Tracking SARS-CoV-2 Variants Using a Rapid Typification Strategy: A Key Tool for Early Detection and Spread Investigation of Omicron in Argentina

Unravelling humoral immunity in SARS-CoV-2: Insights from infection and vaccination

Following infection and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, humoral components of the adaptive immune system play a key role in protecting the host. Specifically, B cells generate high-affinity antibodies against various antigens of the virus. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of immunity initiation through both natural infection and vaccination, shedding light on the activation of B cell subsets in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. The innate immune system serves as the initial line of primary and nonspecific defence against viruses. However, within several days following infection or a vaccine dose, a virus-specific immune response is initiated, primarily by B cells that produce antibodies. These antibodies contribute to the resolution of the disease. Subsequently, these B cells transition into memory B cells, which play a crucial role in providing long-term immunity against the virus. CD4+ T helper cells initiate a cascade, leading to B cell somatic hypermutation, germinal center memory B cells, and the production of neutralizing antibodies. B-cell dysfunction can worsen disease severity and reduce vaccine efficacy. Notably, individuals with B cell immunodeficiency show lower IL-6 production. Furthermore, this review delves into several aspects of immune responses, such as hybrid immunity, which has shown promise in boosting broad-spectrum protection. Cross-reactive immunity is under scrutiny as well, as pre-existing antibodies can offer protection against the disease. We also decipher breakthrough infection mechanisms, especially with the novel variants of the virus. Finally, we discuss some potential therapeutic solutions regarding B cells including convalescent plasma therapy, B-1 cells, B regulatory cell (Breg) modulation, and the use of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies in combating the infection. Ongoing research is crucial to grasp population immunity trends and assess the potential need for booster doses in maintaining effective immune responses against potential viral threats.

Multicenter 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 to share accurate and independent data with the global community requires multisite prospective diagnostic evaluations of Ag-RDTs. This report describes the clinical evaluation of the OnSite COVID-19 rapid test (CTK Biotech, CA, USA) in Brazil and the United Kingdom. A total of 496 paired nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were collected from symptomatic health care workers at Hospital das Clínicas in São Paulo, Brazil, and 211 NP swabs were collected from symptomatic participants at a COVID-19 drive-through testing site in Liverpool, United Kingdom. Swabs were analyzed by Ag-RDT, and results were compared to quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-qPCR). The clinical sensitivity of the OnSite COVID-19 rapid test in Brazil was 90.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 75.1 to 96.7%) and in the United Kingdom was 75.3% (95% CI, 64.6 to 83.6%). The clinical specificity in Brazil was 99.4% (95% CI, 98.1 to 99.8%) and in the United Kingdom was 95.5% (95% CI, 90.6 to 97.9%). Concurrently, 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. This study provides comparative performance of an Ag-RDT across two different settings, geographical areas, and populations. Overall, the OnSite Ag-RDT demonstrated a lower clinical sensitivity than claimed by the manufacturer. The sensitivity and specificity from the Brazil study fulfilled the performance criteria determined by the World Health Organization, but the performance obtained from the UK study failed to do. Further evaluation of Ag-RDTs should include harmonized protocols between laboratories to facilitate comparison between settings. IMPORTANCE Evaluating rapid diagnostic tests in diverse populations is essential to improving diagnostic responses as it gives an indication of the accuracy in real-world scenarios. In the case of rapid diagnostic testing within this pandemic, lateral flow tests that meet the minimum requirements for sensitivity and specificity can play a key role in increasing testing capacity, allowing timely clinical management of those infected, and protecting health care systems. This is particularly valuable in settings where access to the test gold standard is often restricted.

Differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 Variants Using RT-qPCRs by Targeting Recurrent Mutation Sites: A Diagnostic Laboratory Experience from Multi-Center Regional Study, August 2020-December 2021, Poland

Rapid identification of SARS-CoV-2 variants is essential for epidemiological surveillance. RT-qPCR-based variant differentiation tests can be used to quickly screen large sets of samples for relevant variants of concern/interest; this study was conducted on specimens collected at 11 centers located in Poland during routine SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics between August 2020 and December 2021. A total of 1096 samples (with CT < 30) were screened for Alpha, Beta, Delta, Kappa and Omicron variants using commercial assays targeting repeat mutation sites. Variants were assigned to 434 (39.6%) specimens; the remaining 662 (60.4%) samples were not classified (no tested mutations detected). Alpha (n = 289; 66.59%), Delta (n = 115; 26.5%), Kappa (n = 30; 6.91%) and Omicron (n = 2; 0.46%) variants were identified and their distribution changed over time. The first Alpha variant appeared in October 2020, and it began to gradually increase its proportion of the virus population by June 2021. In July 2021, it was replaced by the Delta variant, which already dominated by the end of the year. The first Kappa was detected in October 2021, while Omicron was found in December 2021. The screening of samples allowed the determination of epidemiological trends over a time interval reflecting the national COVID-19 waves.