ABSTRACT
The emergence of the early COVID-19 epidemic in the United States (U.S.) went largely undetected, due to a lack of adequate testing and mitigation efforts. The city of New Orleans, Louisiana experienced one of the earliest and fastest accelerating outbreaks, coinciding with the annual Mardi Gras festival, which went ahead without precautions. To gain insight into the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in the U.S. and how large, crowded events may have accelerated early transmission, we sequenced SARS-CoV-2 genomes during the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in Louisiana. We show that SARS-CoV-2 in Louisiana initially had limited sequence diversity compared to other U.S. states, and that one successful introduction of SARS-CoV-2 led to almost all of the early SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Louisiana. By analyzing mobility and genomic data, we show that SARS-CoV-2 was already present in New Orleans before Mardi Gras and that the festival dramatically accelerated transmission, eventually leading to secondary localized COVID-19 epidemics throughout the Southern U.S.. Our study provides an understanding of how superspreading during large-scale events played a key role during the early outbreak in the U.S. and can greatly accelerate COVID-19 epidemics on a local and regional scale.
ABSTRACT
One goal among microbial ecology researchers is to capture the maximum amount of information from all organisms in a sample. The recent COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the RNA virus SARS-CoV-2, has highlighted a gap in traditional DNA-based protocols, including the high-throughput methods we previously established as field standards. To enable simultaneous SARS-CoV-2 and microbial community profiling, we compare the relative performance of two total nucleic acid extraction protocols and our previously benchmarked protocol. We included a diverse panel of environmental and host-associated sample types, including body sites commonly swabbed for COVID-19 testing. Here we present results comparing the cost, processing time, DNA and RNA yield, microbial community composition, limit of detection, and well-to-well contamination, between these protocols. Accession numbersRaw sequence data were deposited at the European Nucleotide Archive (accession#: ERP124610) and raw and processed data are available at Qiita (Study ID: 12201). All processing and analysis code is available on GitHub (github.com/justinshaffer/Extraction_test_MagMAX). Methods summaryTo allow for downstream applications involving RNA-based organisms such as SARS-CoV-2, we compared the two extraction protocols designed to extract DNA and RNA against our previously established protocol for extracting only DNA for microbial community analyses. Across 10 diverse sample types, one of the two protocols was equivalent or better than our established DNA-based protocol. Our conclusion is based on per-sample comparisons of DNA and RNA yield, the number of quality sequences generated, microbial community alpha- and beta-diversity and taxonomic composition, the limit of detection, and extent of well-to-well contamination.
ABSTRACT
Synergistic effects of bacteria on viral stability and transmission are widely documented but remain unclear in the context of SARS-CoV-2. We collected 972 samples from hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), their health care providers, and hospital surfaces before, during, and after admission. We screened for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-qPCR, characterized microbial communities using 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing, and contextualized the massive microbial diversity in this dataset through meta-analysis of over 20,000 samples. Sixteen percent of surfaces from COVID-19 patient rooms were positive, with the highest prevalence in floor samples next to patient beds (39%) and directly outside their rooms (29%). Although bed rail samples increasingly resembled the patient microbiome over time, SARS-CoV-2 was detected less there (11%). Despite viral surface contamination in almost all patient rooms, no health care workers contracted the disease, suggesting that personal protective equipment was effective in preventing transmissions. SARS-CoV-2 positive samples had higher bacterial phylogenetic diversity across human and surface samples, and higher biomass in floor samples. 16S microbial community profiles allowed for high SARS-CoV-2 classifier accuracy in not only nares, but also forehead, stool, and floor samples. Across distinct microbial profiles, a single amplicon sequence variant from the genus Rothia was highly predictive of SARS-CoV-2 across sample types and had higher prevalence in positive surface and human samples, even compared to samples from patients in another intensive care unit prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. These results suggest that bacterial communities may contribute to viral prevalence both in the host and hospital environment. One Sentence SummaryMicrobial classifier highlights specific taxa predictive of SARS-CoV-2 prevalence across diverse microbial niches in a COVID-19 hospital unit.
ABSTRACT
ImportanceTransmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is possible among symptom-free individuals and some patients are avoiding medically necessary healthcare visits for fear of becoming infected in the healthcare setting. Limited data are available on the point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in U.S. healthcare workers (HCW). ObjectiveTo estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to assess the acceptability of self-collected NPS among HCW. DesignCross-sectional convenience sample enrolled between April 20th and June 24th, 2020. We had >95% power to detect at least one positive test if the true underlying prevalence of SARS-CoV2 was [≥]1%. SettingThe metropolitan area surrounding Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota. ParticipantsHCW free of self-reported upper respiratory symptoms were recruited. ExposuresParticipants completed questionnaires regarding demographics, household characteristics, personal protective equipment (PPE) utilization and comorbidities. OutcomesA participant self-collected nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) was obtained. SARS-CoV-2 infection was assessed via polymerase chain reaction. NPS discomfort was assessed on a scale of 1 (no discomfort) - 10 (extreme discomfort). NPS duration and depth into the nasopharynx, and willingness to perform future self-collections were assessed. ResultsAmong n=489 participants 80% were female and mean age{+/-}SD was 41{+/-}11. Participants reported being physicians (14%), nurse practitioners (8%), physicians assistants (4%), nurses (51%), medics (3%), or other which predominantly included laboratory technicians and administrative roles (22%). Exposure to a known/suspected COVID-19 case in the 14 days prior to enrollment was reported in 40% of participants. SARS-CoV-2 was not detected in any participant. The mean{+/-}SD discomfort level of the NPS was 4.5{+/-}2.0. Participants overwhelmingly reported that their self-swabs was [≥] the duration and depth of patient swabs they had previously performed. Over 95% of participants reported a willingness to repeat a self-collected NP swab in the future. Conclusions and RelevanceThe point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was likely <1% in a convenience sample of symptom-free Minnesota healthcare workers from April 20th and June 24th, 2020. Self-collected NP swabs are well-tolerated and a viable alternative to provider-collected swabs to preserve PPE. KEY POINTSO_ST_ABSQuestionsC_ST_ABSWhat is the point prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among symptom-free healthcare workers (HCW) and what is the acceptability of self-collected nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) for SARS-CoV-2 infection ascertainment? FindingsSARS-CoV-2 was not detected in any of 489 HCWs studied. Self-collected NPS were well tolerated and over 95% of participants reported a willingness to repeat a self-collected NP swab in the future. MeaningThe point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was likely very low in a convenience sample of symptom-free Minnesota healthcare workers from April 20th and June 24th, 2020.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundDetermining the role of fomites in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is essential in the hospital setting and will likely be important outside of medical facilities as governments around the world make plans to ease COVID-19 public health restrictions and attempt to safely reopen economies. Expanding COVID-19 testing to include environmental surfaces would ideally be performed with inexpensive swabs that could be transported safely without concern of being a source of new infections. However, CDC-approved clinical-grade sampling supplies and techniques using a polyester swab are expensive, potentially expose laboratory workers to viable virus and prohibit analysis of the microbiome due to the presence of antibiotics in viral transport media (VTM). To this end, we performed a series of experiments comparing the diagnostic yield using five consumer-grade swabs (including plastic and wood shafts and various head materials including cotton, polyester, and foam) and one clinical grade swab for inhibition to RNA. For three of these swabs, we evaluated performance to detect SARS-CoV-2 in twenty intensive care unit (ICU) hospital rooms of patients with 16 COVID-19+. All swabs were placed in 95% ethanol and further evaluated in terms of RNase activity. SARS-CoV-2 was measured both directly from the swab and from the swab eluent. ResultsCompared to samples collected in VTM, 95% ethanol demonstrated significant inhibition properties against RNases. When extracting directly from the swab head as opposed to the eluent, RNA recovery was approximately 2-4x higher from all six swab types tested as compared to the clinical standard of testing the eluent from a CDC-approved polyester swab. The limit of detection (LoD) of SARs-CoV-2 from floor samples collected using the CGp or TMI swabs was similar or better than the CDC standard, further suggesting that swab type does not impact RNA recovery as measured by SARs-CoV-2. The LoD for TMI was between 0-362.5 viral particles while PE and CGp were both between 725-1450 particles. Lastly microbiome analyses (16S rRNA) of paired samples (e.g., environment to host) collected using different swab types in triplicate indicated that microbial communities were not impacted by swab type but instead driven by the patient and sample type (floor or nasal). ConclusionsCompared to using a clinical-grade polyester swab, detection of SARS-CoV-2 from environmental samples collected from ICU rooms of patients with COVID was similar using consumer grade swabs, stored in 95% ethanol. The yield was best from the swab head rather than the eluent and the low level of RNase activity in these samples makes it possible to perform concomitant microbiome analysis.
