Genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Cambodia, January 2020 to February 2021.

The first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Cambodia was confirmed on 27 January 2020 in a traveller from Wuhan. Cambodia subsequently implemented strict travel restrictions, and although intermittent cases were reported during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, no apparent widespread community transmission was detected. Investigating the routes of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) introduction into the country was critical for evaluating the implementation of public health interventions and assessing the effectiveness of social control measures. Genomic sequencing technologies have enabled rapid detection and monitoring of emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2. Here, we detected 478 confirmed COVID-19 cases in Cambodia between 27 January 2020 and 14 February 2021, 81.3 per cent in imported cases. Among them, fifty-four SARS-CoV-2 genomes were sequenced and analysed along with representative global lineages. Despite the low number of confirmed cases, we found a high diversity of Cambodian viruses that belonged to at least seventeen distinct PANGO lineages. Phylogenetic inference of SARS-CoV-2 revealed that the genetic diversity of Cambodian viruses resulted from multiple independent introductions from diverse regions, predominantly, Eastern Asia, Europe, and Southeast Asia. Most cases were quickly isolated, limiting community spread, although there was an A.23.1 variant cluster in Phnom Penh in November 2020 that resulted in a small-scale local transmission. The overall low incidence of COVID-19 infections suggests that Cambodia's early containment strategies, including travel restrictions, aggressive testing and strict quarantine measures, were effective in preventing large community outbreaks of COVID-19.

One assay to test them all: Multiplex assays for expansion of respiratory virus surveillance.

Molecular multiplex assays (MPAs) for simultaneous detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in a single RT-PCR reaction reduce time and increase efficiency to identify multiple pathogens with overlapping clinical presentation but different treatments or public health implications. Clinical performance of XpertXpress® SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV (Cepheid, GX), TaqPath™ COVID-19, FluA/B, RSV Combo kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, TP), and PowerChek™ SARS-CoV-2/Influenza A&B/RSV Multiplex RT-PCR kit II (KogeneBiotech, PC) was compared to individual Standards of Care (SoC). Thirteen isolates of SARS-CoV-2, human seasonal influenza, and avian influenza served to assess limit of detection (LoD). Then, positive and negative residual nasopharyngeal specimens, collected under public health surveillance and pandemic response served for evaluation. Subsequently, comparison of effectiveness was assessed. The three MPAs confidently detect all lineages of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. MPA-LoDs vary from 1 to 2 Log10 differences from SoC depending on assay and strain. Clinical evaluation resulted in overall agreement between 97 and 100%, demonstrating a high accuracy to detect all targets. Existing differences in costs, testing burden and implementation constraints influence the choice in primary or community settings. TP, PC and GX, reliably detect SARS-CoV-2, influenza and RSV simultaneously, with reduced time-to-results and simplified workflows. MPAs have the potential to enhance diagnostics, surveillance system, and epidemic response to drive policy on prevention and control of viral respiratory infections.

Performance of 30 commercial SARS-CoV-2 serology assays in testing symptomatic COVID-19 patients.

We report evaluation of 30 assays' (17 rapid tests (RDTs) and 13 automated/manual ELISA/CLIA assay (IAs)) clinical performances with 2594 sera collected from symptomatic patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR on a respiratory sample, and 1996 pre-epidemic serum samples expected to be negative. Only 4 RDT and 3 IAs fitted both specificity (> 98%) and sensitivity (> 90%) criteria according to French recommendations. Serology may offer valuable information during COVID-19 pandemic, but inconsistent performances observed among the 30 commercial assays evaluated, which underlines the importance of independent evaluation before clinical implementation.

Caution in interpretation of SARS-CoV-2 quantification based on RT-PCR cycle threshold value.

RT-PCR is the reference method for diagnosis of a Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. During the setting up of 6 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assays in our laboratory, comparative evaluations were systematically undertaken and allowed to evidence major discrepancies on cycle threshold RT-PCR results between techniques. These tendencies were confirmed in routine application when analyzing sequential samples from the same patients. Our aim was to examine the impact of the technique among factors influencing RT-PCR result, a far surrogate of 'viral load' in the heterogeneous environment of respiratory specimens.