High-dose ivermectin for early treatment of COVID-19 (COVER study): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase II, dose-finding, proof-of-concept clinical trial.

High concentrations of ivermectin demonstrated antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of high-dose ivermectin in reducing viral load in individuals with early SARS-CoV-2 infection. This was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase II, dose-finding, proof-of-concept clinical trial. Participants were adults recently diagnosed with asymptomatic/oligosymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Exclusion criteria were: pregnant or lactating women; CNS disease; dialysis; severe medical condition with prognosis <6 months; warfarin treatment; and antiviral/chloroquine phosphate/hydroxychloroquine treatment. Participants were assigned (ratio 1:1:1) according to a randomised permuted block procedure to one of the following arms: placebo (arm A); single-dose ivermectin 600 µg/kg plus placebo for 5 days (arm B); and single-dose ivermectin 1200 µg/kg for 5 days (arm C). Primary outcomes were serious adverse drug reactions (SADRs) and change in viral load at Day 7. From 31 July 2020 to 26 May 2021, 32 participants were randomised to arm A, 29 to arm B and 32 to arm C. Recruitment was stopped on 10 June because of a dramatic drop in cases. The safety analysis included 89 participants and the change in viral load was calculated in 87 participants. No SADRs were registered. Mean (S.D.) log10 viral load reduction was 2.9 (1.6) in arm C, 2.5 (2.2) in arm B and 2.0 (2.1) in arm A, with no significant differences (P = 0.099 and 0.122 for C vs. A and B vs. A, respectively). High-dose ivermectin was safe but did not show efficacy to reduce viral load.

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.

Overall decrease in SARS-CoV-2 viral load and reduction in clinical burden: the experience of a hospital in northern Italy.

OBJECTIVES: In Italy the burden of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) gradually decreased from March to the end of May. In this work we aimed to evaluate a possible association between the severity of clinical manifestations and viral load over time during the epidemiological transition from high-to low-transmission settings. METHODS: We reviewed the cases of COVID-19 diagnosed at the emergency room of our hospital, retrieving the proportion of patients admitted to the intensive care unit. A raw estimation of the viral load was done evaluating the Ct (cycle threshold) trend obtained from our diagnostic reverse transcriptase real-time PCR test. RESULTS: The proportion of patients requiring intensive care significantly decreased from 6.7% (19/281) in March to 1.1% (1/86) in April, and to none in May (Fisher's test p 0.0067). As for viral load, we observed a trend of Ct increasing from a median value of 24 (IQR 19-29) to 34 (IQR 29-37) between March and May, with a statistically significant difference between March and April (pairwise Wilcoxon test with stepdown Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing, p 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a reduction over time in the proportion of patients with COVID-19 requiring intensive care, along with decreasing median values of viral load. As the epidemiological context changes from high-to low-transmission settings, people are presumably exposed to a lower viral load which has been previously associated with less severe clinical manifestations.

Sensitivity, Specificity and Predictive Values of Molecular and Serological Tests for COVID-19: A Longitudinal Study in Emergency Room.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV) of molecular and serological tests for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: A total of 346 patients were enrolled in the emergency room. We evaluated three Reverse Transcriptase-real time PCRs (RT-PCRs) including six different gene targets, five serologic rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and one ELISA. The final classification of infected/non-infected patients was performed using Latent Class Analysis combined with clinical re-assessment of incongruous cases. RESULTS: Out of these, 24.6% of patients were classified as infected. The molecular test RQ-SARS-nCoV-2 showed the highest performance with 91.8% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100.0% PPV and 97.4% NPV respectively. Considering the single gene targets, S and RdRp of RQ-SARS-nCoV-2 had the highest sensitivity (94.1%). The in-house RdRp presented the lowest sensitivity (62.4%). The specificity ranged from 99.2% for in-house RdRp and N2 to 95.0% for E. The PPV ranged from 97.1% of N2 to 85.4% of E and the NPV from 98.1% of S to 89.0% of in-house RdRp. All serological tests had < 50% sensitivity and low PPV and NPV. VivaDiag IgM (RDT) had 98.5% specificity, with 84.0% PPV, but 24.7% sensitivity. CONCLUSION: Molecular tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection showed excellent specificity, but significant differences in sensitivity. Serological tests have limited utility in a clinical context.