Multicentre diagnostic evaluation of OnSite COVID-19 Rapid Test (CTK Biotech) among symptomatic individuals in Brazil and The United Kingdom

The COVID-19 pandemic has given rise to numerous commercially available antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs). To generate and share accurate and independent data with the global community, multi-site prospective diagnostic evaluations of Ag-RDTs are required. This report describes the clinical evaluation of OnSite COVID-19 Rapid Test (CTK Biotech, California, USA) in Brazil and The United Kingdom. A total of 496 paired nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were collected from symptomatic healthcare workers at Hospital das Clinicas in Sao Paulo, and 211 NP swabs were collected from symptomatic participants at a COVID-19 drive-through testing site in Liverpool, England. These swabs were analysed by Ag-RDT and results were compared to RT-qPCR. The clinical sensitivity of the OnSite COVID-19 Rapid test in Brazil was 90.3% [95% Cl 75.1 - 96.7%] and in the United Kingdom was 75.3% [95% Cl 64.6 - 83.6%]. The clinical specificity in Brazil was 99.4% [95% Cl 98.1 - 99.8%] and in the United Kingdom was 95.5% [95% Cl 90.6 - 97.9%]. Analytical evaluation of the Ag-RDT was assessed using direct culture supernatant of SARS-CoV-2 strains from Wild-Type (WT), Alpha, Delta, Gamma and Omicron lineages. Analytical limit of detection was 1.0x103 pfu/mL, 1.0x103 pfu/mL, 1.0x102 pfu/mL, 5.0x103 pfu/mL and 1.0x103 pfu/mL, giving a viral copy equivalent of approximately 2.1x105 copies/mL, 2.1x104 copies/mL, 1.6x104 copies/mL, 3.5x106 copies/mL and 8.7 x 104 for the Ag-RDT, when tested on the WT, Alpha, Delta, Gamma and Omicron lineages, respectively. This study provides comparative performance of an Ag-RDT across two different settings, geographical areas, and population. Overall, the OnSite Ag-RDT demonstrated a lower clinical sensitivity than claimed by the manufacturer... Sensitivity and specificity from the Brazil study fulfilled the performance criteria determined by the World Health Organisation but the performance obtained from the UK study failed to. Further evaluation of the use of Ag-RDTs should include harmonised protocols between laboratories to facilitate comparison between settings.

Head-to head comparison of anterior nares and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection in a community drive-through test centre in the UK

ObjectiveTo conduct a head-to-head diagnostic accuracy evaluation of professionally taken anterior nares (AN) and nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection using rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT). MethodsNP swabs for SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) testing and paired AN and NP swabs for the antigen detection were collected from symptomatic participants enrolled at a community drive-through COVID-19 test centre in Liverpool. Two Ag-RDT brands were evaluated: Sure-Status (PMC, India) and Biocredit (RapiGEN, South Korea). The visual read out of the Ag-RDT test band was quantitative scored and the 50% and 95% limit of detection (LoD) of both Ag-RDT brands using AN and NP swabs was calculated using a probabilistic logistic regression model. ResultsA total of 604 participants were recruited of which 241 (40.3%) were SARS-CoV-2 positive by RT-qPCR. Sensitivity and specificity of AN swabs was equivalent to the obtained with NP swabs: 83.2% (75.2-89.4%) and 98.8% (96.5-99.6%) utilising NP swabs and 84.0% (76.2-90.1%) and 99.2% (97.0-99.8%) with AN swabs for Sure-Status and; 81.2% (73.1-87.7%) and 99.0% (94.7-86.5%) with NP swabs and 79.5% (71.3-86.3%) and 100% (96.5-100%) with AN swabs for Biocredit. The agreement of the AN and NP swabs was high for both brands with an inter-rater relatability ({kappa}) of 0.918 and 0.833 for Sure-Status and Biocredit, respectively. The overall 50% LoD and 95% LoD was 0.9-2.4 x 104 and 3.0-3.2 x 108 RNA copies/mL for NP swabs and 0.3-1.1 x 105 and 0.7-7.9 x 107 RNA copies/mL and for AN swabs with no significant difference on LoD for any of the swabs types or test brands. Quantitative read-out of test line intensity was more often higher when using NP swabs with significantly higher scores for both Ag-RDT brands. Conclusionsthe diagnostic accuracy of the two SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDTs brands evaluated in this study was equivalent using AN swabs than NP swabs. However, test line intensity was lower when using AN swabs which could influence negatively the interpretation of the Ag-RDT results for lay users. Studies on Ag-RDT self-interpretation using AN and NP swabs are needed to ensure accurate test use in the wider community.

Streptococcus pneumoniae colonisation associates with impaired adaptive immune responses against SARS-CoV-2

Although recent epidemiological data suggest that pneumococci may contribute to the risk of SARS-CoV-2 disease, secondary pneumococcal pneumonia has been reported as infrequent. This apparent contradiction may be explained by interactions of SARS-CoV-2 and pneumococcus in the upper airway, resulting in the escape of SARS-CoV-2 from protective host immune responses. Here, we investigated the relationship of these two respiratory pathogens in two distinct cohorts of a) healthcare workers with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection identified by systematic screening and b) patients with moderate to severe disease who presented to hospital. We assessed the effect of co-infection on host antibody, cellular and inflammatory responses to the virus. In both cohorts, pneumococcal colonisation was associated with diminished anti-viral immune responses, which affected primarily mucosal IgA levels among individuals with mild or asymptomatic infection and cellular memory responses in infected patients. Our findings suggest that S. pneumoniae modulates host immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and raises the question if pneumococcal carriage also enables immune escape of other respiratory viruses through a similar mechanism and facilitates reinfection occurrence.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by saliva and nasopharyngeal sampling in frontline healthcare workers: an observational cohort study.

BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused an unprecedented strain on healthcare systems worldwide, including the UK National Health Service (NHS). During the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in UK, SARS-CoV-2 NHS diagnostic test availability was limited to self-isolating symptomatic staff. The burden of symptomatic and asymptomatic infection in healthcare workers (HCW) attending work was unknown. MethodsWe conducted an observational cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCW working in an acute NHS Trust during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, using serial self-collected saliva and nasopharyngeal (NP) samples. We also collected self-assessed symptom profiles and isolation behaviours. We retrospectively compared SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-PCR from saliva (weekly) and NP swabs (twice weekly) from 85 individuals in this cohort and evaluated the association with symptoms. FindingsOver a 12-week period from 30th March 2020, 40% (n=34/85, CI95% 31.3-51.8%) HCWs had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by surveillance NP swab and/or saliva RT-qPCR. Agreement between paired saliva and NP swabs was poor (28.6%, CI95% 13.2-48.7%) with both methods detecting symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. Symptoms were reported by 47.1% (n=40) and self-isolation by 25.9% participants (n=22). Only 41.2% (n=14/34) participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection reported any symptoms within 14 days of the infection. InterpretationHCWs are a potential source of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in hospitals and symptom screening will identify the minority of infections in HCW. Saliva is an easily accessible fluid sample for screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection and in addition to NP swab, facilitated ascertainment of symptomatic and asymptomatic cases in this setting. Combined saliva and NP testing would improve detection of SARS-CoV-2 for surveillance. Better understanding of transmissibility from asymptomatic staff using transmission-based infection precautions, is required to inform policy.

Self-sampling of capillary blood for serological testing of SARS-CoV-2 by COVID-19 IgG ELISA

Serological testing is emerging as a powerful tool to progress our understanding of COVID-19 exposure, transmission and immune response. Large-scale testing is limited by the need for in-person blood collection by staff trained in venepuncture. Capillary blood self-sampling and postage to laboratories for analysis could provide a reliable alternative. Two-hundred and nine matched venous and capillary blood samples were obtained from thirty nine participants and analysed using a COVID-19 IgG ELISA to detect antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Thirty seven out of thirty eight participants were able to self-collect an adequate sample of capillary blood ([≥]50 l). Using plasma from venous blood collected in lithium heparin as the reference standard, matched capillary blood samples, collected in lithium heparin-treated tubes and on filter paper as dried blood spots, achieved a Cohen's kappa coefficient of >0.88 (near-perfect agreement). Storage of capillary blood at room temperature for up to 7 days post sampling did not affect concordance. Our results indicate that capillary blood self-sampling is a reliable and feasible alternative to venepuncture for serological assessment in COVID-19.

High SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Health Care Workers but relatively low numbers of deaths in urban Malawi

BackgroundIn low-income countries, like Malawi, important public health measures including social distancing or a lockdown, have been challenging to implement owing to socioeconomic constraints, leading to predictions that the COVID-19 pandemic would progress rapidly. However, due to limited capacity to test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, there are no reliable estimates of the true burden of infection and death. We, therefore, conducted a SARS-CoV-2 serosurvey amongst health care workers (HCW) in Blantyre city to estimate the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in urban Malawi. MethodsFive hundred otherwise asymptomatic HCWs were recruited from Blantyre City (Malawi) from 22nd May 2020 to 19th June 2020 and serum samples were collected all participants. A commercial ELISA was used to measure SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in serum. We run local negative samples (2018 - 2019) to verify the specificity of the assay. To estimate the seroprevalence of SARS CoV-2 antibodies, we adjusted the proportion of positive results based on local specificity of the assay. ResultsEighty-four participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The HCW with a positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody result came from different parts of the city. The adjusted seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 12.3% [CI 9.0-15.7]. Using age-stratified infection fatality estimates reported from elsewhere, we found that at the observed adjusted seroprevalence, the number of predicted deaths was 8 times the number of reported deaths. ConclusionThe high seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among HCW and the discrepancy in the predicted versus reported deaths, suggests that there was early exposure but slow progression of COVID-19 epidemic in urban Malawi. This highlights the urgent need for development of locally parameterised mathematical models to more accurately predict the trajectory of the epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa for better evidence-based policy decisions and public health response planning.

Saliva offers a sensitive, specific and non-invasive alternative to upper respiratory swabs for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.

RT-qPCR utilising upper respiratory swabs are the diagnostic gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 despite reported low sensitivity and limited scale up due to global shortages. Saliva is a non-invasive, equipment independent alternative to swabs. We collected 145 paired saliva and nasal/throat (NT) swabs at diagnosis (day 0) and repeated on day 2 and day 7 dependent on inpatient care and day 28 for study follow up. Laboratory cultured virus was used to determine the analytical sensitivity of spiked saliva and swabs containing amies preservation media. Self-collected saliva samples were found to be consistent, and in some cases superior when compared to healthcare worker collected NT swabs from COVID-19 suspected participants. We report for the first time the analytical limit of detection of 10-2and 100 pfu/ml for saliva and swabs respectively. Saliva is a easily self-collected, highly sensitive specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.