No evidence of SARS-CoV-2 circulation in the framework of influenza surveillance between October 2019 and February 2020 in Lombardy, Italy

Molecular evidence for SARS-CoV-2 in samples collected from patients with morbilliform eruptions since late 2019 in Lombardy, northern Italy

As a reference laboratory for measles and rubella surveillance in Lombardy, we evaluated the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and measles-like syndromes, providing preliminary evidence for undetected early circulation of SARS-CoV-2. Overall, 435 samples from 156 cases were investigated. RNA from oropharyngeal swabs (N = 148) and urine (N = 141) was screened with four hemi-nested PCRs and molecular evidence for SARS-CoV-2 infection was found in 13 subjects. Two of the positive patients were from the pandemic period (2/12, 16.7%, March 2020-March 2021) and 11 were from the pre-pandemic period (11/44, 25%, August 2019-February 2020). Sera (N = 146) were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG, IgM, and IgA antibodies. Five of the RNA-positive individuals also had detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. No strong evidence of infection was found in samples collected between August 2018 and July 2019 from 100 patients. The earliest sample with evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was from September 12, 2019, and the positive patient was also positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgG and IgM). Mutations typical of B.1 strains previously reported to have emerged in January 2020 (C3037T, C14408T, and A23403G), were identified in samples collected as early as October 2019 in Lombardy. One of these mutations (C14408T) was also identified among sequences downloaded from public databases that were obtained by others from samples collected in Brazil in November 2019. We conclude that a SARS-CoV-2 progenitor capable of producing a measles-like syndrome may have emerged in late June-late July 2019 and that viruses with mutations characterizing B.1 strain may have been spreading globally before the first Wuhan outbreak. Our findings should be complemented by high-throughput sequencing to obtain additional sequence information. We highlight the importance of retrospective surveillance studies in understanding the early dynamics of COVID-19 spread and we encourage other groups to perform retrospective investigations to seek confirmatory proofs of early SARS-CoV-2 circulation.

Characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated and nonvaccinated patients hospitalized in a single Italian hub for COVID-19 during the Delta and Omicron waves in Northern Italy

OBJECTIVE

We compared the characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated and nonvaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

DESIGN

We analyzed patients hospitalized in a COVID hub during three one-month periods: (i) October 15, 2020-November 15, 2020 (prevaccination peak); (ii) October 15, 2021-November 15, 2021 (Delta wave); (iii) December 15, 2021-January 15, 2022 (Omicron wave). To define the epidemiologic context, SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers was analyzed.

RESULTS

SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence in healthcare workers was 146 cases per 1000 persons in 2020 (prevaccination) and 67 in 2021 (postvaccination, when the Omicron variant caused most infections). There were 420 hospitalized patients in the prevaccination period, 51 during the Delta wave (52.1% vaccinated) and 165 during the Omicron wave (52.9% vaccinated). During the Delta wave, a significantly higher number of nonvaccinated (29.2%) than vaccinated patients (3.7%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.019). Nonvaccinated patients were younger and had a lower rate of concomitant medical conditions (53.2% vs 83.7%; p < 0.001) during the Omicron wave when 80% of patients admitted to ICU and all those who died were still infected by the Delta variant.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine effectiveness in fragile individuals appears to be lower because of a faster immunity decline. However, the Omicron variant seems to cause less severe COVID-19.

Waiting for the truth: is reluctance in accepting an early origin hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 delaying our understanding of viral emergence?

Two years after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, key questions about the emergence of its aetiological agent (SARS-CoV-2) remain a matter of considerable debate. Identifying when SARS-CoV-2 began spreading among people is one of those questions. Although the current canonically accepted timeline hypothesises viral emergence in Wuhan, China, in November or December 2019, a growing body of diverse studies provides evidence that the virus may have been spreading worldwide weeks, or even months, prior to that time. However, the hypothesis of earlier SARS-CoV-2 circulation is often dismissed with prejudicial scepticism and experimental studies pointing to early origins are frequently and speculatively attributed to false-positive tests. In this paper, we critically review current evidence that SARS-CoV-2 had been circulating prior to December of 2019, and emphasise how, despite some scientific limitations, this hypothesis should no longer be ignored and considered sufficient to warrant further larger-scale studies to determine its veracity.

Timeline of SARS-CoV-2 Spread in Italy: Results from an Independent Serological Retesting

The massive emergence of COVID-19 cases in the first phase of pandemic within an extremely short period of time suggest that an undetected earlier circulation of SARS-CoV-2 might have occurred. Given the importance of this evidence, an independent evaluation was recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) to test a subset of samples selected on the level of positivity in ELISA assays (positive, low positive, negative) detected in our previous study of prepandemic samples collected in Italy. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were blindly retested by two independent centers in 29 blood samples collected in the prepandemic period in Italy, 29 samples collected one year before and 11 COVID-19 control samples. The methodologies used included IgG-RBD/IgM-RBD ELISA assays, a qualitative micro-neutralization CPE-based assay, a multiplex IgG protein array, an ELISA IgM kit (Wantai), and a plaque-reduction neutralization test. The results suggest the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in some samples collected in the prepandemic period, with the oldest samples found to be positive for IgM by both laboratories collected on 10 October 2019 (Lombardy), 11 November 2019 (Lombardy) and 5 February 2020 (Lazio), the latter with neutralizing antibodies. The detection of IgM and/or IgG binding and neutralizing antibodies was strongly dependent on the different serological assays and thresholds employed, and they were not detected in control samples collected one year before. These findings, although gathered in a small and selected set of samples, highlight the importance of harmonizing serological assays for testing the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and may contribute to a better understanding of future virus dynamics.

The early phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Lombardy, Italy

Background

In the night of February 20, 2020, the first epidemic of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outside Asia was uncovered by the identification of its first patient in Lombardy region, Italy. In the following weeks, Lombardy experienced a sudden increase in the number of ascertained infections and strict measures were imposed to contain the epidemic spread.

Methods

We analyzed official records of cases occurred in Lombardy to characterize the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 during the early phase of the outbreak. A line list of laboratory-confirmed cases was set up and later retrospectively consolidated, using standardized interviews to ascertained cases and their close contacts. We provide estimates of the serial interval, of the basic reproduction number, and of the temporal variation of the net reproduction number of SARS-CoV-2.

Results

Epidemiological investigations detected over 500 cases (median age: 69, IQR: 57–78) before the first COVID-19 diagnosed patient (February 20, 2020), and suggested that SARS-CoV-2 was already circulating in at least 222 out of 1506 (14.7%) municipalities with sustained transmission across all the Lombardy provinces. We estimated the mean serial interval to be 6.6 days (95% CrI, 0.7–19). Our estimates of the basic reproduction number range from 2.6 in Pavia (95% CI, 2.1–3.2) to 3.3 in Milan (95% CI, 2.9–3.8). A decreasing trend in the net reproduction number was observed following the detection of the first case.

Conclusions

At the time of first case notification, COVID-19 was already widespread in the entire Lombardy region. This may explain the large number of critical cases experienced by this region in a very short timeframe. The slight decrease of the reproduction number observed in the early days after February 20, 2020 might be due to increased population awareness and early interventions implemented before the regional lockdown imposed on March 8, 2020.

•

Over 500 cases (median age: 69, IQR: 57–78) declaring symptom onset before the notification of the first case (20 February 2020) were retrospectively detected.

•

SARS-CoV-2 was already circulating in at least 222 out of 1506 (14.7%) municipalities of Lombardy.

•

The estimated mean serial interval was 6.6 days (95% CrI, 0.7–19).

•

The basic reproduction number in the 12 provinces of Lombardy ranged from 2.6 (95% CI, 2.1–3.2) to 3.3 (95% CI, 2.9–3.8).

•

A decreasing trend in the net reproduction number following the detection of the epidemic and the introduction of the first restrictive measures.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections with the alpha variant are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic among health care workers

Vaccine breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection has been monitored in 3720 healthcare workers receiving 2 doses of BNT162b2. SARS-CoV-2 infection is detected in 33 subjects, with a 100-day cumulative incidence of 0.93%. Vaccine protection against acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 infection is 83% (95%CI: 58-93%) in the overall population and 93% (95%CI: 69-99%) in SARS-CoV-2-experienced subjects, when compared with a non-vaccinated control group from the same Institution, in which SARS-CoV-2 infection occurs in 20/346 subjects (100-day cumulative incidence: 5.78%). The infection is symptomatic in 16 (48%) vaccinated subjects vs 17 (85%) controls (p = 0.01). All analyzed patients, in whom the amount of viral RNA was sufficient for genome sequencing, results infected by the alpha variant. Antibody and T-cell responses are not reduced in subjects with breakthrough infection. Evidence of virus transmission, determined by contact tracing, is observed in two (6.1%) cases. This real-world data support the protective effect of BNT162b2 vaccine. A triple antigenic exposure, such as two-dose vaccine schedule in experienced subjects, may confer a higher protection.