SARS-CoV-2-Induced Autoimmune Hepatitis.

Few case reports discuss the incidences of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) in patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here, we present a case of SARS-CoV-2-induced AIH in a male patient who came into the emergency department with complaints of weight loss, poor oral intake, nausea, dark-colored urine, clay-colored stools, and scleral icterus, which began two weeks after he tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 PCR. Liver biopsy and subsequent histology confirmed the diagnosis of AIH with the most probable etiology being SARS-CoV-2 infection. The patient was treated with N-acetylcysteine (NAC) and steroids with clinical improvement and eventual discharge home. Our goal is to provide a clinical presentation, treatment, and outcome in a patient with SARS-CoV-2-induced AIH.

Improving immunoassay detection accuracy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies through dual modality validation.

A novel test strategy is proposed with dual-modality detection techniques for COVID-19 antibody detection. The full-length S protein of SARS-CoV-2 was chemically immobilized on a glass surface to capture anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG in patient serum and was detected through either Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy (EIS) or fluorescence imaging with labeled secondary antibodies. Gold nanoparticles conjugated with protein G were used as the probe and the bound GNP-G was detected through EIS measurements. Anti-human-IgG conjugated with the fluorescent tag Alexa Fluor 488 was used as the probe for fluorescence imaging. Clinical SARS-CoV-2 IgG positive serum and negative controls were used to validate both modalities. For fluorescence-based detection, a high sensitivity was noticed with a quantification range of 0.01-0.1 A.U.C. and a LOD of 0.004 A.U.C. This study demonstrates the possibility of utilizing different measurement techniques in conjunction for improved COVID-19 serology testing.

Confidence Intervals for Seroprevalence

This paper concerns the construction of confidence intervals in standard seroprevalence surveys. In particular, we discuss methods for constructing confidence intervals for the proportion of individuals in a population infected with a disease using a sample of antibody test results and measurements of the test’s false positive and false negative rates. We begin by documenting erratic behavior in the coverage probabilities of standard Wald and percentile bootstrap intervals when applied to this problem. We then consider two alternative sets of intervals constructed with test inversion. The first set of intervals are approximate, using either asymptotic or bootstrap approximation to the finite-sample distribution of a chosen test statistic. We consider several choices of test statistic, including maximum likelihood estimators and generalized likelihood ratio statistics. We show with simulation that, at empirically relevant parameter values and sample sizes, the coverage probabilities for these intervals are close to their nominal level and are approximately equi-tailed. The second set of intervals are shown to contain the true parameter value with probability at least equal to the nominal level, but can be conservative in finite samples. © Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2022

Biology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the humoral immunoresponse: a systematic review of evidence to support global policy-level actions and research.

BACKGROUND: Both population-level epidemiological data and individual-level biological data are needed to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Population-level data are widely available and efforts to combat COVID-19 have generated proliferate data on the biology and immunoresponse to the causative pathogen, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, there remains a paucity of systemized data on this subject. OBJECTIVE: In this review, we attempt to extract systemized data on the biology and immuno-response to SARS-CoV-2 from the most up-to-date peer-reviewed studies. We will focus on the biology of the virus and immunological variations that are key for determining long-term immunity, transmission potential, and prognosis. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS: Peer-reviewed articles were sourced from the PubMed database and by snowballing search of selected publications. Search terms included: "Novel Coronavirus" OR "COVID-19" OR "SARS-CoV-2" OR "2019-nCoV" AND "Immunity" OR "Immune Response" OR "Antibody Response" OR "Immunologic Response". Studies published from December 31, 2019 to December 31, 2020 were included. To ensure validity, papers in pre-print were excluded. RESULTS: Of 2 889 identified papers, 36 were included. Evidence from these studies suggests early seroconversion in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. Antibody titers appear to markedly increase two weeks after infection, followed by a plateau. A more robust immune response is seen in patients with severe COVID-19 as opposed to mild or asymptomatic presentations. This trend persists with regard to the length of antibody maintenance. However, overall immunity appears to wane within two to three months post-infection. CONCLUSION: Findings of this study indicate that immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 follow the general pattern of viral infection. Immunity generated through natural infection appears to be short, suggesting a need for long-term efforts to control the pandemic. Antibody testing will be essential to gauge the epidemic and inform decision-making on effective strategies for treatment and prevention. Further research is needed to illustrate immunoglobulin-specific roles and neutralizing antibody activity.

Application of SARS-CoV-2 Serology Testing: A Case Study

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the new coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in early December 2019, in Wuhan city, the capital city of Hubei Province. This virus spread easily and rapidly worldwide. A lot of serology testing for COVID-19 are now available, and very powerful tools to understand the immune response to SARS-CoV-2, vaccine efficacy, hard immunity among communities, and so on. However, there remains several uncertainties about serology testing, compared to the direct virus detection test, such as reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and antigen test. In this chapter, we introduce the current understanding of serological testing for COVID-19 to clarify how to use and select during the COVID-19 pandemic. © 2022, RIETI.

Silent SARS-CoV-2 Infections, Waning Immunity, Serology Testing, and COVID-19 Vaccination: A Perspective.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus causes a spectrum of clinical manifestations, ranging from asymptomatic to mild, moderate, or severe illness with multi-organ failure and death. Using a new machine learning algorithm developed by us, we have reported a significantly higher number of predicted COVID-19 cases than the documented counts across the world. The sole reliance on confirmed symptomatic cases overlooking the symptomless COVID-19 infections and the dynamics of waning immunity may not provide 'true' spectrum of infection proportion, a key element for an effective planning and implementation of protection and prevention strategies. We and others have previously shown that strategic orthogonal testing and leveraging systematic data-driven modeling approach to account for asymptomatics and waning cases may situationally have a compelling role in informing efficient vaccination strategies beyond prevalence reporting. However, currently Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) does not recommend serological testing either before or after vaccination to assess immune status. Given the 27% occurrence of breakthrough infections in fully vaccinated (FV) group with many being asymptomatics and still a larger fraction of the general mass remaining unvaccinated, the relaxed mask mandate and distancing by CDC can drive resurgence. Thus, we believe it is a key time to focus on asymptomatics (no symptoms) and oligosymptomatics (so mild that the symptoms remain unrecognized) as they can be silent reservoirs to propagate the infection. This perspective thus highlights the need for proactive efforts to reevaluate the current variables/strategies in accounting for symptomless and waning fractions.

Staff SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence and Mental Health as Key Factors in University Response to COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: In response to rapid global spread of the newly emerged coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), universities transitioned to online learning and telework to decrease risks of inter-person contact. To help administrators respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and better understand its impacts, we surveyed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among NOVA University employees and assessed community mental health. Methods: Data were collected from voluntary participants at six NOVA University locations, in the Lisbon metropolitan area, from June 15-30, 2020. All subjects provided written informed consent. Of 1,627 recruited participants (mean age 42.0 ± 12.3 years), 1,624 were tested. Prior to blood collection, participants completed a questionnaire that assessed: COVID-19 symptoms during the previous 14 days, chronic non-communicable diseases, chronic medication, anxiety, and depression symptoms. SARS-CoV-2 serology tests were then performed, and results communicated approximately 4 days after blood draw. Participants with positive serology tests were contacted to assess COVID-19 symptoms since February. Results: Estimated prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies was 3.1% (n = 50), of which 43.5% reported symptoms in the previous 4 months. The Medical School had the highest seroprevalence (6.2%). Participants reported having at least one chronic disease (63.7%), depression-like symptoms (2.1%), and anxiety symptoms (8.1%). Rates of depression and anxiety symptoms were significantly higher in women, with sleep hours and occasional alcohol consumption negatively associated with depression. Male gender, older age, and sleep hours negatively associated with anxiety symptoms. School of employment and presence of comorbidities positively associated with anxiety. Conclusion: By measuring seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among NOVA employees and assessing subjects' mental health, we aim to help administrators at European public universities in urban areas, such as Lisbon, Portugal, better understand the needs of their communities. This study resulted in implementation of a stricter contingency plan in the Medical School, while other schools continued to follow Government mitigation guidelines. These findings may also guide the development of tailored strategies to ensure physical and mental health of the academic community during this pandemic crisis. We conclude that, together with COVID-19 contingency plans, psychological support services and facilities to help people effectively face pandemic-associated challenges and minimise anxiety and depression should be implemented.

SARS-CoV-2 serology testing: Progress and challenges.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused the most devasting social and economic impact of this century. The current pandemic will end only after a safe, effective vaccine becomes available and protective herd immunity has been achieved through vaccination. The key parameter to gauge protective immunity is neutralizing antibody levels. Thus, reliable serology testing is essential to diagnose whether an individual has been previously infected, as a large proportion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections is asymptomatic. For both naturally infected and vaccinated individuals, it is critical to monitor their neutralizing antibody titers over time. This is because, when neutralizing antibody levels wane below a threshold which remains to be determined, they become vulnerable to reinfection. Due to the importance of serology testing, academia and industry have developed different platforms for serological diagnosis, many of which have achieved the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA). Here we summarize the status of COVID-19 serology testing, discuss challenges, and provide future directions for improvement.

Hospital-wide SARS-CoV-2 antibody screening of staff in a university psychiatric centre in Belgium.

In this first serosurvey among psychiatric healthcare providers, only 3.2% of a sample of 431 staff members of a Belgian University Psychiatric Centre, screened 3-17 June 2020, had SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies, which is considerably lower compared with both the general population and other healthcare workers in Belgium. The low seroprevalence was unexpected, given the limited availability of personal protective equipment and the high amount of COVID-19 symptoms reported by staff members. Importantly, exposure at home predicted the presence of antibodies, but exposure at work did not. Measures to prevent transmission from staff to patients are warranted in psychiatric facilities.

The Main Molecular and Serological Methods for Diagnosing COVID-19: An Overview Based on the Literature.

Diagnostic tests have been considered as the main alternative for the control of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), as a correct diagnosis allows for decision making when facing the disease, particularly as there is a lack of effective therapeutic protocols and vaccines. Thus, in this review, we summarized the main diagnostic approaches currently available for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans based on studies available in article databases. The tests can be organized into two main categories: nucleic acid-based tests, recommended for the initial detection of the virus, and serological tests, recommended for assessing the disease progression. The studies have shown that the performance of diagnostic methods depends on different factors, such as the type of samples and the characteristics of each assay. It was identified that the positivity of the tests is mainly related to the onset of symptoms. We also observed that point-of-care diagnoses are considered as one of the main trends in this area, due to the low-cost and simplicity of the assay; however, the analytical performance must be critically analyzed. Thus, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the critical role of diagnostic technologies in the control of infectious diseases.

Immunologic Testing for SARS-CoV-2 Infection from the Antigen Perspective.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has spread globally as a severe pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 infection stimulates antigen-specific antibody responses. Multiple serologic tests have been developed for SARS-CoV-2. However, which antigens are most suitable for serological testing remains poorly understood. Specifically, which antigens have the highest sensitivity and specificity for serological testing and which have the least cross-reactivity with other coronaviruses are currently unknown. Previous studies have shown that the S1 domain of the spike (S) protein has very low cross-reactivity between epidemic coronaviruses and common human coronaviruses, whereas the S2 domain of the S protein and the nucleocapsid protein (N protein) show low-level cross-reactivity. Therefore, S1 is considered more specific than the native homotrimer of the S protein, and the receptor-binding domain as an antigen to test patient antibodies is more sensitive than the native N protein. In addition, an increasing number of studies have used multiantigen protein arrays to screen serum from convalescent patients with COVID-19. Antigen combinations demonstrated improved performance compared to each individual antigen. For rapid antigen detection, the sensitivity of the test is higher in the first week of onset of the disease with high viral loads. Highly sensitive and specific immunological diagnostic methods for antibodies or those that directly detect viral antigens in clinical samples would be beneficial for the rapid and accurate diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Antibody tests for diagnosing COVID-19: how relevant are they?

The current standards for detecting active coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection are molecular tests by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, using swabs from the lower or upper respiratory tract. Because of the expertise required and the long turnaround time for the availability of test results, faster and easier point-of-care methods are necessary. The latter may include the detection of antibodies specific to COVID-19. We highlight a recent Cochrane review that assessed the accuracy of antibody tests for diagnosing COVID-19. The review shows that, at present, antibodies have little use in the diagnosis of COVID-19 within the first seven days from onset of symptoms. However, as time progresses, the sensitivity of the antibody tests increases. Antibody tests are more useful in detecting previous COVID-19 infection if used 15 days or more from onset of symptoms. Data presented in the review should be interpreted with caution as most studies (85%) recruited in-hospital patients and 11% recruited suspected COVID-19 patients, while only 4% recruited convalescent patients. This limits generalisability of the results to most settings.

Molecular, serological, and biochemical diagnosis and monitoring of COVID-19: IFCC taskforce evaluation of the latest evidence.

The global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has presented major challenges for clinical laboratories, from initial diagnosis to patient monitoring and treatment. Initial response to this pandemic involved the development, production, and distribution of diagnostic molecular assays at an unprecedented rate, leading to minimal validation requirements and concerns regarding their diagnostic accuracy in clinical settings. In addition to molecular testing, serological assays to detect antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are now becoming available from numerous diagnostic manufacturers. In both cases, the lack of peer-reviewed data and regulatory oversight, combined with general misconceptions regarding their appropriate use, have highlighted the importance of laboratory professionals in robustly validating and evaluating these assays for appropriate clinical use. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) Task Force on COVID-19 has been established to synthesize up-to-date information on the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and laboratory diagnosis and monitoring of COVID-19, as well as to develop practical recommendations on the use of molecular, serological, and biochemical tests in disease diagnosis and management. This review summarizes the latest evidence and status of molecular, serological, and biochemical testing in COVID-19 and highlights some key considerations for clinical laboratories operating to support the global fight against this ongoing pandemic. Confidently this consolidated information provides a useful resource to laboratories and a reminder of the laboratory's critical role as the world battles this unprecedented crisis.

Laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 in China: A review of challenging cases and analysis.

Since the initial emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, Hubei province, China, a rapid spread of the disease occurred around the world, rising to become an international global health concern at pandemic level. In the face of this medical challenge threatening humans, the development of rapid and accurate methods for early screening and diagnosis of COVID-19 became crucial to containing the emerging public health threat, and prevent further spread within the population. Despite the large number of COVID-19 confirmed cases in China, some problematic cases with inconsistent laboratory testing results, were reported. Specifically, a high false-negative rate of 41% on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) assays was observed in China. Although serological testing has been applied worldwide as a complementary method to help identify SARS-CoV-2, several limitations on its use have been reported in China. Therefore, the use of both qRT-PCR and serological testing in the diagnosis of COVID-19 in China and elsewhere, presented considerable challenges, but when used in combination, can be valuable tools in the fight against COVID-19. In this review, we give an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of different molecular techniques for SARS-CoV-2 detection that are currently used in several labs, including qRT-PCR, gene sequencing, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), nucleic acid mass spectrometry (MS), and gene editing technique based on clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR/Cas13) system. Then we mainly review and analyze some causes of false-negative qRT-PCR results, and how to resolve some of the diagnostic dilemma.

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19): A General Review.

The rampant COVID-19 pandemic has strained the testing capabilities of healthcare centers across the country. Several nucleic acid and serologic assays are available or currently being developed to meet the growing demand for large-scale testing. This review summarizes the developments of commonly used testing methods and their strategic use in clinical diagnosis and epidemiologic surveillance. This review will cover the basic virology of SARS-CoV-2, nucleic acid amplification testing, serology, antigen testing, as well as newer testing methods such as CRISPR-based assays.

Molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 in different biologic matrix, their diagnostic validity and clinical relevance: A systematic review.

Due to COVID 19 outbreak many studies are being conducted for therapeutic strategies and vaccines but detection methods play an important role in the containment of the disease. Hence, this systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the molecular detection techniques in COVID-19. For framing the systematic review 6 literature databases (PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar) were searched for relevant studies and articles were screened for relevant content till 25th April 2020. Observations from this systematic review reveal the utility of RT-PCR with serological testing as one such method cannot correlate with accurate results. Availability of point of care devices do not conform to sensitivity and specificity in comparison to the conventional methods due to lack of clinical investigations. Pivotal aim of molecular and serological research is the development of detection methods that can support the clinical decision making of patients suspected with SARS-CoV-2. However, none of the methods were 100% sensitive and specific; hence additional studies are required to overcome the challenges addressed here. We hope that the present article with its observations and suggestions will assist the researchers to realize this vision in future.

Different longitudinal patterns of nucleic acid and serology testing results based on disease severity of COVID-19 patients.

Effective strategy to mitigate the ongoing pandemic of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) require a comprehensive understanding of humoral responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the emerging virus causing COVID-19. The dynamic profile of viral replication and shedding along with viral antigen specific antibody responses among COVID-19 patients started to be reported but there is no consensus on their patterns. Here, we conducted a serial investigation on 21 individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 in two medical centres from Jiangsu Province, including 11 non-severe COVID-19 patients, and 5 severe COVID-19 patients and 5 asymptomatic carriers based on nucleic acid test and clinical symptoms. The longitudinal swab samples and sera were collected from these people for viral RNA testing and antibody responses, respectively. Our data revealed different pattern of seroconversion among these groups. All 11 non-severe COVID-19 patients and 5 severe COVID-19 patients were seroconverted during hospitalization or follow-up period, suggesting that serological testing is a complementary assay to nucleic acid test for those symptomatic COVID-19 patients. Of note, immediate antibody responses were identified among severe cases, compared to non-severe cases. On the other hand, only one were seroconverted for asymptomatic carriers. The SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody responses were well-maintained during the observation period. Such information is of immediate relevance and would assist COVID-19 clinical diagnosis, prognosis and vaccine design.