ACoRE: Accurate SARS-CoV-2 genome reconstruction for the characterization of intra-host and inter-host viral diversity in clinical samples and for the evaluation of re-infections.

Sequencing the SARS-CoV-2 genome from clinical samples can be challenging, especially in specimens with low viral titer. Here we report Accurate SARS-CoV-2 genome Reconstruction (ACoRE), an amplicon-based viral genome sequencing workflow for the complete and accurate reconstruction of SARS-CoV-2 sequences from clinical samples, including suboptimal ones that would usually be excluded even if unique and irreplaceable. The protocol was optimized to improve flexibility and the combination of technical replicates was established as the central strategy to achieve accurate analysis of low-titer/suboptimal samples. We demonstrated the utility of the approach by achieving complete genome reconstruction and the identification of false-positive variants in >170 clinical samples, thus avoiding the generation of inaccurate and/or incomplete sequences. Most importantly, ACoRE was crucial to identify the correct viral strain responsible of a relapse case, that would be otherwise mis-classified as a re-infection due to missing or incorrect variant identification by a standard workflow.

Impact of Full Vaccination with mRNA BNT162b2 on SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Genomic and Subgenomic Viral RNAs Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva of Health Care Workers.

SARS-CoV-2 infection was monitored in 1898 health care workers (HCWs) after receiving full vaccination with BNT162b2. Untill 30 June 2021, 10 HCWs tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 using real time RT-PCR, resulting in a 4-month cumulative incidence of 0.005%. The infection was mildly symptomatic in six (60%) and asymptomatic in four (40%) individuals. Among the infected HCWs, eight consenting individuals provided paired NPS and saliva during the course of infection, for the purpose of the analysis performed in the present study. Genomic and subgenomic viral RNAs were investigated using real-time RT-PCR in both biological specimens. The temporal profile of viral load was measured using ddPCR. Viral mutations were also analysed. Subgenomic viral RNA was detected in 8/8 (100%) NPS and in 6/8 (75%) saliva specimens at the baseline. The expression of subgenomic RNA was observed for up to 7 days in 3/8 (38%) symptomatic cases. Moreover, concordance was observed between NPS and saliva in the detection of viral mutations, and both N501Y and 69/70del (associated with the B.1.1.7 variant) were detected in the majority 6/8 (75%) of subjects, while the K417T mutation (associated with the P.1-type variants) was detected in 2/8 (25%) individuals. Overall, our findings report a low frequency of infected HCWs after full vaccination. It is, therefore, important to monitor the vaccinees in order to identify asymptomatic infected individuals. Saliva can be a surrogate for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance, particularly in social settings such as hospitals.

Assessment of the direct quantitation of SARS-CoV-2 by droplet digital PCR.

Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) is a sensitive and reproducible technology widely used for quantitation of several viruses. The aim of this study was to evaluate the 2019-nCoV CDC ddPCR Triplex Probe Assay (BioRad) performance, comparing the direct quantitation of SARS-CoV-2 on nasopharyngeal swab with the procedure applied to the extracted RNA. Moreover, two widely used swab types were compared (UTM 3 mL and ESwab 1 mL, COPAN). A total of 50 nasopharyngeal swabs (n = 25 UTM 3 mL and n = 25 ESwab 1 mL) from SARS-CoV-2 patients, collected during the pandemic at IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital (Veneto Region, North-East Italy), were used for our purpose. After heat inactivation, an aliquot of swab medium was used for the direct quantitation. Then, we compared the direct method with the quantitation performed on the RNA purified from nasopharyngeal swab by automated extraction. We observed that the direct approach achieved generally equal RNA copies compared to the extracted RNA. The results with the direct quantitation were more accurate on ESwab with a sensitivity of 93.33% [95% CI, 68.05 to 99.83] and specificity of 100.00% for both N1 and N2. On the other hand, on UTM we observed a higher rate of discordant results for N1 and N2. The human internal amplification control (RPP30) showed 100% of both sensitivity and specificity independent of swabs and approaches. In conclusion, we described a direct quantitation of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab. Our approach resulted in an efficient quantitation, without automated RNA extraction and purification. However, special care needs to be taken on the potential bias due to the conservation of samples and to the heating treatment, as we used thawed and heat inactivated material. Further studies on a larger cohort of samples are warranted to evaluate the clinical value of this direct approach.