Development and Evaluation of a duo SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR Assay Combining Two Assays Approved by the World Health Organization Targeting the Envelope and the RNA-Dependant RNA Polymerase (RdRp) Coding Regions

Broad-spectrum dengue virus detection using the commercial RealStar dengue RT-PCR kit 3.0 (Altona) and an in-house combined real-time RT-PCR assay

In endemic areas, the genetic diversity among co-circulating dengue virus (DENV) strains is considerable and new, highly divergent strains are identified on a regular basis. It is thus critical to ensure that molecular diagnostic tools effectively detect virus genomes even in case of important genetic variation. Here, we tested both the pan-DENV detection capacity and the limit of detection of two real-time RT-PCR assays: (i) the commercial RealStar Altona 3.0 system and (ii) a laboratory developed test (LDT) combining two RT-PCR systems in a single reaction tube (DenAllDUO). We used a panel of DENV strains representative of the genetic diversity within DENV species, combined with three in vitro transcribed RNAs as surrogates for unavailable strains corresponding to recently discovered strains with substantial genetic divergence: DENV serotype 1 (DENV-1) Brun2014, DENV-2 QML22 and DENV-4 DKE121. Both systems (i) targeted the genome 3' untranslated region, (ii) displayed a broad detection spectrum, encompassing most of DENV species diversity, and (iii) detected the three aforementioned divergent strains. DenAllDUO detected all the strains tested, whereas the RealStar system failed to detect strains from DENV-4 genotype III. Altogether, our findings support the value of these two RT-PCR systems as part of the Dengue diagnostic arsenal.

Prior COVID-19 Immunization Does Not Cause IgA- or IgG-Dependent Enhancement of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) can increase the rates and severity of infection with various viruses, including coronaviruses, such as MERS. Some in vitro studies on COVID-19 have suggested that prior immunization enhances SARS-CoV-2 infection, but preclinical and clinical studies have demonstrated the contrary. We studied a cohort of COVID-19 patients and a cohort of vaccinated individuals with a heterologous (Moderna/Pfizer) or homologous (Pfizer/Pfizer) vaccination scheme. The dependence on IgG or IgA of ADE of infection was evaluated on the serum samples from these subjects (twenty-six vaccinated individuals and twenty-one PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2-infected patients) using an in vitro model with CD16- or CD89-expressing cells and the Delta (B.1.617.2 lineage) and Omicron (B.1.1.529 lineage) variants of SARS-CoV-2. Sera from COVID-19 patients did not show ADE of infection with any of the tested viral variants. Some serum samples from vaccinated individuals displayed a mild IgA-ADE effect with Omicron after the second dose of the vaccine, but this effect was abolished after the completion of the full vaccination scheme. In this study, FcγRIIIa- and FcαRI-dependent ADE of SARS-CoV-2 infection after prior immunization, which might increase the risk of severe disease in a second natural infection, was not observed.

Preclinical study of a DNA vaccine targeting SARS-CoV-2

To fight against the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, the development of an effective and safe vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 is required. As potential pandemic vaccines, DNA/RNA vaccines, viral vector vaccines and protein-based vaccines have been rapidly developed to prevent pandemic spread worldwide. In this study, we designed plasmid DNA vaccine targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Spike glycoprotein (S protein) as pandemic vaccine, and the humoral, cellular, and functional immune responses were characterized to support proceeding to initial human clinical trials. After intramuscular injection of DNA vaccine encoding S protein with alum adjuvant (three times at 2-week intervals), the humoral immunoreaction, as assessed by anti-S protein or anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) antibody titers, and the cellular immunoreaction, as assessed by antigen-induced IFNγ expression, were up-regulated. In IgG subclass analysis, IgG2b was induced as the main subclass. Based on these analyses, DNA vaccine with alum adjuvant preferentially induced Th1-type T cell polarization. We confirmed the neutralizing action of DNA vaccine-induced antibodies by a binding assay of RBD recombinant protein with angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), a receptor of SARS-CoV-2, and neutralization assays using pseudo-virus, and live SARS-CoV-2. Further B cell epitope mapping analysis using a peptide array showed that most vaccine-induced antibodies recognized the S2 and RBD subunits. Finally, DNA vaccine protected hamsters from SARS-CoV-2 infection. In conclusion, DNA vaccine targeting the spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 might be an effective and safe approach to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

SARS-CoV-2-Antigenschnelltests

Hintergrund

Zur Detektion SARS-CoV-2-Infizierter („severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2“) ist die quantitative Real-Time-PCR (qRT-PCR) Goldstandard. Antigenschnelltests haben gegenüber der PCR-Diagnostik den Vorteil, dass sie schnell Ergebnisse liefern und vor Ort durchführbar sind. Nachteil der Schnelltests ist ihre schlechtere Sensitivität und Spezifität. Mittlerweile sind mehrere hundert Schnelltests auf der BfArm-Liste zu finden, die aber noch nicht alle herstellerunabhängig evaluiert wurden.

Ziel der Arbeit

Untersuchung der diagnostischen Performance von SARS-CoV-2-Antigenschnelltests unterschiedlicher Hersteller.

Material und Methoden

Es wurden naso- und oropharyngeale Abstrichtupfer verwendet, welche zuvor mittels qRT-PCR positiv auf SARS-CoV‑2 getestet wurden. Diese Tupfer wurden anschließend in verschiedenen Antigenschnelltests eingesetzt. Zum Ausschluss eines möglichen Verdünnungseffekts aufgrund erneuten Einsatzes der Tupfer erfolgte zuvor eine erneute PCR-Messung, in der sich die ursprünglich gemessenen Ct-Werte der Proben wiederfinden ließen.

Ergebnisse

Die von uns untersuchten Schnelltests erwiesen sich als sehr unterschiedlich in ihrer Fähigkeit, zwischen positiven und negativen Proben zu diskriminieren. Generell erwies sich jedoch der Einsatz von Schnelltests im Bereich niedriger Viruskonzentrationen (Ct-Wert > 30) als nicht zuverlässig. Für den sicheren Nachweis einer SARS-CoV-2-Infektion sind sie daher nicht geeignet.

Diskussion

Schnelltests mit hoher Sensitivität ermöglichen einen Einsatz vor Ort, der zügig hochinfektiöse Patienten identifizieren kann. Es gibt allerdings deutliche Unterschiede zwischen verschiedenen Herstellern. Hier ist, im Sinne einer validen Patientenversorgung, eine unabhängige, transparente Evaluation von Schnelltests zu fordern.

SARS-CoV-2 shedding sources in wastewater and implications for wastewater-based epidemiology

Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) approach for COVID-19 surveillance is largely based on the assumption of SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding into sewers by infected individuals. Recent studies found that SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentration in wastewater (C_RNA) could not be accounted by the fecal shedding alone. This study aimed to determine potential major shedding sources based on literature data of C_RNA, along with the COVID-19 prevalence in the catchment area through a systematic literature review. Theoretical C_RNA under a certain prevalence was estimated using Monte Carlo simulations, with eight scenarios accommodating feces alone, and both feces and sputum as shedding sources. With feces alone, none of the WBE data was in the confidence interval of theoretical C_RNA estimated with the mean feces shedding magnitude and probability, and 63% of C_RNA in WBE reports were higher than the maximum theoretical concentration. With both sputum and feces, 91% of the WBE data were below the simulated maximum C_RNA in wastewater. The inclusion of sputum as a major shedding source led to more comparable theoretical C_RNA to the literature WBE data. Sputum discharging behavior of patients also resulted in great fluctuations of C_RNA under a certain prevalence. Thus, sputum is a potential critical shedding source for COVID-19 WBE surveillance.

SARS-CoV2 RT-PCR assays: In vitro comparison of 4 WHO approved protocols on clinical specimens and its implications for real laboratory practice through variant emergence

Introduction

RT-PCR testing on nasopharyngeal swabs is a key component in the COVID-19 fighting, provided to use sensitive and specific SARS-CoV2 genome targets. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and to compare 4 widely used WHO approved RT-PCR protocols on real clinical specimens, to decrypt the reasons of the diverging results and to propose recommendations for the choice of the genome targets.

Methods

260 nasopharyngeal samples were randomly selected among the samples tested between Week-16, 2020 and week-16 2021, in the Institut Pasteur de Tunis, Tunisia, one of the referent laboratories of COVID-19 in Tunisia. All samples were tested by Charité, Berlin protocol (singleplex envelop (E) and singleplex RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp)), Hong Kong Universiy, China protocol (singleplex nucleoprotein (N) and singleplex Open reading frame Orf1b), commercial test DAAN Gene® (using the CDC China protocol), (triplex N, Orf1ab with internal control) and Institut Pasteur Paris protocol (IPP) (triplex IP2(nsp9) and IP4 (nsp12) with internal control). For IPP, a selection from samples positive by IP2 but negative with IP4 was re-tested by exactly the same protocol but this time in singleplex. New results were described and analyzed.

Results

In vitro analysis showed discordant results in 29.2% of cases (76 out of 260). The most discordant protocol is DAAN Gene® due to the false positive late signals with N target. Discordant results between the two protocol’s targets are more frequent when viral load are low (high Ct values). Our results demonstrated that the multiplexing has worsened the sensitivity of the IP4 target.

Conclusion

We provide concise recommendations for the choice of the genome targets, the interpretation of the results and the alarm signals which makes suspect a gene mutation.

Endonuclease-based genotyping of the RBM as a method to track the emergence or evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemics, variants have emerged. Some of them display increased transmissibility and/or resistance to immune response. Most of the mutations involved in the functional adaptation are found in the receptor-binding motif (RBM), close to the interface with the receptor ACE2. We thus developed a fast molecular assay to detect mutations in the RBM coding sequence. After amplification, the amplicon is heat-denatured and hybridized with an amplicon of reference. The presence of a mutation can be detected using a mismatch-specific endonuclease and the cleavage pattern is analyzed by capillary electrophoresis. The method was validated on RNA of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants produced in vitro before being implemented for clinical samples. The assay showed 97.8% sensitivity and 97.8% specificity. The procedure can be set up for high-throughput identification of the presence of mutations and serve as a first-line screening to select the samples for full genome sequencing.

Strategy to Develop and Evaluate a Multiplex RT-ddPCR in Response to SARS-CoV-2 Genomic Evolution

The worldwide emergence and spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) since 2019 has highlighted the importance of rapid and reliable diagnostic testing to prevent and control the viral transmission. However, inaccurate results may occur due to false negatives (FN) caused by polymorphisms or point mutations related to the virus evolution and compromise the accuracy of the diagnostic tests. Therefore, PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics should be evaluated and evolve together with the rapidly increasing number of new variants appearing around the world. However, even by using a large collection of samples, laboratories are not able to test a representative collection of samples that deals with the same level of diversity that is continuously evolving worldwide. In the present study, we proposed a methodology based on an in silico and in vitro analysis. First, we used all information offered by available whole-genome sequencing data for SARS-CoV-2 for the selection of the two PCR assays targeting two different regions in the genome, and to monitor the possible impact of virus evolution on the specificity of the primers and probes of the PCR assays during and after the development of the assays. Besides this first essential in silico evaluation, a minimal set of testing was proposed to generate experimental evidence on the method performance, such as specificity, sensitivity and applicability. Therefore, a duplex reverse-transcription droplet digital PCR (RT-ddPCR) method was evaluated in silico by using 154 489 whole-genome sequences of SARS-CoV-2 strains that were representative for the circulating strains around the world. The RT-ddPCR platform was selected as it presented several advantages to detect and quantify SARS-CoV-2 RNA in clinical samples and wastewater. Next, the assays were successfully experimentally evaluated for their sensitivity and specificity. A preliminary evaluation of the applicability of the developed method was performed using both clinical and wastewater samples.

Are Posterior Oropharyngeal Saliva Specimens an Acceptable Alternative to Nasopharyngeal Sampling for the Monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 in Primary-Care Settings?

Background: The present study was set up to evaluate the efficacy of virological surveillance using posterior oropharyngeal saliva samples to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic in general practice. Methods: Posterior oropharyngeal saliva samples were collected without restriction on timing or alimentation by general practitioners from patients with acute respiratory infection (ARI) seen in consultation. Saliva samples were tested by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for SARS-CoV-2 and 21 other respiratory pathogens. Results for SARS-CoV-2 in saliva samples were compared to results obtained using a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) collected in a certified medical laboratory before or after the ARI consultation. Results: Overall, 143 ARI patients were enrolled between 6 June 2020, and 19 January 2021. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 37.0% (n = 53) of saliva samples and in 39.0% (n = 56) of NPS. Both saliva and NPS were positive in 51 patients. Positive and negative results were concordant between saliva samples and NPS in 51 (96.2%) and in 85 (94.4%) patients, respectively, with a Cohen’s Kappa coefficient of 0.89 (95% CI 0.82–0.97, p < 0.001). Other respiratory viruses were detected in 28.0% (n = 40) of the 143 saliva samples. Conclusions: Findings suggest that saliva samples could represent an attractive alternative to NPS for surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in patients consulting for an ARI in primary care.

COVID-19 and Diagnostic Testing for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-qPCR-Facts and Fallacies

Although molecular testing, and RT-qPCR in particular, has been an indispensable component in the scientific armoury targeting SARS-CoV-2, there are numerous falsehoods, misconceptions, assumptions and exaggerated expectations with regards to capability, performance and usefulness of the technology. It is essential that the true strengths and limitations, although publicised for at least twenty years, are restated in the context of the current COVID-19 epidemic. The main objective of this commentary is to address and help stop the unfounded and debilitating speculation surrounding its use.

Evaluation of a Trio Toscana Virus Real-Time RT-PCR Assay Targeting Three Genomic Regions within Nucleoprotein Gene

Toscana virus (TOSV) can cause central nervous system infections in both residents of and travelers to Mediterranean countries. Data mining identified three real-time RT-qPCR assays for detecting TOSV RNA targeting non-overlapping regions in the nucleoprotein gene. Here, they were combined to create a multi-region assay named Trio TOSV RT-qPCR consisting of six primers and three probes. In this study, (i) we evaluated in silico the three RT-qPCR assays available in the literature for TOSV detection, (ii) we combined the three systems to create the Trio TOSV RT-qPCR, (iii) we assessed the specificity and sensitivity of the three monoplex assays versus the Trio TOSV RT-qPCR assay, and (iv) we compared the performance of the Trio TOSV RT-qPCR assay with one of the reference monoplex assays on clinical samples. In conclusion, the Trio TOSV RT-qPCR assay performs equally or better than the three monoplex assays; therefore, it provides a robust assay that can be used for both research and diagnostic purposes.