Short-Term Effectiveness of Oral Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant and Culture-Positive Viral Shedding.

BACKGROUND: Information on the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron is limited. The clinical response and viral kinetics to therapy in the real world need to be evaluated. METHODS: Mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with risk factors for severe illness were prospectively enrolled as a treatment group with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir therapy versus a control group with supportive care. Serial viral load and culture from the upper respiratory tract were evaluated for seven days, and clinical responses and adverse reactions were evaluated for 28 days. RESULTS: A total of 51 patients were analyzed including 40 in the treatment group and 11 in the control group. Faster symptom resolution during hospitalization (P = 0.048) was observed in the treatment group. Only minor adverse reactions were reported in 27.5% of patients. The viral load on Day 7 was lower in the treatment group (P = 0.002). The viral culture showed a positivity of 67.6% (25/37) vs. 100% (6/6) on Day 1, 0% (0/37) vs. 16.7 (1/6) on Day 5, and 0% (0/16) vs. 50.0% (2/4) on Day 7 in the treatment and control groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron was safe and resulted in negative viral culture conversion after Day 5 of treatment with better symptomatic resolution.

Kinetics of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody titers and estimated protective immunity against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant: A prospective nationwide cohort study comparing three COVID-19 vaccination protocols in South Korea.

Introduction: Despite vaccine development, the COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing due to immunity-escaping variants of concern (VOCs). Estimations of vaccine-induced protective immunity against VOCs are essential for setting proper COVID-19 vaccination policy. Methods: We performed plaque-reduction neutralizing tests (PRNTs) using sera from healthcare workers (HCWs) collected from baseline to six months after COVID-19 vaccination and from convalescent COVID-19 patients. The 20.2% of the mean PRNT titer of convalescent sera was used as 50% protective value, and the percentage of HCWs with protective immunity for each week (percent-week) was compared among vaccination groups. A correlation equation was deduced between a PRNT 50% neutralizing dose (ND50) against wild type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 and that of the Delta variant. Results: We conducted PRNTs on 1,287 serum samples from 297 HCWs (99 HCWs who received homologous ChAdOx1 vaccination (ChAd), 99 from HCWs who received homologous BNT162b2 (BNT), and 99 from HCWs who received heterologous ChAd followed by BNT (ChAd-BNT)). Using 365 serum samples from 116 convalescent COVID-19 patients, PRNT ND50 of 118.25 was derived as 50% protective value. The 6-month cumulative percentage of HCWs with protective immunity against WT SARS-CoV-2 was highest in the BNT group (2297.0 percent-week), followed by the ChAd-BNT (1576.8) and ChAd (1403.0) groups. In the inter-group comparison, protective percentage of the BNT group (median 96.0%, IQR 91.2-99.2%) was comparable to the ChAd-BNT group (median 85.4%, IQR 15.7-100%; P =0.117) and significantly higher than the ChAd group (median 60.1%, IQR 20.0-87.1%; P <0.001). When Delta PRNT was estimated using the correlation equation, protective immunity at the 6-month waning point was markedly decreased (28.3% for ChAd group, 52.5% for BNT, and 66.7% for ChAd-BNT). Conclusion: Decreased vaccine-induced protective immunity at the 6-month waning point and lesser response against the Delta variant may explain the Delta-dominated outbreak of late 2021. Follow-up studies for newly-emerging VOCs would also be needed.

Heterologous ChAdOx1 and Bnt162b2 vaccination induces strong neutralizing antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 including delta variant with tolerable reactogenicity.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed humoral responses and reactogenicity following the heterologous vaccination compared to the homologous vaccination groups. METHODS: We enrolled healthcare workers (HCWs) who were either vaccinated with ChAdOx1 followed by BNT162b2 (heterologous group) or 2 doses of ChAdOx1 (ChAdOx1 group) or BNT162b2 (BNT162b2 group). Immunogenicity was assessed by measuring antibody titers against receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in all participants and neutralizing antibody titer in 100 participants per group. Reactogenicity was evaluated by a questionnaire-based survey. RESULTS: We enrolled 499 HCWs (ChAdOx1, n = 199; BNT162b2, n = 200; heterologous ChAdOx1/BNT162b2, n = 100). The geometric mean titer of anti-receptor-binding domain antibody at 14 days after the booster dose was significantly higher in the heterologous group (11 780.55 binding antibody unit (BAU)/mL [95% CI, 10 891.52-12 742.14]) than in the ChAdOx1 (1561.51 [95% CI, 1415.03-1723.15]) or BNT162b2 (2895.90 [95% CI, 2664.01-3147.98]) groups (both p < 0.001). The neutralizing antibody titer of the heterologous group (geometric mean ND50, 2367.74 [95% CI, 1970.03-2845.74]) was comparable to that of the BNT162b2 group (2118.63 [95% CI, 1755.88-2556.32]; p > 0.05) but higher than that of the ChAdOx1 group (391.77 [95% CI, 326.16-470.59]; p < 0.001). Compared with those against wild-type SARS-CoV-2, the geometric mean neutralizing antibody titers against the Delta variant at 14 days after the boosting were reduced by 3.0-fold in the heterologous group (geometric mean ND50, 872.01 [95% CI, 685.33-1109.54]), 4.0-fold in the BNT162b2 group (337.93 [95% CI, 262.78-434.57]), and 3.2-fold in the ChAdOx1 group (206.61 [95% CI, 144.05-296.34]). The local or systemic reactogenicity after the booster dose in the heterologous group was higher than that of the ChAdOx1 group but comparable to that of the BNT162b2 group. DISCUSSION: Heterologous ChAdOx1 followed by BNT162b2 vaccination with a 12-week interval induced a robust humoral immune response against SARS-CoV-2, including the Delta variant, that was comparable to the homologous BNT162b2 vaccination and stronger than the homologous ChAdOx1 vaccination, with a tolerable reactogenicity profile.

Booster BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccination Increases Neutralizing Antibody Titers Against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant in Both Young and Elderly Adults.

Concerns about the effectiveness of current vaccines against the rapidly spreading severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 omicron (B.1.1.529) variant are increasing. This study aimed to assess neutralizing antibody activity against the wild-type (BetaCoV/Korea/KCDC03/2020), delta, and omicron variants after full primary and booster vaccinations with BNT162b2. A plaque reduction neutralization test was employed to determine 50% neutralizing dilution (ND50) titers in serum samples. ND50 titers against the omicron variant (median [interquartile range], 5.3 [< 5.0-12.7]) after full primary vaccination were lower than those against the wild-type (144.8 [44.7-294.0]) and delta (24.3 [14.3-81.1]) variants. Furthermore, 19/30 participants (63.3%) displayed lower ND50 titers than the detection threshold (< 10.0) against omicron after full primary vaccination. However, the booster vaccine significantly increased ND50 titers against BetaCoV/Korea/KCDC03/2020, delta, and omicron, although titers against omicron remained lower than those against the other variants (P < 0.001). Our study suggests that booster vaccination with BNT162b2 significantly increases humoral immunity against the omicron variant.

Clinical Characteristics of 40 Patients Infected With the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant in Korea.

Since severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 variant B.1.1.529 (omicron) was first reported to the World Health Organization on November 24, 2021, the cases of the omicron variant have been detected in more than 90 countries over the last month. We investigated the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of the first 40 patients with the omicron variant who had been isolated at the National Medical Center in South Korea during December 4-17, 2021. The median age of the patients was 39.5 years. Twenty-two patients (55%) were women. Seventeen patients (42.5%) were fully vaccinated, and none were reinfected with the omicron. Eighteen (45%) had recent international travel history. Half of the patients (19, 47.5%) were asymptomatic, while the others had mild symptoms. Six patients (15%) showed lung infiltrations on chest image; however, none required supplemental oxygen. These mild clinical features are consistent with recent case reports on the omicron variant from other countries.

Risk Factors and a Scoring System to Predict ARDS in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia in Korea: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

Predictive studies of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are limited. In this study, the predictors of ARDS were investigated and a score that can predict progression to ARDS in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was developed. All patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia between February 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020, at five university hospitals in Korea were enrolled. Their demographic, clinical, and epidemiological characteristics and the outcomes were collected using the World Health Organization COVID-19 Case Report Form. A logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the predictors for ARDS. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for the scoring model. Of the 166 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, 37 (22.3%) patients developed ARDS. The areas under the curves for the infiltration on a chest X-ray, C-reactive protein, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, and age, for prediction of ARDS were 0.91, 0.90, 0.87, and 0.80, respectively (all P < 0.001). The COVID-19 ARDS Prediction Score (CAPS) was constructed using age (≥60 years old), C-reactive protein (≥5 mg/dL), and the infiltration on a chest X-ray (≥22%), with each predictor allocated 1 point. The area under the curve of COVID-19 ARDS prediction score (CAPS) for prediction of ARDS was 0.90 (95% CI 0.86-0.95; P < 0.001). It provided 100% sensitivity and 75% specificity when the CAPS score cutoff value was 2 points. CAPS, which consists of age, C-reactive protein, and the area of infiltration on a chest X-ray, was predictive of the development of ARDS in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Air and Environmental Contamination Caused by COVID-19 Patients: a Multi-Center Study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the extent of air and surface contamination of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in four health care facilities with hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: We investigated air and environmental contamination in the rooms of eight COVID-19 patients in four hospitals. Some patients were in negative-pressure rooms, and others were not. None had undergone aerosol-generating procedures. On days 0, 3, 5, and 7 of hospitalization, the surfaces in the rooms and anterooms were swabbed, and air samples were collected 2 m from the patient and from the anterooms. RESULTS: All 52 air samples were negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Widespread surface contamination of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was observed. In total, 89 of 320 (27%) environmental surface samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Surface contamination of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was common in rooms without surface disinfection and in rooms sprayed with disinfectant twice a day. However, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in a room cleaned with disinfectant wipes on a regular basis. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that remote (> 2 m) airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from hospitalized COVID-19 patients is uncommon when aerosol-generating procedures have not been performed. Surface contamination was widespread, except in a room routinely cleaned with disinfectant wipes.

Viral Load Kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Saliva in Korean Patients: a Prospective Multi-center Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: This study was performed to compare the viral load and kinetics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in saliva with those in standard nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal (NP/OP) swabs. METHODS: Fifteen patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from four hospitals were prospectively enrolled and matched samples of nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs and saliva were collected at Day 1 of admission and every other day till consequently negative for two times. Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) was performed to detect the envelope (E) and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) genes. RESULTS: The cycle threshold values of saliva were comparable to those of NP/OP swabs overall (P = 0.720, Mann-Whitney U test). However, the overall sensitivity of rRT-PCR using saliva was 64% (34/53), which is lower than the 77% (41/53) using NP/OP swabs. The sensitivity of rRT-PCR using saliva was especially lower in early stage of symptom onset (1-5 days; 8/15; 53%) and in patients who did not have sputum (12/22; 55%). CONCLUSION: Saliva sample itself is not appropriate for initial diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to replace NP/OP swabs, especially for the person who does not produce sputum. COVID-19 cannot be excluded when the test using saliva is negative, and it is necessary to retest using NP/OP swabs.