Use of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibody Tests by US Infectious Disease Physicians: Results of an Emerging Infections Network Survey, March 2022.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests have had limited recommended clinical application during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To inform clinical practice, an understanding is needed of current perspectives of United States-based infectious disease (ID) physicians on the use, interpretation, and need for SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests. Methods: In March 2022, members of the Emerging Infections Network (EIN), a national network of practicing ID physicians, were surveyed on types of SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays ordered, interpretation of test results, and clinical scenarios for which antibody tests were considered. Results: Of 1867 active EIN members, 747 (40%) responded. Among the 583 who managed or consulted on COVID-19 patients, a majority (434/583 [75%]) had ordered SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests and were comfortable interpreting positive (452/578 [78%]) and negative (405/562 [72%]) results. Antibody tests were used for diagnosing post-COVID-19 conditions (61%), identifying prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (60%), and differentiating prior infection and response to COVID-19 vaccination (37%). Less than a third of respondents had used antibody tests to assess need for additional vaccines or risk stratification. Lack of sufficient evidence for use and nonstandardized assays were among the most common barriers for ordering tests. Respondents indicated that statements from professional societies and government agencies would influence their decision to order SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for clinical decision making. Conclusions: Practicing ID physicians are using SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests, and there is an unmet need for clarifying the appropriate use of these tests in clinical practice. Professional societies and US government agencies can support clinicians in the community through the creation of appropriate guidance.

Analysis of the initial lot of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) real-time RT-PCR diagnostic panel.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) designed, manufactured, and distributed the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel for SARS-CoV-2 detection. The diagnostic panel targeted three viral nucleocapsid gene loci (N1, N2, and N3 primers and probes) to maximize sensitivity and to provide redundancy for virus detection if mutations occurred. After the first distribution of the diagnostic panel, state public health laboratories reported fluorescent signal in the absence of viral template (false-positive reactivity) for the N3 component and to a lesser extent for N1. This report describes the findings of an internal investigation conducted by the CDC to identify the cause(s) of the N1 and N3 false-positive reactivity. For N1, results demonstrate that contamination with a synthetic template, that occurred while the "bulk" manufactured materials were located in a research lab for quality assessment, was the cause of false reactivity in the first lot. Base pairing between the 3' end of the N3 probe and the 3' end of the N3 reverse primer led to amplification of duplex and larger molecules resulting in false reactivity in the N3 assay component. We conclude that flaws in both assay design and handling of the "bulk" material, caused the problems with the first lot of the 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. In addition, within this study, we found that the age of the examined diagnostic panel reagents increases the frequency of false positive results for N3. We discuss these findings in the context of improvements to quality control, quality assurance, and assay validation practices that have since been improved at the CDC.

Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy of a Potential Smallpox Therapeutic, Brincidofovir, in a Lethal Monkeypox Virus Animal Model.

Smallpox, caused by Variola virus (VARV), was eradicated in 1980; however, VARV bioterrorist threats still exist, necessitating readily available therapeutics. Current preparedness activities recognize the importance of oral antivirals and recommend therapeutics with different mechanisms of action. Monkeypox virus (MPXV) is closely related to VARV, causing a highly similar clinical human disease, and can be used as a surrogate for smallpox antiviral testing. The prairie dog MPXV model has been characterized and used to study the efficacy of antipoxvirus therapeutics, including recently approved TPOXX (tecovirimat). Brincidofovir (BCV; CMX001) has shown antiviral activity against double-stranded DNA viruses, including poxviruses. To determine the exposure of BCV following oral administration to prairie dogs, a pharmacokinetics (PK) study was performed. Analysis of BCV plasma concentrations indicated variability, conceivably due to the outbred nature of the animals. To determine BCV efficacy in the MPXV prairie dog model, groups of animals were intranasally challenged with 9 × 105 plaque-forming units (PFU; 90% lethal dose [LD90]) of MPXV on inoculation day 0 (ID0). Animals were divided into groups based on the first day of BCV treatment relative to inoculation day (ID-1, ID0, or ID1). A trend in efficacy was noted dependent upon treatment initiation (57% on ID-1, 43% on ID0, and 29% on ID1) but was lower than demonstrated in other animal models. Analysis of the PK data indicated that BCV plasma exposure (maximum concentration [Cmax]) and the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast) were lower than in other animal models administered the same doses, indicating that suboptimal BCV exposure may explain the lower protective effect on survival.IMPORTANCE Preparedness activities against highly transmissible viruses with high mortality rates have been highlighted during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Smallpox, caused by variola virus (VARV) infection, is highly transmissible, with an estimated 30% mortality. Through an intensive vaccination campaign, smallpox was declared eradicated in 1980, and routine smallpox vaccination of individuals ceased. Today's current population has little/no immunity against VARV. If smallpox were to reemerge, the worldwide results would be devastating. Recent FDA approval of one smallpox antiviral (tecovirimat) was a successful step in biothreat preparedness; however, orthopoxviruses can become resistant to treatment, suggesting the need for multiple therapeutics. Our paper details the efficacy of the investigational smallpox drug brincidofovir in a monkeypox virus (MPXV) animal model. Since brincidofovir has not been tested in vivo against smallpox, studies with the related virus MPXV are critical in understanding whether it would be protective in the event of a smallpox outbreak.

Seroprevalence of Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in 10 Sites in the United States, March 23-May 12, 2020.

IMPORTANCE: Reported cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection likely underestimate the prevalence of infection in affected communities. Large-scale seroprevalence studies provide better estimates of the proportion of the population previously infected. OBJECTIVE: To estimate prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in convenience samples from several geographic sites in the US. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study performed serologic testing on a convenience sample of residual sera obtained from persons of all ages. The serum was collected from March 23 through May 12, 2020, for routine clinical testing by 2 commercial laboratory companies. Sites of collection were San Francisco Bay area, California; Connecticut; south Florida; Louisiana; Minneapolis-St Paul-St Cloud metro area, Minnesota; Missouri; New York City metro area, New York; Philadelphia metro area, Pennsylvania; Utah; and western Washington State. EXPOSURES: Infection with SARS-CoV-2. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was estimated using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and estimates were standardized to the site populations by age and sex. Estimates were adjusted for test performance characteristics (96.0% sensitivity and 99.3% specificity). The number of infections in each site was estimated by extrapolating seroprevalence to site populations; estimated infections were compared with the number of reported coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases as of last specimen collection date. RESULTS: Serum samples were tested from 16 025 persons, 8853 (55.2%) of whom were women; 1205 (7.5%) were 18 years or younger and 5845 (36.2%) were 65 years or older. Most specimens from each site had no evidence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Adjusted estimates of the proportion of persons seroreactive to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies ranged from 1.0% in the San Francisco Bay area (collected April 23-27) to 6.9% of persons in New York City (collected March 23-April 1). The estimated number of infections ranged from 6 to 24 times the number of reported cases; for 7 sites (Connecticut, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, New York City metro area, Utah, and western Washington State), an estimated greater than 10 times more SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred than the number of reported cases. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: During March to early May 2020, most persons in 10 diverse geographic sites in the US had not been infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus. The estimated number of infections, however, was much greater than the number of reported cases in all sites. The findings may reflect the number of persons who had mild or no illness or who did not seek medical care or undergo testing but who still may have contributed to ongoing virus transmission in the population.