Outbreak of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in hospitalized hemodialysis patients: An epidemiologic and genomic investigation.

We performed an epidemiological investigation and genome sequencing of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to define the source and scope of an outbreak in a cluster of hospitalized patients. Lack of appropriate respiratory hygiene led to SARS-CoV-2 transmission to patients and healthcare workers during a single hemodialysis session, highlighting the importance of infection prevention precautions.

Estimating severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) seroprevalence from residual clinical blood samples, January-March 2021.

We describe severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgG seroprevalence and antigenemia among patients at a medical center in January-March 2021 using residual clinical blood samples. The overall seroprevalences were 17% by infection and 16% by vaccination. Spent or residual samples are a feasible alternative for rapidly estimating seroprevalence or monitoring trends in infection and vaccination.

Nucleocapsid Antigenemia Is a Marker of Acute SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is essential for diagnosis, treatment, and infection control. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) fails to distinguish acute from resolved infections, as RNA is frequently detected after infectiousness. We hypothesized that nucleocapsid in blood marks acute infection with the potential to enhance isolation and treatment strategies. In a retrospective serosurvey of inpatient and outpatient encounters, we categorized samples along an infection timeline using timing of SARS-CoV-2 testing and symptomatology. Among 1860 specimens from 1607 patients, the highest levels and frequency of antigenemia were observed in samples from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antigenemia was higher in seronegative individuals and in those with severe disease. In our analysis, antigenemia exhibited 85.8% sensitivity and 98.6% specificity as a biomarker for acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Thus, antigenemia sensitively and specifically marks acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Further study is warranted to determine whether antigenemia may aid individualized assessment of active COVID-19.

Hantavirus Disease and COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Navajo Nation is disproportionately affected by hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome (HCPS), a severe respiratory disease that can quickly progress to respiratory failure and cardiogenic shock. The initial signs and symptoms of HCPS are indistinguishable from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, this distinction is critical, as the disease course differs greatly, with most patients with COVID-19 experiencing mild to moderate illness. We set out to determine if the evaluation of peripheral blood smears for five hematopathologic criteria previously identified as hallmarks of hantavirus infection, or "the hantavirus 5-point screen," could distinguish between COVID-19 and HCPS. METHODS: The hantavirus 5-point screen was performed on peripheral blood smears from 139 patients positive for COVID-19 seeking treatment from Tséhootsooí Medical Center and two Emory University hospitals. RESULTS: Of these 139 individuals, 136 (98%) received a score of 3/5 or below, indicating low suspicion for HCPS. While thrombocytopenia, one of the key signs of HCPS, was seen in the patients with COVID-19, it was generally mild and remained stable on repeat specimens collected 12 to 24 hours later. CONCLUSIONS: Given these findings, the 5-point screen remains a useful rapid screening tool for potential HCPS cases and may be useful to distinguish early HCPS from COVID-19 in HCPS endemic regions.

Estimating SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence from Spent Blood Samples, January–March 2021

Background Measuring SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence in spent samples at serial time points can determine seropositivity in a diverse pool of individuals to inform understanding of trends as vaccinations are implemented. Methods Blood samples collected for clinical testing and then discarded ("spent samples") were obtained from the clinical laboratory of a medical center in Atlanta. A convenience sample of spent samples from both inpatients (medical/surgical floors, intensive care, obstetrics) and outpatients (clinics and ambulatory surgery) were collected one day per week from January-March 2021. Samples were matched to clinical data from the electronic medical record. In-house single dilution serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD) and nucleocapsid (N) antibodies were developed and validated using pre-pandemic and PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patient serum and plasma samples (Figure 1). ELISA optical density (OD) cutoffs for seroconversion were chosen using receiver operating characteristic analysis with areas under the curve for all four assays greater than 0.95 after 14 days post symptom onset. IgG profiles were defined as natural infection (RBD and N positive) or vaccinated (RBD positive, N negative). Figure 1. Nucleocapsid serology assay validation Single dilution serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibodies were validated using pre-pandemic and PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patient serum and plasma samples. ELISA optical density (OD) cutoffs for seroconversion were chosen using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis with areas under the curve (AUC) for all four assays greater than 0.95 after 14 days post symptom onset. Results A total of 2406 samples were collected from 2132 unique patients. Median age was 58 years (IQR 40-70), with 766 (36%) ≥ 65 years. The majority were female (1173, 55%), and 1341 (63%) were Black. Median Elixhauser comorbidity index was 5 (IQR 2-9). 210 (9.9%) patients ever had SARS-CoV-2 detected by PCR, and 191 (9.0%) received a COVID-19 vaccine within the health system. Nearly half (1186/2406, 49.3%) of samples were collected from inpatient units, 586 (24.4%) from outpatient labs, 403 (16.8%) from the emergency department, and 231 (9.6%) from infusion centers. Overall, 17.0% had the IgG natural infection profile, while 16.2% had a vaccination profile. Prevalence estimates for IgG due to natural infection ranged from 24.0% in week 2 to 9.7% in week 5, and for IgG due to vaccine from 4.4% in week 2 to 32.0% in week 6 (Table, Figure 2). Table. SARS-CoV-2 antibody seropositivity by week of sample collection for spent routine blood chemistry samples. RBD = receptor binding domain. N = nucleocapsid. Seropositivity defined by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) optical density cutoffs selected using receiver operating characteristic analysis with areas under the curve (AUC) for all four assays greater than 0.95 after 14 days post symptom onset. IgG defined as positive if both RBD and N seropositive. Figure 2. RBD and Nucleocapsid seropositivity to differentiate natural infection vs. vaccination by week of sample collection. RBD = receptor binding domain. N = nucleocapsid. Seropositivity defined by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) optical density cutoffs selected using receiver operating characteristic analysis with areas under the curve (AUC) for all four assays greater than 0.95 after 14 days post symptom onset. Conclusion Estimated SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence among patients at a medical center from January-March 2021 was 17% by natural infection, and 16% by vaccination. Weekly trends likely reflect community spread and vaccine uptake. Disclosures Daniel Graciaa, MD, MPH, MSc, Critica, Inc (Consultant)

Comparison of Antibody Class-Specific SARS-CoV-2 Serologies for the Diagnosis of Acute COVID-19.

Accurate diagnosis of acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is critical for appropriate management of patients with this disease. We examined the possible complementary role of laboratory-developed class-specific clinical serology in assessing SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients. Serological tests for immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgA, and IgM antibodies against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 were evaluated using samples from real-time reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (qRT-PCR)-confirmed inpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. We analyzed the influence of timing and clinical severity on the diagnostic value of class-specific COVID-19 serology testing. Cross-sectional analysis revealed higher sensitivity and specificity at lower optical density cutoffs for IgA in hospitalized patients than for IgG and IgM serology (IgG area under the curve [AUC] of 0.91 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.89 to 0.93] versus IgA AUC of 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96 to 0.98] versus IgM AUC of 0.95 [95% CI, 0.92 to 0.97]). The enhanced performance of IgA serology was apparent in the first 2 weeks after symptom onset and the first week after PCR testing. In patients requiring intubation, all three tests exhibit enhanced sensitivity. Among PCR-negative patients under investigation for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2 out of 61 showed clear evidence of seroconversion IgG, IgA, and IgM. Suspected false-positive results in the latter population were most frequently observed in IgG and IgM serology tests. Our findings suggest the potential utility of IgA serology in the acute setting and explore the benefits and limitations of class-specific serology as a complementary diagnostic tool to PCR for COVID-19 in the acute setting.

Validation of an admission coagulation panel for risk stratification of COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data on the markers of coagulation and hemostatic activation (MOCHA) profile in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its ability to identify COVID-19 patients at risk for thrombotic events and other complications. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-COV-2 from four Atlanta hospitals were included in this observational cohort study and underwent admission testing of MOCHA parameters (plasma d-dimer, prothrombin fragment 1.2, thrombin-antithrombin complex, fibrin monomer). Clinical outcomes included deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, access line thrombosis, ICU admission, intubation and mortality. MAIN RESULTS: Of 276 patients (mean age 59 ± 6.4 years, 47% female, 62% African American), 45 (16%) had a thrombotic endpoint. Each MOCHA parameter was independently associated with a thrombotic event (p<0.05) and ≥ 2 abnormalities was associated with thrombotic endpoints (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2-8.8) as were admission D-dimer ≥ 2000 ng/mL (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.5-6.6) and ≥ 3000 ng/mL (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.6-7.9). However, only ≥ 2 MOCHA abnormalities were associated with ICU admission (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.7-5.2) and intubation (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.6-6.4). MOCHA and D-dimer cutoffs were not associated with mortality. MOCHA with <2 abnormalities (26% of the cohort) had 89% sensitivity and 93% negative predictive value for a thrombotic endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: An admission MOCHA profile is useful to risk-stratify COVID-19 patients for thrombotic complications and more effective than isolated d-dimer for predicting risk of ICU admission and intubation.

Therapeutic plasma exchange for COVID-19-associated hyperviscosity.

BACKGROUND: Recent data suggests an association between blood hyperviscosity and both propensity for thrombosis and disease severity in patients with COVID-19. This raises the possibility that increased viscosity may contribute to endothelial damage and multiorgan failure in COVID-19, and that therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) to decrease viscosity may improve patient outcomes. Here we sought to share our experience using TPE in the first 6 patients treated for COVID-19-associated hyperviscosity. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Six critically ill COVID-19 patients with plasma viscosity levels ranging from 2.6 to 4.2 centipoise (cP; normal range, 1.4-1.8 cP) underwent daily TPE for 2-3 treatments. RESULTS: TPE decreased plasma viscosity in all six patients (Pre-TPE median 3.75 cP, range 2.6-4.2 cP; Post-TPE median 1.6 cP, range 1.5-1.9 cP). TPE also decreased fibrinogen levels in all five patients for whom results were available (Pre-TPE median 739 mg/dL, range 601-1188 mg/dL; Post-TPE median 359 mg/dL, range 235-461 mg/dL); D-dimer levels in all six patients (Pre-TPE median 5921 ng/mL, range 1134-60 000 ng/mL; Post-TPE median 4893 ng/mL, range 620-7518 ng/mL); and CRP levels in five of six patients (Pre-TPE median 292 mg/L, range 136-329 mg/L; Post-TPE median 84 mg/L, range 31-211 mg/L). While the two sickest patients died, significant improvement in clinical status was observed in four of six patients shortly after TPE. CONCLUSIONS: This series demonstrates the utility of TPE to rapidly correct increased blood viscosity in patients with COVID-19-associated hyperviscosity. Large randomized trials are needed to determine whether TPE may improve clinical outcomes for patients with COVID-19.

Retrospective Analyses Associate Hemostasis Activation Biomarkers With Poor Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have thromboembolic complications. Assessment of coagulation and other markers could be useful to understand their coagulopathy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of inflammatory and coagulation parameters, including prothrombin fragment 1.2 (PF1.2), thrombin-antithrombin complexes (TATs), fibrin monomers, and D-dimer, in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We compared the markers in patients with thrombosis, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and poor outcome. RESULTS: Of the 81 patients, 9 (11%) experienced an acute thrombotic event (4 with pulmonary embolism, 3 with venous thrombosis, and 2 with stroke). PF1.2 was elevated in 32 (39%) patients, TATs in 54 (67%), fibrin monomers in 49 (60%), and D-dimer in 76 (94%). Statistically significant elevation in PF1.2 and TATs was seen in patients admitted to the ICU, while D-dimer and fibrin monomers were significantly elevated in patients with poor outcomes. The presence of multiple abnormal coagulation parameters was associated with ICU admission. Other parameters with statistically significant results included abnormal WBC counts and elevated C-reactive protein, which were associated with ICU admission and poor outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that abnormalities of biomarkers of hemostasis activation and inflammatory markers are associated with poor outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) coronavirus pandemic: current situation and implications for Mexico.

The Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) is one of the most devastating in this century. It originated in China in December 2019 caused by the SARS-Cov-2 virus, and in less than a month it had been classified as an "International Public Health Emergency". To date there are nearly 3 million people infected and more than 250,000 deaths caused by the disease worldwide. Initially it affects the respiratory tract with atypical pneumonia and in severe cases it produces systemic inflammation with cytokine storm that can cause rapid deterioration with circulatory and respiratory failure, coagulopathy and a lethality rate of approximately 7%. In Mexico, the first case was detected in February 2020, and to date there are 26,616 confirmed cases and 2,961 deaths throughout the country. The low number of diagnostic tests conducted in our country clearly underestimates the real incidence and impact of the disease. The most affected groups are those with risk factors such as age over 60, presence of hypertension, diabetes or cardiovascular disease. Of the confirmed cases, 15% are healthcare workers. There is no specific treatment or vaccine yet, so it is important to have hygiene, social isolation and personal protection measures. Health, social and economic consequences could have great impact in the near future.

La pandemia del Coronavirus (COVID-19) es una de las más devastadoras de este siglo. Originada en China en diciembre de 2019 y causada por el virus SARS-CoV-2, en menos de 1 mes ya había sido catalogada como "Emergencia de Salud Pública de Alcance Internacional". A la fecha hay cerca de 3 millones de personas con infección confirmada y ha provocado más de 250,000 fallecimientos en el mundo. Inicialmente afecta las vías respiratorias con neumonías atípica y en casos graves provoca inflamación sistémica con liberación de citoquinas que pueden provocar un rápido deterioro, insuficiencia circulatoria, respiratoria y alteraciones de coagulación con una letalidad cercana al 7%. En México, el primer caso se detectó en febrero del 2020, y a la fecha de esta publicación se cuenta con 29,616 casos confirmados y 2,961 fallecimientos en toda la extensión de país. La baja tasa de muestreo diagnóstico en nuestro país claramente subestima la incidencia e impacto de esta enfermedad. Los grupos mas afectados son aquéllos con factores de riesgo como lo son la edad mayor a 60 años, hipertensión, diabetes o historia de enfermedad cardiovascular. De los casos confirmados, 15% son trabajadores del sector salud. No existe hasta ahora un tratamiento específico o vacuna, de tal manera que es importante contar con las medidas de higiene, aislamiento social y protección personal. Las consecuencias en salud, sociales y económicas podrían ser de gran impacto en los tiempos por venir.

Rapid Generation of Neutralizing Antibody Responses in COVID-19 Patients.

SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is causing a devastating worldwide pandemic, and there is a pressing need to understand the development, specificity, and neutralizing potency of humoral immune responses during acute infection. We report a cross-sectional study of antibody responses to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein and virus neutralization activity in a cohort of 44 hospitalized COVID-19 patients. RBD-specific IgG responses are detectable in all patients 6 days after PCR confirmation. Isotype switching to IgG occurs rapidly, primarily to IgG1 and IgG3. Using a clinical SARS-CoV-2 isolate, neutralizing antibody titers are detectable in all patients by 6 days after PCR confirmation and correlate with RBD-specific binding IgG titers. The RBD-specific binding data were further validated in a clinical setting with 231 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patient samples. These findings have implications for understanding protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2, therapeutic use of immune plasma, and development of much-needed vaccines.

Suitability and Sufficiency of Telehealth Clinician-Observed, Participant-Collected Samples for SARS-CoV-2 Testing: The iCollect Cohort Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic calls for expanded opportunities for testing, including novel testing strategies such as home-collected specimens. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to understand whether oropharyngeal swab (OPS), saliva, and dried blood spot (DBS) specimens collected by participants at home and mailed to a laboratory were sufficient for use in diagnostic and serology tests of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Eligible participants consented online and were mailed a participant-collection kit to support collection of three specimens for SARS-CoV-2 testing: saliva, OPS, and DBS. Participants performed the specimen collection procedures during a telehealth video appointment while clinical observers watched and documented the suitability of the collection. The biological sufficiency of the specimens for detection of SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction and serology testing was assessed by laboratorians using visual inspection and quantification of the nucleic acid contents of the samples by ribonuclease P (RNase P) measurements. RESULTS: Of the enrolled participants,153/159 (96.2%) returned their kits, which were included in this analysis. All these participants attended their video appointments. Clinical observers assessed that of the samples collected, 147/153 (96.1%) of the saliva samples, 146/151 (96.7%) of the oropharyngeal samples, and 135/145 (93.1%) of the DBS samples were of sufficient quality for submission for laboratory testing; 100% of the OPS samples and 98% of the saliva samples had cycle threshold values for RNase P <30, indicating that the samples contained sufficient nucleic acid for RNA-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: These pilot data indicate that most participant-collected OPS, saliva, and DBS specimens are suitable and sufficient for testing for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and serology. Clinical observers rated the collection of specimens as suitable for testing, and visual and quantitative laboratory assessment indicated that the specimens were biologically sufficient. These data support the utility of participant-collected and mailed-in specimens for SARS-CoV-2 testing. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/19054.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and Antibodies in Diverse Samples: Protocol to Validate the Sufficiency of Provider-Observed, Home-Collected Blood, Saliva, and Oropharyngeal Samples.

BACKGROUND: The response in the United States to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been hampered by a lack of aggressive testing for the infection. Testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cornerstone of an effective public health response. However, efforts to test have been hampered by limited reagents, limitations in the availability of swabs used for the collection of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimens, limitations in personal protective equipment (PPE) for health care providers collecting the NPS specimens, and limitations in viral transport media for transporting the specimens. Therefore, more flexible options for screening for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and serologic responses are critical to inform clinical and public health responses. OBJECTIVE: We aim to document the ability of patients to self-collect sufficient specimens for SARS-CoV-2 viral detection and serology. METHODS: Patient self-collection of samples will be done with observation by a health care provider during a telemedicine session. Participants will be mailed a specimen collection kit, engage in a telehealth session with a provider through a HIPPA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996)-compliant video meeting, and collect specimens while being observed by the provider. Providers will record whether they are confident in the suitability of the specimen for laboratory testing that would inform clinical decision making. We will objectively assess the sufficiency of biological material in the mailed-in specimens. RESULTS: The protocol was approved by the Emory University Institutional Review Board (IRB) on March 30, 2020 (Protocol number 371). To date, we have enrolled 159 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Defining a conceptual framework for assessing the sufficiency of patient-collected samples for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and serologic responses to infection is critical for facilitating public health responses and providing PPE-sparing options to increase testing. Validation of alternative methods of specimen collection should include objective measures of the sufficiency of specimens for testing. A strong evidence base for diversifying testing modalities will improve tools to guide public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.