Immunodetection assays for the quantification of seasonal common cold coronaviruses OC43, NL63, or 229E infection confirm nirmatrelvir as broad coronavirus inhibitor.

Besides pandemic SARS-CoV-2, also endemic seasonal human common cold coronaviruses (hCoVs) have a significant impact on human health and economy. Studies on hCoVs and the identification of antivirals are therefore crucial to improve human well-being. However, hCoVs have long been neglected and the methodology to study virus infection, replication and inhibition warrants being updated. We here evaluated the established plaque-based assays to determine viral titers and cell-to-cell spread and developed protocols for the immunodetection of the viral nucleocapsid protein by flow cytometry and in-cell ELISA to study infection rates at early time points. The developed protocols allow detection of hCoV-229E infection after 2, and hCoV-NL63 and -OC43 infection after 3 days at a single cell level or in a 96 well microtiter format, in large sample numbers without being laborious or expensive. Both assays can be applied to assess the susceptibility of cells to hCoV infection and replication, and to determine the efficacy of antiviral compounds as well as neutralizing antibodies in a sensitive and quantitative manner. Application revealed that clinically applied SARS-CoV-2 targeting monoclonal antibodies are inactive against hCoVs, but that the viral polymerase targeting antivirals remdesivir and molnupiravir are broadly active also against all three hCoVs. Further, the in-cell ELISA provided evidence that nirmatrelvir, previously shown to broadly inhibit coronavirus proteases, also prevents replication of authentic hCoVs. Importantly, the protocols described here can be easily adapted to other coronavirus strains and species as well as viruses of other families within a short time. This will facilitate future research on known and emerging (corona)viruses, support the identification of antivirals and increase the preparedness for future virus outbreaks.

Assessment of the Feasibility of Using Noninvasive Wearable Biometric Monitoring Sensors to Detect Influenza and the Common Cold Before Symptom Onset.

Importance: Currently, there are no presymptomatic screening methods to identify individuals infected with a respiratory virus to prevent disease spread and to predict their trajectory for resource allocation. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of using noninvasive, wrist-worn wearable biometric monitoring sensors to detect presymptomatic viral infection after exposure and predict infection severity in patients exposed to H1N1 influenza or human rhinovirus. Design, Setting, and Participants: The cohort H1N1 viral challenge study was conducted during 2018; data were collected from September 11, 2017, to May 4, 2018. The cohort rhinovirus challenge study was conducted during 2015; data were collected from September 14 to 21, 2015. A total of 39 adult participants were recruited for the H1N1 challenge study, and 24 adult participants were recruited for the rhinovirus challenge study. Exclusion criteria for both challenges included chronic respiratory illness and high levels of serum antibodies. Participants in the H1N1 challenge study were isolated in a clinic for a minimum of 8 days after inoculation. The rhinovirus challenge took place on a college campus, and participants were not isolated. Exposures: Participants in the H1N1 challenge study were inoculated via intranasal drops of diluted influenza A/California/03/09 (H1N1) virus with a mean count of 106 using the median tissue culture infectious dose (TCID50) assay. Participants in the rhinovirus challenge study were inoculated via intranasal drops of diluted human rhinovirus strain type 16 with a count of 100 using the TCID50 assay. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measures included cross-validated performance metrics of random forest models to screen for presymptomatic infection and predict infection severity, including accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: A total of 31 participants with H1N1 (24 men [77.4%]; mean [SD] age, 34.7 [12.3] years) and 18 participants with rhinovirus (11 men [61.1%]; mean [SD] age, 21.7 [3.1] years) were included in the analysis after data preprocessing. Separate H1N1 and rhinovirus detection models, using only data on wearble devices as input, were able to distinguish between infection and noninfection with accuracies of up to 92% for H1N1 (90% precision, 90% sensitivity, 93% specificity, and 90% F1 score, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.70-1.00] AUC) and 88% for rhinovirus (100% precision, 78% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 88% F1 score, and 0.96 [95% CI, 0.85-1.00] AUC). The infection severity prediction model was able to distinguish between mild and moderate infection 24 hours prior to symptom onset with an accuracy of 90% for H1N1 (88% precision, 88% sensitivity, 92% specificity, 88% F1 score, and 0.88 [95% CI, 0.72-1.00] AUC) and 89% for rhinovirus (100% precision, 75% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 86% F1 score, and 0.95 [95% CI, 0.79-1.00] AUC). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests that the use of a noninvasive, wrist-worn wearable device to predict an individual's response to viral exposure prior to symptoms is feasible. Harnessing this technology would support early interventions to limit presymptomatic spread of viral respiratory infections, which is timely in the era of COVID-19.

A severe case of human coronavirus 229E pneumonia in an elderly man with diabetes mellitus: a case report.

BACKGROUND: With pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), human coronaviruses (HCoVs) have recently attached worldwide attention as essential pathogens in respiratory infection. HCoV-229E has been described as a rare cause of lower respiratory infection in immunocompetent adults. CASE PRESENTATION: We reported a 72-year-old man infected by HCoV-229E with rapid progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome, in conjunction with new onset atrial fibrillation, intensive care unit acquired weakness, and recurrent hospital acquired pneumonia. Clinical and radiological data were continuously collected. The absolute number of peripheral T cells and the level of complement components diminished initially and recovered after 2 months. The patient was successfully treated under intensive support care and discharged from the hospital after 3 months and followed. CONCLUSION: HCoV-229E might an essential causative agent of pulmonary inflammation and extensive lung damage. Supportive treatment was essential to HCoVs infection on account of a long duration of immunological recovery in critical HCoV-229E infection.

An evaluation of patients with a previous endemic coronavirus infection during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Few studies exist on the clinical manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients who previously had a common cold due to an endemic coronavirus (eCoV). In a retrospective scan of the data obtained in our microbiology laboratory, 64 patients who were diagnosed with an eCoV infection between 2016 and 2020 were identified. National COVID-19 surveillance data showed that four (6.2%) of 64 patients were infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by the end of 2020, while, simultaneously, the COVID-19 prevalence in the city of Malatya ranged from 7.8% (polymerase chain reaction-based diagnosis) to 9.2% (total diagnosis). The differences were found statistically significant (6.2% vs. 7.8%, p < .01; 6.2% vs. 9.2%, p < .001). Patient interviews and evaluation of medical records revealed that these four patients did not manifest any severe COVID-19 symptoms despite their substantial comorbidities, and they did not require hospitalization. Consequently, despite a low number of samples, we determined a lower frequency of COVID-19 among the patients who had a prior eCoV infection, and the results of this study support the previous findings that people with a prior eCoV infection develop a milder case of COVID-19. Our results may provide some insights for future studies aiming at vaccine development, but detailed investigations are still required.

Comparison of the clinical differences between COVID-19, SARS, influenza, and the common cold: A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: This review focuses on the frequency of symptoms in COVID-19 in comparison to SARS, influenza and common cold. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the knowledge about the clinical features, symptoms and differences between patients with COVID-19, SARS, influenza, and common cold. The research can help ear, nose and throat specialists and other health practitioners manage patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The biomedical databases used in the study included PubMed and MEDLINE. Statistical analysis using the Z-score test assessed which symptoms were more characteristic of COVID-19 than other viral diseases. RESULTS: Among individuals with COVID-19, the most frequently reported symptoms were cough (70%), fever (45%), muscular pain (29%), and headache (21%), whereas sore throat (12%), and rhinorrhea (4%) were observed at lower rates. Fever was identified as most frequent in COVID-19 (74%), appearing at a higher rate in those cases than in influenza (68%) or the common cold (40%) (p < 0.05). In comparison to other viral diseases, sore throat was rarely reported in COVID-19 and SARS (12% and 18%, respectively) (p < 0.05). In influenza and common cold, a cough was identified in 93% and 80% of cases (p < 0.05). Headache, rhinorrhea, muscular pain, and sore throat were more common in influenza (91%, 91%, 94%, and 84%, respectively) and common cold (89%, 81%, 94%, and 84%, respectively) than in COVID-19 (21%, 4%, 29%, and 12%, respectively) and SARS (45%, 12%, 55%, and 18%, respectively) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The results of the analysis show that a greater number of general symptoms should lead to a diagnosis of influenza or common cold rather than COVID-19.

Risk factors for a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR in patients with common cold symptoms in a primary care setting - a retrospective analysis based on a joint documentation standard.

BACKGROUND: Combating the COVID-19 pandemic is a major challenge for health systems, citizens and policy makers worldwide. Early detection of affected patients within the large and heterogeneous group of patients with common cold symptoms is an important element of this effort, but often hindered by limited testing resources, false-negative test results and the lack of pathognomonic symptoms in COVID-19. Therefore, we aimed to identify anamnestic items with an increased/decreased odds ratio for a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR (CovPCR) result in a primary care setting. METHODS: We performed a multi-center cross-sectional cohort study on predictive clinical characteristics for a positive CovPCR over a period of 4 weeks in primary care patients in Germany. RESULTS: In total, 374 patients in 14 primary care centers received CovPCR and were included in this analysis. The median age was 44.0 (IQR: 31.0-59.0) and a fraction of 10.7% (n = 40) tested positive for COVID-19. Patients who reported anosmia had a higher odds ratio (OR: 4.54; 95%-CI: 1.51-13.67) for a positive test result while patients with a sore throat had a lower OR (OR: 0.33; 95%-CI: 0.11-0.97). Furthermore, patients who had a first grade contact with an infected persons and showed symptoms themselves also had an increased OR for positive testing (OR: 5.16; 95% CI: 1.72-15.51). This correlation was also present when they themselves were still asymptomatic (OR: 12.55; 95% CI: 3.97-39.67). CONCLUSIONS: Several anamnestic criteria may be helpful to assess pre-test probability of COVID-19 in patients with common cold symptoms.

Two serological approaches for detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in different scenarios: a screening tool and a point-of-care test.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has infected more than 8 million people worldwide, becoming a pandemic. Detecting antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 is of utmost importance and a good indicator of exposure and circulation of the virus within the general population. Two serological tools based on a double recognition assay [enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (DR-ELISA) and lateral flow assay (DR-LFA)] to detect total antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 have been developed based on the recombinant nucleocapsid protein. A total of 1065 serum samples, including positive for COVID-19 and negative samples from healthy donors or infected with other respiratory pathogens, were analyzed. The results showed values of sensitivity between 91.2% and 100%, and specificity of 100% and 98.2% for DR-LFA and DR-ELISA, respectively. No cross-reactivity against seasonal coronavirus (HCoV-NL63, HCoV-229E, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-OC43) was found. These results demonstrate the importance of serology as a complementary tool to polymerase chain reaction for follow-up of recovered patients and identification of asymptomatic individuals.