RESUMEN
The rapid global spread and continued evolution of SARS-CoV-2 has highlighted an unprecedented need for viral genomic surveillance and clinical viral sequencing. Amplicon-based sequencing methods provide a sensitive, low-cost and rapid approach but suffer a high potential for contamination, which can undermine lab processes and results. This challenge will only increase with expanding global production of sequences by diverse research groups for epidemiological and clinical interpretation. We present an approach which uses synthetic DNA spike-ins (SDSIs) to track samples and detect inter-sample contamination through a sequencing workflow. Applying this approach to the ARTIC Consortiums amplicon design, we define a series of best practices for Illumina-based sequencing and provide a detailed characterization of approaches to increase sensitivity for low-viral load samples incorporating the SDSIs. We demonstrate the utility and efficiency of the SDSI method amidst a real-time investigation of a suspected hospital cluster of SARS-CoV-2 cases.
RESUMEN
Developing and deploying new diagnostic tests is difficult, but the need to do so in response to a rapidly emerging pandemic such as COVID-19 is crucially important for an effective response. In the early stages of a pandemic, laboratories play a key role in helping health care providers and public health authorities detect active infection, a task most commonly achieved using nucleic acid-based assays. While the landscape of diagnostics is rapidly evolving, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) remains the gold-standard of nucleic acid-based diagnostic assays, in part due to its reliability, flexibility, and wide deployment. To address a critical local shortage of testing capacity persisting during the COVID-19 outbreak, our hospital set up a molecular based laboratory developed test (LDT) to accurately and safely diagnose SARS-CoV-2. We describe here the process of developing an emergency-use LDT, in the hope that our experience will be useful to other laboratories in future outbreaks and will help to lower barriers to fast and accurate diagnostic testing in crisis conditions.
RESUMEN
SARS-CoV-2 has caused a severe, ongoing outbreak of COVID-19 in Massachusetts with 111,070 confirmed cases and 8,433 deaths as of August 1, 2020. To investigate the introduction, spread, and epidemiology of COVID-19 in the Boston area, we sequenced and analyzed 772 complete SARS-CoV-2 genomes from the region, including nearly all confirmed cases within the first week of the epidemic and hundreds of cases from major outbreaks at a conference, a nursing facility, and among homeless shelter guests and staff. The data reveal over 80 introductions into the Boston area, predominantly from elsewhere in the United States and Europe. We studied two superspreading events covered by the data, events that led to very different outcomes because of the timing and populations involved. One produced rapid spread in a vulnerable population but little onward transmission, while the other was a major contributor to sustained community transmission, including outbreaks in homeless populations, and was exported to several other domestic and international sites. The same two events differed significantly in the number of new mutations seen, raising the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 superspreading might encompass disparate transmission dynamics. Our results highlight the failure of measures to prevent importation into MA early in the outbreak, underscore the role of superspreading in amplifying an outbreak in a major urban area, and lay a foundation for contact tracing informed by genetic data.
RESUMEN
IntroductionThe diagnosis of COVID-19 requires integration of clinical and laboratory data. SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic assays play a central role in diagnosis and have fixed technical performance metrics. Interpretation becomes challenging because the clinical sensitivity changes as the virus clears and the immune response emerges. Our goal was to examine the clinical sensitivity of two most common SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test modalities, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and serology, over the disease course to provide insight into their clinical interpretation in patients presenting to the hospital. MethodsA single-center, retrospective study. To derive clinical sensitivity of PCR, we identified 209 PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 patients with multiple PCR test results (624 total PCR tests) and calculated daily sensitivity from date of symptom onset or first positive test. To calculate daily clinical sensitivity by serology, we utilized 157 PCR- positive patients with a total of 197 specimens tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for IgM, IgG, and IgA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. ResultsClinical sensitivity of PCR decreased with days post symptom onset with >90% clinical sensitivity during the first 5 days after symptom onset, 70-71% from days 9-11, and 30% at day 21. In contrast, serological sensitivity increased with days post symptom onset with >50% of patients seropositive by at least one antibody isotype after day 7, >80% after day 12, and 100% by day 21. ConclusionPCR and serology are complimentary modalities that require time- dependent interpretation. Superimposition of sensitivities over time indicate that serology can function as a reliable diagnostic aid indicating recent or prior infection.
