Comparison of the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Surrogate Neutralization Assays by TECOmedical and DiaPROPH-Med with Samples from Vaccinated and Infected Individuals.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific serological responses are a topic of ongoing evaluation studies. In the study presented here, the anti-SARS-CoV-2 surrogate neutralization assays by TECOmedical and DiaPROPH -Med were assessed in a head-to-head comparison with serum samples of individuals after vaccination as well as after previous infection with SARS-CoV-2. In case of discordant results, a cell culture-based neutralization assay was applied as a reference standard. The TECOmedical assay showed sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 61.3%, respectively, the DiaPROPH-Med assay 95.0% and 48.4%, respectively. As a side finding of the study, differences in the likelihood of expressing neutralizing antibodies could be shown for different exposition types. So, 60 of 81 (74.07%) of the samples with only one vaccination showed an expression of neutralizing antibodies in contrast to 85.71% (60 of 70 samples) of the samples with two vaccinations and 100% (40 of 40) of the samples from previously infected individuals. In conclusion, the both assays showed results similar to previous assessments. While the measured diagnostic accuracy of both assays requires further technical improvement of this diagnostic approach, as the calculated specificity values of 61.3% and 48.4%, respectively, appear acceptable for diagnostic use only in populations with a high percentage of positive subjects, but not at expectedly low positivity rates.

Case Report: Interferon- γ Rescues Monocytic Human Leukocyte Antigen Receptor (mHLA-DR) Function in a COVID-19 Patient With ARDS and Superinfection With Multiple MDR 4MRGN Bacterial Strains.

Background: CD14+ monocytes present antigens to adaptive immune cells via monocytic human leukocyte antigen receptor (mHLA-DR), which is described as an immunological synapse. Reduced levels of mHLA-DR can display an acquired immune defect, which is often found in sepsis and predisposes for secondary infections and fatal outcomes. Monocytic HLA-DR expression is reliably induced by interferon- γ (IFNγ) therapy. Case Report: We report a case of multidrug-resistant superinfected COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. The resistance profiles of the detected Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii and Citrobacter freundii isolates were equipped with resistance to all four antibiotic classes including carbapenems (4MRGN) and Cefiderocol in the case of K. pneumoniae. A causal therapeutic antibiotic strategy was not available. Therefore, we measured the immune status of the patient aiming to identify a potential acquired immune deficiency. Monocyte HLA-DR expression identified by FACS analysis revealed an expression level of 34% positive monocytes and suggested severe immunosuppression. We indicated IFNγ therapy, which resulted in a rapid increase in mHLA-DR expression (96%), rapid resolution of invasive bloodstream infection, and discharge from the hospital on day 70. Discussion: Superinfection is a dangerous complication of COVID-19 pneumonia, and sepsis-induced immunosuppression is a risk factor for it. Immunosuppression is expressed by a disturbed antigen presentation of monocytes to cells of the adaptive immune system. The case presented here is remarkable as no validated antibiotic regimen existed against the detected bacterial pathogens causing bloodstream infection and severe pneumonia in a patient suffering from COVID-19 ARDS. Possible restoration of the patient's own immunity by IFNγ was a plausible option to boost the patient's immune system, eliminate the identified 4MRGNs, and allow for lung recovery. This led to the conclusion that immune status monitoring is useful in complicated COVID-19-ARDS and that concomitant IFNγ therapy may support antibiotic strategies. Conclusion: After a compromised immune system has been detected by suppressed mHLA-DR levels, the immune system can be safely reactivated by IFNγ.

Diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 with Antigen Testing, Transcription-Mediated Amplification and Real-Time PCR.

This study was performed as a head-to-head comparison of the performance characteristics of (1) two SARS-CoV-2-specific rapid antigen assays with real-time PCR as gold standard as well as (2) a fully automated high-throughput transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) assay and real-time PCR in a latent class analysis-based test comparison without a gold standard with several hundred samples in a low prevalence "real world" setting. Recorded sensitivity and specificity of the NADAL and the LumiraDx antigen assays and the Hologic Aptima SARS-CoV-2 TMA assay were 0.1429 (0.0194, 0.5835), 0.7644 (0.7016, 0.8174), and 0.7157 (0, 1) as well as 0.4545 (0.2022, 0.7326), 0.9954 (0.9817, 0.9988), and 0.9997 (not estimable), respectively. Agreement kappa between the positive results of the two antigen-based assays was 0.060 (0.002, 0.167) and 0.659 (0.492, 0.825) for TMA and real-time PCR. Samples with low viral load as indicated by cycle threshold (Ct) values > 30 were generally missed by both antigen assays, while 1:10 pooling suggested higher sensitivity of TMA compared to real-time PCR. In conclusion, both sensitivity and specificity speak in favor of the use of the LumiraDx rather than the NADAL antigen assay, while TMA results are comparably as accurate as PCR, when applied in a low prevalence setting.