Initial introduction and spread of the SARS-CoV-2 AY.4.2.1 Delta variant in Bulgaria, a genomic insight

Molecular Epidemiology of the Norwegian SARS-CoV-2 Delta Lineage AY.63

Extensive genomic surveillance has given great insights into the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and emerging variants. During the summer months of 2021, Norway was dominated by the Pango lineage AY.63 which is a sub-lineage of the highly transmissible Delta variant. Strikingly, AY.63 did not spread in other countries to any significant extent. AY.63 carried a key mutation, A222V, in the spike protein, as well as the deletion of three residues in nsp1. Although these mutations are close to functionally important areas, we did not find any evidence that they induced higher fitness compared to other Delta lineages. This variant was introduced to Norway at a time when there were low levels of SARS-CoV-2 and contact-reducing measures were relaxed, which probably explains why the lineage rose so quickly. Furthermore, we found that the lack of imports of AY.63 from other countries probably led to the eventual demise of the lineage in Norway.

Performance Analysis of Self-Collected Nasal and Oral Swabs for Detection of SARS-CoV-2

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the third highly pathogenic human coronavirus and is rapidly transmitted by infected individuals regardless of their symptoms. During the COVID-19 pandemic, owing to the dearth of skilled healthcare workers (HCWs) to collect samples for early diagnosis, self-collection emerged as a viable alternative. To evaluate the reliability of self-collection, we compared the virus detection rate using 3990 self-collected swabs and HCW-collected swabs, procured from the same individuals and collected immediately after the self-collection. The results of multiplex reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction revealed that the viral load in the HCW-collected swabs was marginally (18.4–28.8 times) higher than that in self-collected swabs. Self-collection showed no significant difference in sensitivity and specificity from HCW-collection (κ = 0.87, McNemar’s test; p = 0.19), indicating a comparable performance. These findings suggest that self-collected swabs are acceptable substitutes for HCW-collected swabs, and that their use improved the specimen screening efficiency and reduced the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.