Rapid emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is associated with an infection advantage over Delta in vaccinated persons

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants continues to shape the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. The detection and rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (lineage B.1.1.529) in Botswana and South Africa became a global concern because it contained 15 mutations in the spike protein immunogenic receptor binding domain and was less neutralized by sera derived from vaccinees compared to the previously dominant Delta variant. To investigate if Omicron is more likely than Delta to cause infections in vaccinated persons, we analyzed 37,877 nasal swab PCR tests conducted from 12-26 December 2021 and calculated the test positivity rates for each variant by vaccination status. We found that the positivity rate among unvaccinated persons was higher for Delta (5.2%) than Omicron (4.5%). We found similar results in persons who received a single vaccine dose. Conversely, our results show that Omicron had higher positivity rates than Delta among those who received two doses within five months (Omicron = 4.7% vs. Delta = 2.6%), two doses more than five months ago (4.2% vs. 2.9%), and three vaccine doses (2.2% vs. 0.9%). Our estimates of Omicron positivity rates in persons receiving one or two vaccine doses were not significantly lower than unvaccinated persons but were 49.7% lower after three doses. In comparison, the reduction in Delta positivity rates from unvaccinated to 2 vaccine doses was 45.6-49.6% and to 3 vaccine doses was 83.2%. Despite the higher positivity rates for Omicron in vaccinated persons, we still found that 91.2% of the Omicron infections in our study occurred in persons who were eligible for 1 or more vaccine doses at the time of PCR testing. In conclusion, escape from vaccine-induced immunity likely contributed to the rapid rise in Omicron infections.

Comparison of infectious SARS-CoV-2 from the nasopharynx of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals

The frequency of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections in fully vaccinated individuals increased with the emergence of the Delta variant, particularly with longer time from vaccine completion. However, whether breakthrough infections lead to onward transmission remains unclear. Here, we conducted a study involving 125 patients comprised of 72 vaccinated and 53 unvaccinated individuals, to assess the levels of infectious virus in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Quantitative plaque assays showed no significant differences in the titers of virus between these cohorts. However, the proportion of nasopharyngeal samples with culturable virus was lower in the vaccinated patients relative to unvaccinated patients (21% vs. 40%). Finally, time-to-event analysis with Kaplan-Myer curves revealed that protection from culturable infectious virus waned significantly starting at 5 months after completing a 2-dose regimen of mRNA vaccines. These results have important implications in timing of booster dose to prevent onward transmission from breakthrough cases.

Variant abundance estimation for SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater using RNA-Seq quantification

Effectively monitoring the spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants is essential to efforts to counter the ongoing pandemic. Wastewater monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 RNA has proven an effective and efficient technique to approximate COVID-19 case rates in the population. Predicting variant abundances from wastewater, however, is technically challenging. Here we show that by sequencing SARS-CoV-2 RNA in wastewater and applying computational techniques initially used for RNA-Seq quantification, we can estimate the abundance of variants in wastewater samples. We show by sequencing samples from wastewater and clinical isolates in Connecticut U.S.A. between January and April 2021 that the temporal dynamics of variant strains broadly correspond. We further show that this technique can be used with other wastewater sequencing techniques by expanding to samples taken across the United States in a similar timeframe. We find high variability in signal among individual samples, and limited ability to detect the presence of variants with clinical frequencies <10%; nevertheless, the overall trends match what we observed from sequencing clinical samples. Thus, while clinical sequencing remains a more sensitive technique for population surveillance, wastewater sequencing can be used to monitor trends in variant prevalence in situations where clinical sequencing is unavailable or impractical.

Combining genomic and epidemiological data to compare the transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 lineages

Emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants have shaped the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic and the public health discourse around effective control measures. Evaluating the public health threat posed by a new variant is essential for appropriately adapting response efforts when community transmission is detected. However, this assessment requires that a true comparison can be made between the new variant and its predecessors because factors other than the virus genotype may influence spread and transmission. In this study, we develop a framework that integrates genomic surveillance data to estimate the relative effective reproduction number (Rt) of co-circulating lineages. We use Connecticut, a state in the northeastern United States in which the SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.1.7 and B.1.526 co-circulated in early 2021, as a case study for implementing this framework. We find that the Rt of B.1.1.7 was 6-10% larger than that of B.1.526 in Connecticut in the midst of a COVID-19 vaccination campaign. To assess the generalizability of this framework, we apply it to genomic surveillance data from New York City and observe the same trend. Finally, we use discrete phylogeography to demonstrate that while both variants were introduced into Connecticut at comparable frequencies, clades that resulted from introductions of B.1.1.7 were larger than those resulting from B.1.526 introductions. Our framework, which uses open-source methods requiring minimal computational resources, may be used to monitor near real-time variant dynamics in a myriad of settings.

Longitudinal immune profiling of a SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in a solid organ transplant recipient

Prior to the emergence of antigenically distinct SARS-CoV-2 variants, reinfections were reported infrequently - presumably due to the generation of durable and protective immune responses. However, case reports also suggested that rare, repeated infections may occur as soon as 48 days following initial disease onset. The underlying immunologic deficiencies enabling SARS-CoV-2 reinfections are currently unknown. Here we describe a renal transplant recipient who developed recurrent, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection - confirmed by whole virus genome sequencing - 7 months after primary infection. To elucidate the immunological mechanisms responsible for SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, we performed longitudinal profiling of cellular and humoral responses during both primary and recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found that the patient responded to the primary infection with transient, poor-quality adaptive immune responses. The patients immune system was further compromised by intervening treatment for acute rejection of the renal allograft prior to reinfection. Importantly, we also identified the development of neutralizing antibodies and the formation of humoral memory responses prior to SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. However, these neutralizing antibodies failed to confer protection against reinfection, suggesting that additional factors are required for efficient prevention of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Further, we found no evidence supporting viral evasion of primary adaptive immune responses, suggesting that susceptibility to reinfection may be determined by host factors rather than pathogen adaptation in this patient. In summary, our study suggests that a low neutralizing antibody presence alone is not sufficient to confer resistance against reinfection. Thus, patients with solid organ transplantation, or patients who are otherwise immunosuppressed, who recover from infection with SARS-CoV-2 may not develop sufficient protective immunity and are at risk of reinfection.

Early introductions and community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 in the United States

The emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7, first detected in the United Kingdom, has become a global public health concern because of its increased transmissibility. Over 2500 COVID-19 cases associated with this variant have been detected in the US since December 2020, but the extent of establishment is relatively unknown. Using travel, genomic, and diagnostic data, we highlight the primary ports of entry for B.1.1.7 in the US and locations of possible underreporting of B.1.1.7 cases. Furthermore, we found evidence for many independent B.1.1.7 establishments starting in early December 2020, followed by interstate spread by the end of the month. Finally, we project that B.1.1.7 will be the dominant lineage in many states by mid to late March. Thus, genomic surveillance for B.1.1.7 and other variants urgently needs to be enhanced to better inform the public health response.

Saliva viral load is a dynamic unifying correlate of COVID-19 severity and mortality

While several clinical and immunological parameters correlate with disease severity and mortality in SARS-CoV-2 infection, work remains in identifying unifying correlates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that can be used to guide clinical practice. Here, we examine saliva and nasopharyngeal (NP) viral load over time and correlate them with patient demographics, and cellular and immune profiling. We found that saliva viral load was significantly higher in those with COVID-19 risk factors; that it correlated with increasing levels of disease severity and showed a superior ability over nasopharyngeal viral load as a predictor of mortality over time (AUC=0.90). A comprehensive analysis of immune factors and cell subsets revealed strong predictors of high and low saliva viral load, which were associated with increased disease severity or better overall outcomes, respectively. Saliva viral load was positively associated with many known COVID-19 inflammatory markers such as IL-6, IL-18, IL-10, and CXCL10, as well as type 1 immune response cytokines. Higher saliva viral loads strongly correlated with the progressive depletion of platelets, lymphocytes, and effector T cell subsets including circulating follicular CD4 T cells (cTfh). Anti-spike (S) and anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG levels were negatively correlated with saliva viral load showing a strong temporal association that could help distinguish severity and mortality in COVID-19. Finally, patients with fatal COVID-19 exhibited higher viral loads, which correlated with the depletion of cTfh cells, and lower production of anti-RBD and anti-S IgG levels. Together these results demonstrated that viral load - as measured by saliva but not nasopharyngeal -- is a dynamic unifying correlate of disease presentation, severity, and mortality over time.

Diverse Functional Autoantibodies in Patients with COVID-19

COVID-19 manifests with a wide spectrum of clinical phenotypes that are characterized by exaggerated and misdirected host immune responses1-8. While pathological innate immune activation is well documented in severe disease1, the impact of autoantibodies on disease progression is less defined. Here, we used a high-throughput autoantibody discovery technique called Rapid Extracellular Antigen Profiling (REAP) to screen a cohort of 194 SARS-CoV-2 infected COVID-19 patients and healthcare workers for autoantibodies against 2,770 extracellular and secreted proteins (the "exoproteome"). We found that COVID-19 patients exhibit dramatic increases in autoantibody reactivities compared to uninfected controls, with a high prevalence of autoantibodies against immunomodulatory proteins including cytokines, chemokines, complement components, and cell surface proteins. We established that these autoantibodies perturb immune function and impair virological control by inhibiting immunoreceptor signaling and by altering peripheral immune cell composition, and found that murine surrogates of these autoantibodies exacerbate disease severity in a mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Analysis of autoantibodies against tissue-associated antigens revealed associations with specific clinical characteristics and disease severity. In summary, these findings implicate a pathological role for exoproteome-directed autoantibodies in COVID-19 with diverse impacts on immune functionality and associations with clinical outcomes.

Simply saliva: stability of SARS-CoV-2 detection negates the need for expensive collection devices

Most currently approved strategies for the collection of saliva for COVID-19 diagnostics require specialized tubes containing buffers promoted for the stabilization of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and virus inactivation. Yet many of these are expensive, in limited supply, and not necessarily validated specifically for viral RNA. While saliva is a promising sample type as it can be reliably self-collected for the sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2, the expense and availability of these collection tubes are prohibitive to mass testing efforts. Therefore, we investigated the stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and infectious virus detection from saliva without supplementation. We tested RNA stability over extended periods of time (2-25 days) and at temperatures representing at-home storage and elevated temperatures which might be experienced when cold chain transport may be unavailable. We found SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva from infected individuals is stable at 4{degrees}C, room temperature ([~]19{degrees}C), and 30{degrees}C for prolonged periods and found limited evidence for viral replication in stored saliva samples. This work demonstrates that expensive saliva collection options involving RNA stabilization and virus inactivation buffers are not always needed, permitting the use of cheaper collection options. Affordable testing methods are urgently needed to meet current testing demands and for continued surveillance in reopening strategies.

SalivaDirect: Simple and sensitive molecular diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance

Current bottlenecks for improving accessibility and scalability of SARS-CoV-2 testing include diagnostic assay costs, complexity, and supply chain shortages. To resolve these issues, we developed SalivaDirect, which received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on August 15th, 2020. The critical component of our approach is to use saliva instead of respiratory swabs, which enables non-invasive frequent sampling and reduces the need for trained healthcare professionals during collection. Furthermore, we simplified our diagnostic test by (1) not requiring nucleic acid preservatives at sample collection, (2) replacing nucleic acid extraction with a simple proteinase K and heat treatment step, and (3) testing specimens with a dualplex quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) assay. We validated SalivaDirect with reagents and instruments from multiple vendors to minimize the risk for supply chain issues. Regardless of our tested combination of reagents and instruments from different vendors, we found that SalivaDirect is highly sensitive with a limit of detection of 6-12 SARS-CoV-2 copies/L. When comparing SalivaDirect to paired nasopharyngeal swabs using the authorized ThermoFisher Scientific TaqPath COVID-19 combo kit, we found high agreement in testing outcomes (>94%). In partnership with the National Basketball Association (NBA) and Players Association, we conducted a large-scale (n = 3,779) SalivaDirect usability study and comparison to standard nasal/oral tests for asymptomatic and presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 detection. From this cohort of healthy NBA players, staff, and contractors, we found that 99.7% of samples were valid using our saliva collection techniques and a 89.5% positive and >99.9% negative test agreement to swabs, demonstrating that saliva is a valid and noninvasive alternative to swabs for large-scale SARS-CoV-2 testing. SalivaDirect is a flexible and inexpensive ($1.21-$4.39/sample in reagent costs) option to help improve SARS-CoV-2 testing capacity. Register to become a designated laboratory to use SalivaDirect under our FDA EUA on our website: publichealth.yale.edu/salivadirect/.

The Sensitivity of Respiratory Tract Specimens for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2: A Protocol for a Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundHighly sensitive, non-invasive, and easily accessible diagnostics for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are essential for the control of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. There is a clear need to establish a gold standard diagnostic for SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans using respiratory tract specimens. MethodsSearches will be conducted in the bibliographic databases Medline, Embase, bioRxiv, medRxiv, F1000, ChemRxiv, PeerJ Preprints, Preprints.org, Beilstein Archive, and Research Square. Relevant government documents and grey literature will be sought on the FDAs Emergency Use Authorizations website, the ECDCs website, and the website of the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics. Finally, papers categorized as diagnosis papers by the EPPI Centres COVID-19 living systematic map will be added to our screening process; those papers are tagged with the diagnosis topic based on human review, rather than database searches, and thus this set of papers might include ones that have not been captured by our search strategy.

Saliva is more sensitive for SARS-CoV-2 detection in COVID-19 patients than nasopharyngeal swabs

Rapid and accurate SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing is essential for controlling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The current gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis is real-time RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 from nasopharyngeal swabs. Low sensitivity, exposure risks to healthcare workers, and global shortages of swabs and personal protective equipment, however, necessitate the validation of new diagnostic approaches. Saliva is a promising candidate for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics because (1) collection is minimally invasive and can reliably be self-administered and (2) saliva has exhibited comparable sensitivity to nasopharyngeal swabs in detection of other respiratory pathogens, including endemic human coronaviruses, in previous studies. To validate the use of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection, we tested nasopharyngeal and saliva samples from confirmed COVID-19 patients and self-collected samples from healthcare workers on COVID-19 wards. When we compared SARS-CoV-2 detection from patient-matched nasopharyngeal and saliva samples, we found that saliva yielded greater detection sensitivity and consistency throughout the course of infection. Furthermore, we report less variability in self-sample collection of saliva. Taken together, our findings demonstrate that saliva is a viable and more sensitive alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs and could enable at-home self-administered sample collection for accurate large-scale SARS-CoV-2 testing.

Analytical sensitivity and efficiency comparisons of SARS-COV-2 qRT-PCR assays

The recent spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exemplifies the critical need for accurate and rapid diagnostic assays to prompt clinical and public health interventions. Currently, several quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) assays are being used by clinical, research, and public health laboratories. However, it is currently unclear if results from different tests are comparable. Our goal was to evaluate the primer-probe sets used in four common diagnostic assays available on the World Health Organization (WHO) website. To facilitate this effort, we generated RNA transcripts to be used as assay standards and distributed them to other laboratories for internal validation. We then used (1) RNA transcript standards, (2) full-length SARS-CoV-2 RNA, (3) pre-COVID-19 nasopharyngeal swabs, and (4) clinical samples from COVID-19 patients to determine analytical efficiency and sensitivity of the qRT-PCR primer-probe sets. We show that all primer-probe sets can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2 at 500 virus copies per reaction, except for the RdRp-SARSr (Charite) confirmatory primer-probe set which has low sensitivity. Our findings characterize the limitations of currently used primer-probe sets and can assist other laboratories in selecting appropriate assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Coast-to-coast spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States revealed by genomic epidemiology

Since its emergence and detection in Wuhan, China in late 2019, the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has spread to nearly every country around the world, resulting in hundreds of thousands of infections to date. The virus was first detected in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States in January, 2020, with subsequent COVID-19 outbreaks detected in all 50 states by early March. To uncover the sources of SARS-CoV-2 introductions and patterns of spread within the U.S., we sequenced nine viral genomes from early reported COVID-19 patients in Connecticut. Our phylogenetic analysis places the majority of these genomes with viruses sequenced from Washington state. By coupling our genomic data with domestic and international travel patterns, we show that early SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Connecticut was likely driven by domestic introductions. Moreover, the risk of domestic importation to Connecticut exceeded that of international importation by mid-March regardless of our estimated impacts of federal travel restrictions. This study provides evidence for widespread, sustained transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within the U.S. and highlights the critical need for local surveillance.