Use of standard, contact, and droplet precautions with eye protection for the prevention of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission among home healthcare personnel in hospice and home healthcare settings-King and Snohomish counties, Washington, February-October 2020.

Among EvergreenHealth Home Care Service professionals, no coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases were reported when they were instructed to use standard, contact, and droplet precautions with eye protection while providing home health care to patients diagnosed with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). These precautions might provide some level of protection against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among home healthcare personnel.

Clinical and Virologic Characteristics and Outcomes of Coronavirus Disease 2019 at a Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: High morbidity and mortality have been observed in patients with cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, there are limited data on antimicrobial use, coinfections, and viral shedding. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 28, 2020 and June 15, 2020 to characterize antimicrobial use, coinfections, viral shedding, and outcomes within 30 days after diagnosis. Cycle threshold values were used as a proxy for viral load. We determined viral clearance, defined as 2 consecutive negative results using severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction results through July 30, 2020. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were included with a median age of 61 years; 59% had a solid tumor. Only 3 patients had documented respiratory bacterial coinfection. Empiric antibiotics for pneumonia were prescribed more frequently early in the study period (February 29-March 28, 2020; 12/34) compared to the later period (March 29-June 15, 2020; 2/36) (P = .002). The median number of days from symptom onset to viral clearance was 37 days with viral load rapidly declining in the first 7-10 days after symptom onset. Within 30 days of diagnosis, 29 (41%) patients were hospitalized and 12 (17%) died. Each additional comorbidity was associated with 45% lower odds of days alive and out of hospital in the month following diagnosis in adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: Patients at a cancer center, particularly those with multiple comorbidities, are at increased risk of poor outcomes from COVID-19. Prolonged viral shedding is frequently observed among cancer patients, and its implications on transmission and treatment strategies warrant further study.

Case Study: Prolonged Infectious SARS-CoV-2 Shedding from an Asymptomatic Immunocompromised Individual with Cancer.

Long-term severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) shedding was observed from the upper respiratory tract of a female immunocompromised individual with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and acquired hypogammaglobulinemia. Shedding of infectious SARS-CoV-2 was observed up to 70 days, and of genomic and subgenomic RNA up to 105 days, after initial diagnosis. The infection was not cleared after the first treatment with convalescent plasma, suggesting a limited effect on SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract of this individual. Several weeks after a second convalescent plasma transfusion, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was no longer detected. We observed marked within-host genomic evolution of SARS-CoV-2 with continuous turnover of dominant viral variants. However, replication kinetics in Vero E6 cells and primary human alveolar epithelial tissues were not affected. Our data indicate that certain immunocompromised individuals may shed infectious virus longer than previously recognized. Detection of subgenomic RNA is recommended in persistently SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals as a proxy for shedding of infectious virus.

Detection of Nucleocapsid Antibody to SARS-CoV-2 is More Sensitive than Antibody to Spike Protein in COVID-19 Patients.

Background: SARS-CoV-2, the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is associated with respiratory-related morbidity and mortality. Assays to detect virus-specific antibodies are important to understand the prevalence of infection and the course of the immune response. Methodology: Quantitative measurements of plasma or serum antibodies by luciferase immunoprecipitation assay systems (LIPS) to the nucleocapsid and spike proteins were analyzed in 100 cross-sectional or longitudinal samples from SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. A subset of samples was tested with and without heat inactivation. Results: Fifteen or more days after symptom onset, antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein showed 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity, while antibodies to spike protein were detected with 91% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Neither antibody levels nor the rate of seropositivity were significantly reduced by heat inactivation of samples. Analysis of daily samples from six patients with COVID-19 showed anti-nucleocapsid and spike antibodies appearing between day 8 to day 14 after initial symptoms. Immunocompromised patients generally had a delayed antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 compared to immunocompetent patients. Conclusions: Antibody to the nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2 is more sensitive than spike protein antibody for detecting early infection. Analyzing heat-inactivated samples by LIPS is a safe and sensitive method for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Sensitivity in Detection of Antibodies to Nucleocapsid and Spike Proteins of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is associated with respiratory-related disease and death. Assays to detect virus-specific antibodies are important to understand the prevalence of infection and the course of the immune response. METHODS: Quantitative measurements of plasma or serum antibodies to the nucleocapsid and spike proteins were analyzed using luciferase immunoprecipitation system assays in 100 cross-sectional or longitudinal samples from patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. A subset of samples was tested both with and without heat inactivation. RESULTS: At >14 days after symptom onset, antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein showed 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity, whereas antibodies to spike protein were detected with 91% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Neither antibody levels nor the rate of seropositivity were significantly reduced by heat inactivation of samples. Analysis of daily samples from 6 patients with COVID-19 showed anti-nucleocapsid and spike protein antibodies appearing between days 8 and 14 after initial symptoms. Immunocompromised patients generally had a delayed antibody response to SARS-CoV-2, compared with immunocompetent patients. CONCLUSIONS: Antibody to the nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2 is more sensitive than spike protein antibody for detecting early infection. Analyzing heat-inactivated samples with a luciferase immunoprecipitation system assay is a safe and sensitive method for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Earliest cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) identified in solid organ transplant recipients in the United States.

With the rapidly expanding pandemic of SARS-CoV-2, there is concern that solid organ transplant recipients will be particularly vulnerable to infection and may experience a more severe clinical course. We report four cases of COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients including recipients of kidney, liver, lung, and heart transplants. We describe each patient's medical history including transplantation history, their clinical presentation and workup, and their course from diagnosis to either hospital discharge or to improvement in symptoms. These reports demonstrate a range of symptoms, clinical severity, and disease course in solid organ transplant recipients with COVID-19, including two hospitalized patients and two patients managed entirely in the outpatient setting.

COVID-19 in a Long-Term Care Facility - King County, Washington, February 27-March 9, 2020.

On February 28, 2020, a case of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was identified in a woman resident of a long-term care skilled nursing facility (facility A) in King County, Washington.* Epidemiologic investigation of facility A identified 129 cases of COVID-19 associated with facility A, including 81 of the residents, 34 staff members, and 14 visitors; 23 persons died. Limitations in effective infection control and prevention and staff members working in multiple facilities contributed to intra- and interfacility spread. COVID-19 can spread rapidly in long-term residential care facilities, and persons with chronic underlying medical conditions are at greater risk for COVID-19-associated severe disease and death. Long-term care facilities should take proactive steps to protect the health of residents and preserve the health care workforce by identifying and excluding potentially infected staff members and visitors, ensuring early recognition of potentially infected patients, and implementing appropriate infection control measures.

Epidemiology of Covid-19 in a Long-Term Care Facility in King County, Washington.

BACKGROUND: Long-term care facilities are high-risk settings for severe outcomes from outbreaks of Covid-19, owing to both the advanced age and frequent chronic underlying health conditions of the residents and the movement of health care personnel among facilities in a region. METHODS: After identification on February 28, 2020, of a confirmed case of Covid-19 in a skilled nursing facility in King County, Washington, Public Health-Seattle and King County, aided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, launched a case investigation, contact tracing, quarantine of exposed persons, isolation of confirmed and suspected cases, and on-site enhancement of infection prevention and control. RESULTS: As of March 18, a total of 167 confirmed cases of Covid-19 affecting 101 residents, 50 health care personnel, and 16 visitors were found to be epidemiologically linked to the facility. Most cases among residents included respiratory illness consistent with Covid-19; however, in 7 residents no symptoms were documented. Hospitalization rates for facility residents, visitors, and staff were 54.5%, 50.0%, and 6.0%, respectively. The case fatality rate for residents was 33.7% (34 of 101). As of March 18, a total of 30 long-term care facilities with at least one confirmed case of Covid-19 had been identified in King County. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of rapidly escalating Covid-19 outbreaks, proactive steps by long-term care facilities to identify and exclude potentially infected staff and visitors, actively monitor for potentially infected patients, and implement appropriate infection prevention and control measures are needed to prevent the introduction of Covid-19.

Treatment approaches including fecal microbiota transplantation for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (RCDI) among infectious disease physicians.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) was the most common nosocomial infection in the U.S. in 2010. Most cases of CDI respond to a standard course of antibiotics, but recurrent C. difficile infections (RCDI) are increasingly common. Given the lack of randomized clinical trials, it is important to understand how infectious disease physicians are managing RCDI to inform future clinical research. METHODS: An electronic survey was conducted among members of the Emerging Infections Network (EIN) in October 2012. Respondents were asked to answer specific questions about their treatment approaches toward patients with CDI, including fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT). RESULTS: The overall response rate was 621/1212 (51%). The vast majority of respondents had cared for small to moderate numbers of patients with CDI over the prior 6 months, and reported recurrence rates were consistent with published data. Preferred treatment regimens for RCDI showed significant variance from recommendations published in national guidelines. Eighty percent (424/527) of the respondents would consider FMT for patients with RCDI, and of 149 who had FMT available at their institution, 107 (72%) had actually treated >1 patient with FMT in the preceding year. However, significant barriers to institutional adoption of FMT remain for many respondents, despite very good success rates with its use. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians who regularly care for patients with CDI use a variety of treatment approaches for treating severe or recurrent CDI cases. The results of our survey demonstrate that FMT is used by a growing number of infectious disease providers as an effective and safe treatment alternative for patients with multiple recurrences of C. difficile infection.