR, the sensitivity and specificity of the RT-LAMP assay in saliva were 34% and 97%, respectively. The Ct values of nasopharyngeal RT-PCR were significantly lower in the 40 true positive subjects with saliva RT-LAMP (Ct 25.9) than in the 48 false negative subjects with saliva RT-LAMP (Ct 28.4) (p = 0.028). Considering six alternate criteria for reference tests, including saliva RT-PCR and nasopharyngeal antigen, the sensitivity of saliva RT-LAMP ranged between 27 and 44%. The detection of SARS-CoV-2 in crude saliva samples with an RT-LAMP assay had a lower sensitivity than nasopharyngeal RT-PCR, saliva RT-PCR and nasopharyngeal antigen testing.Registration number: NCT04578509.

Accuracy of saliva and nasopharyngeal sampling for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in community screening: a multicentric cohort study.

Nasopharyngeal sampling for nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) is the standard diagnostic test of coronavirus disease 2019. Our objectives were to assess, in real-life conditions, the diagnostic accuracy of a nasopharyngeal point-of-care antigen (Ag) test and of saliva NAAT for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in ambulatory care. This was a prospective cohort study from 19 October through 18 December 2020 in two community COVID-19 screening centers in Paris, France. Two nasopharyngeal swabs and one saliva sample were simultaneously collected. Diagnostic accuracies of nasopharyngeal Ag testing and of three saliva NAAT methods were assessed as compared to nasopharyngeal NAAT. A total of 1452 ambulatory children and adults were included. Overall, 129/1443 (9%) participants tested positive on nasopharyngeal NAAT (102/564 [18%] in symptomatic and 27/879 [3%] in asymptomatic participants). Sensitivity was 94%, 23%, 96%, and 94% for the three different protocols of saliva NAAT and for the nasopharyngeal Ag test, respectively. Estimates of specificity were above 95% for all methods. Diagnostic accuracy was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. Diagnostic accuracy of nasopharyngeal Ag testing and of saliva NAAT is similar to that of nasopharyngeal NAAT, subject to compliance with specific protocols for saliva. Registration number: NCT04578509.

Transmission Routes of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Among Healthcare Workers of a French University Hospital in Paris, France.

In this case-control study on 564 healthcare workers of a university hospital in Paris (France), contacts without protection with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients or with colleagues were associated with infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, whereas working in a COVID-dedicated unit and having children kept in childcare facilities were not.

Association of Antihypertensive Agents with the Risk of In-Hospital Death in Patients with Covid-19.

PURPOSE: The role of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), or other antihypertensive agents in the case of Covid-19 remains controversial. We aimed to investigate the association between antihypertensive agent exposure and in-hospital mortality in patients with Covid-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort study on patients hospitalized between February 1 and May 15, 2020. All patients had been followed up for at least 30 days. RESULTS: Of the 8078 hospitalized patients for Covid-19, 3686 (45.6%) had hypertension and were included in the study. In this population, the median age was 75.4 (IQR, 21.5) years and 57.1% were male. Overall in-hospital 30-day mortality was 23.1%. The main antihypertensive pharmacological classes used were calcium channel blockers (CCB) (n=1624, 44.1%), beta-blockers (n=1389, 37.7%), ARB (n=1154, 31.3%), and ACEi (n=998, 27.1%). The risk of mortality was lower in CCB (aOR, 0.83 [0.70-0.99]) and beta-blockers (aOR, 0.80 [0.67-0.95]) users and non-significant in ARB (aOR, 0.88 [0.72-1.06]) and ACEi (aOR, 0.83 [0.68-1.02]) users, compared to non-users. These results remain consistent for patients receiving CCB, beta-blocker, or ARB as monotherapies. CONCLUSION: This large multicenter retrospective of Covid-19 patients with hypertension found a reduced mortality among CCB and beta-blockers users, suggesting a putative protective effect. Our findings did not show any association between the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and the risk of in-hospital death. Although they need to be confirmed in further studies, these results support the continuation of antihypertensive agents in patients with Covid-19, in line with the current guidelines.

Placental transfer and safety in pregnancy of medications under investigation to treat coronavirus disease 2019.

Objective: Treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 is mostly symptomatic, but a wide range of medications are under investigation against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Although pregnant women are excluded from clinical trials, they will inevitably receive therapies whenever they seem effective in nonpregnant patients and even under compassionate use. Methods: We conducted a review of the literature on placental transfer and pregnancy safety data of drugs under current investigation for coronavirus disease 2019. Results: Regarding remdesivir, there are no data in pregnant women. Several other candidates already have safety data in pregnant women, because they are repurposed drugs already used for their established indications. Thus, they may be used in pregnancy, although their safety in the context of coronavirus disease 2019 may differ from conventional use. These include HIV protease inhibitors such as lopinavir/ritonavir that have low placental transfer, interferon that does not cross the placental barrier, and hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine that has high placental transfer. There are also pregnancy safety and placental transfer data for colchicine, steroids, oseltamivir, azithromycin, and some monoclonal antibodies. However, some drugs are strictly prohibited in pregnancy because of known teratogenicity (thalidomide) or fetal toxicities (renin-angiotensin system blockers). Other candidates including tocilizumab, other interleukin 6 inhibitors, umifenovir, and favipiravir have insufficient data on pregnancy outcomes. Conclusion: In life-threatening cases of coronavirus disease 2019, the potential risks of therapy to the fetus may be more than offset by the benefit of curing the mother. Although preclinical and placental transfer studies are required for a number of potential anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 drugs, several medications can already be used in pregnant women.

Comparing Dynamics and Determinants of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Transmissions Among Healthcare Workers of Adult and Pediatric Settings in Central Paris.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) have paid a heavy toll during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. Routes of transmission remain to be fully understood. METHODS: This prospective study compared a 1500-bed adult and 600-bed pediatric setting of a tertiary-care university hospital located in central Paris. From 24 February until 10 April 2020, all symptomatic HCWs were screened for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on a nasopharyngeal swab. HCWs screened positive were questioned on their profession, symptoms, and occupational and nonoccupational exposures to SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Among 1344 HCWs tested, 373 were positive (28%) and 336 (90%) corresponding questionnaires were completed. Three hospitalizations and no deaths were reported. Most HCWs (70%) had patient-facing occupational activities (22% in COVID-19 dedicated units). The total number of HCW cases peaked on 23 March, then decreased slowly, concomitantly with a continuous increase of compliance to preventive measures (including universal medical masking and personal protective equipment [PPE] for direct care to COVID-19 patients). Attack rates were of 3.2% and 2.3% in the adult and pediatric settings, respectively (P = .0022). In the adult setting, HCWs more frequently reported exposure to COVID-19 patients without PPE (25% vs 15%, P = .046). Report of contacts with children attending out-of-home care facilities dramatically decreased over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Universal masking, reinforcement of hand hygiene, and PPE with medical masks for patients' care allowed protection of HCWs and containment of the outbreak. Residual transmissions were related to persistent exposures with undiagnosed patients or colleagues and not to contacts with children attending out-of-home care facilities.

Plasma Concentrations and Safety of Lopinavir/Ritonavir in COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Although the efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir has not been proven, it has been proposed as an off-label treatment for COVID-19. Previously, it has been reported that the plasma concentrations of lopinavir significantly increase in inflammatory settings. As COVID-19 may be associated with major inflammation, assessing the plasma concentrations and safety of lopinavir in COVID-19 patients is essential. METHODS: Real-world COVID-19 data based on a retrospective study. RESULTS: Among the 31 COVID-19 patients treated with lopinavir/ritonavir between March 18, 2020 and April 1, 2020, higher lopinavir plasma concentrations were observed, which increased by 4.6-fold (interquartile range: 3.6-6.2), compared with the average plasma concentrations in HIV. Lopinavir concentrations in all except one patient were above the upper limit of the concentration range of HIV treatment. Approximately one to 5 patients prematurely stopped treatment mainly because of an ADR related to hepatic or gastrointestinal disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Lopinavir plasma concentrations in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 were higher than expected, and they were associated with the occurrence of hepatic or gastrointestinal adverse drug reactions. However, a high plasma concentration may be required for in vivo antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2, as suggested by previous studies. Therefore, in the absence of adverse drug reaction, lopinavir dosage should not be reduced. Caution is essential because off-label use can be associated with a new drug safety profile.

Impaired type I interferon activity and inflammatory responses in severe COVID-19 patients.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by distinct patterns of disease progression that suggest diverse host immune responses. We performed an integrated immune analysis on a cohort of 50 COVID-19 patients with various disease severity. A distinct phenotype was observed in severe and critical patients, consisting of a highly impaired interferon (IFN) type I response (characterized by no IFN-ß and low IFN-α production and activity), which was associated with a persistent blood viral load and an exacerbated inflammatory response. Inflammation was partially driven by the transcriptional factor nuclear factor-κB and characterized by increased tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-6 production and signaling. These data suggest that type I IFN deficiency in the blood could be a hallmark of severe COVID-19 and provide a rationale for combined therapeutic approaches.