Use of Self-Collected Dried Blood Spots and a Multiplex Microsphere Immunoassay to Measure IgG Antibody Response to COVID-19 Vaccines.

Serosurveys can determine the extent and spread of a pathogen in populations. However, collection of venous blood requires trained medical staff. Dried blood spots (DBS) are a suitable alternative because they can be self-collected and stored/shipped at room temperature. As COVID-19 vaccine deployment began in early 2021, we rapidly enrolled laboratory employees in a study to evaluate IgG antibody levels following vaccination. Participants received a DBS collection kit, self-collection instructions, and a brief questionnaire. Three DBS were collected by each of 168 participants pre- and/or postvaccination and tested with a multiplex microsphere immunoassay (MIA) that separately measures IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike-S1 and nucleocapsid antigens. Most DBS (99.6%, 507/509) were suitable for testing. Participants with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 7) generated high S antibody levels after the first vaccine dose. Naïve individuals (n = 161) attained high S antibody levels after the second dose. Similar antibody levels were seen among those vaccinated with Moderna (n = 29) and Pfizer-BioNTech (n = 137). For those receiving either mRNA vaccine, local side effects were more common after the first vaccine dose, whereas systemic side effects were more common after the second dose. Individuals with the highest antibody levels in the week prior to the second vaccine dose experienced more side effects from the second dose. Our study demonstrated that combining self-collected DBS and a multiplex MIA is a convenient and effective way to assess antibody levels to vaccination and could easily be used for population serosurveys of SARS-CoV-2 or other emerging pathogens. IMPORTANCE Serosurveys are an essential tool for assessing immunity in a population (1, 2). However, common barriers to effective serosurveys, particularly during a pandemic, include high-costs, resources required to collect venous blood samples, lack of trained laboratory technicians, and time required to perform the assay. By utilizing self-collected dried blood spots (DBS) and our previously developed high-throughput microsphere immunoassay, we were able to significantly reduce many of these common challenges. Participants were asked to self-collect three DBS before and/or after they received their COVID-19 vaccines to measure antibody levels following vaccination. Participants successfully collected 507 DBS that were tested for IgG antibodies to the spike and nucleocapsid proteins of SARS-CoV-2. When used with self-collected DBS, our relatively low-cost assay significantly reduced common barriers to collecting serological data from a population and was able to effectively assess antibody response to vaccination.

Diagnostic Performance, Stability, and Usability of Self-Collected Combo Swabs and Saliva for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Diagnosis: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Self-sampling procedures to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is important for patients who have difficulty visiting the hospital and may decrease the burden for health care workers (HCWs). The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance, stability and usability of self-collected nasal and oral combo swabs and saliva specimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a case-control study with 50 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 50 healthy volunteers from March, 2021 to June, 2021. We performed real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction to compare the diagnostic performance of self-collected specimens using positive percent agreements (PPAs). RESULTS: The PPAs between self-collected and HCW-collected specimens were 77.3 - 81.0% and 80.5 -86.7% for the combo swabs and saliva specimens, respectively. The PPAs increased to 88.9 - 89.2% and 81.2 - 82.1% with a cycle threshold value ≤30. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of self sampling was comparable to that of HCW sampling in patients with high viral loads and may thus assist in the early diagnosis of COVID-19.

The Italian Mandatory Notification System: An Important Public Health Tool For Continuous Monitoring Of Infectious Diseases.

Infectious diseases still register significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Surveillance through a mandatory notification system allows the continuous analysis of the situation even at a local level and its importance has been highlighted by the recent COVID-19 pandemic. This paper aimed to outline the importance of the mandatory notification system as a Public Health tool in the continuous monitoring of infectious diseases. To this aim, we carried out a cross-sectional study examining the notifications reported in the Italian territory of Messina, Sicily, in the period 2001-2020. The institutional websites were examined and the notification data were used to obtain the incidences. Overall, a significant reduction of the incidence notification trend was observed. Chickenpox was by far the most notified infectious disease, followed by scabies, pediculosis, and brucellosis. Outbreaks of brucellosis, measles and hepatitis A occurred. All the diseases decreased over time, except syphilis, for which a significant increase was observed. Surveillance of infectious diseases through a mandatory notification system remains a bulwark of public health despite underreporting. Our study reflects the situation of a typical high-income area, although some unexpected criticisms are highlighted. Continuous information about correct behaviors through education campaigns are crucial in order to improve the situation. Keywords: mandatory notifications, infectious diseases, surveillance, public health Corresponding author: Alessio Facciolà, Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, University of Messina, Italy. Email: afacciola@unime.it.

Self-Collected Samples to Detect SARS-CoV-2: Direct Comparison of Saliva, Tongue Swab, Nasal Swab, Chewed Cotton Pads and Gargle Lavage.

Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR is a vital public health tool in the pandemic. Self-collected samples are increasingly used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs. Several studies suggested that they are sufficiently sensitive to be a useful alternative. However, there are limited data directly comparing several different types of self-collected materials to determine which material is preferable. A total of 102 predominantly symptomatic adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection self-collected native saliva, a tongue swab, a mid-turbinate nasal swab, saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad and gargle lavage, within 48 h of initial diagnosis. Sample collection was unsupervised. Both native saliva and gargling with tap water had high diagnostic sensitivity of 92.8% and 89.1%, respectively. Nasal swabs had a sensitivity of 85.1%, which was not significantly inferior to saliva (p = 0.092), but 16.6% of participants reported they had difficult in self-collection of this sample. A tongue swab and saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad had a significantly lower sensitivity of 74.2% and 70.2%, respectively. Diagnostic sensitivity was not related to the presence of clinical symptoms or to age. When comparing self-collected specimens from different material, saliva, gargle lavage or mid-turbinate nasal swabs may be considered for most symptomatic patients. However, complementary experiments are required to verify that differences in performance observed among the five sampling modes were not attributed to collection impairment.

Effects of Patient Characteristics on Diagnostic Performance of Self-Collected Samples for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.

We evaluated the performance of self-collected anterior nasal swab (ANS) and saliva samples compared with healthcare worker-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens used to test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We used the same PCR diagnostic panel to test all self-collected and healthcare worker-collected samples from participants at a public hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Among 1,076 participants, 51.9% were men, 57.1% were >50 years of age, 81.2% were Black (non-Hispanic), and 74.9% reported >1 chronic medical condition. In total, 8.0% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Compared with nasopharyngeal swab samples, ANS samples had a sensitivity of 59% and saliva samples a sensitivity of 68%. Among participants tested 3-7 days after symptom onset, ANS samples had a sensitivity of 80% and saliva samples a sensitivity of 85%. Sensitivity varied by specimen type and patient characteristics. These findings can help physicians interpret PCR results for SARS-CoV-2.

Home collection of nasal swabs for detection of influenza in the Household Influenza Vaccine Evaluation Study.

BACKGROUND: Community-based studies of influenza and other respiratory viruses (eg, SARS-CoV-2) require laboratory confirmation of infection. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing guidelines require alternative data collection in order to protect both research staff and participants. Home-collected respiratory specimens are less resource-intensive, can be collected earlier after symptom onset, and provide a low-contact means of data collection. A prospective, multi-year, community-based cohort study is an ideal setting to examine the utility of home-collected specimens for identification of influenza. METHODS: We describe the feasibility and reliability of home-collected specimens for the detection of influenza. We collected data and specimens between October 2014 and June 2017 from the Household Influenza Vaccine Evaluation (HIVE) Study. Cohort participants were asked to collect a nasal swab at home upon onset of acute respiratory illness. Research staff also collected nose and throat swab specimens in the study clinic within 7 days of onset. We estimated agreement using Cohen's kappa and calculated sensitivity and specificity of home-collected compared to staff-collected specimens. RESULTS: We tested 336 paired staff- and home-collected respiratory specimens for influenza by RT-PCR; 150 staff-collected specimens were positive for influenza A/H3N2, 23 for influenza A/H1N1, 14 for influenza B/Victoria, and 31 for influenza B/Yamagata. We found moderate agreement between collection methods for influenza A/H3N2 (0.70) and B/Yamagata (0.69) and high agreement for influenza A/H1N1 (0.87) and B/Victoria (0.86). Sensitivity ranged from 78% to 86% for all influenza types and subtypes. Specificity was high for influenza A/H1N1 and both influenza B lineages with a range from 96% to 100%, and slightly lower for A/H3N2 infections (88%). CONCLUSIONS: Collection of nasal swab specimens at home is both feasible and reliable for identification of influenza virus infections.