Nationwide Harmonization Effort for Semi-Quantitative Reporting of SARS-CoV-2 PCR Test Results in Belgium

Multiplex PCR in Diagnosing Respiratory Tract Infections in Hospitalized Children

OBJECTIVES

To elaborate the utility of multiplex quantitative polymerase chain reaction (multiplex qPCR) for the accurate diagnosis of severe respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in hospitalized children.

METHODS

In two separate periods during 2022, 76 respiratory specimens (combined throat/nasopharyngeal swabs) were submitted for multiplex qPCR regarding 26 respiratory pathogens. The specimens were obtained from children with severe RTIs hospitalized in the Institute for Respiratory Diseases in Children, Skopje.

RESULTS

Multiplex qPCR detected at least one respiratory pathogen in all examined specimens (76/76), with 83% (63/76) rate of co-infections. Considering that positive results are only the ones with Ct value below 28, the rates of detected pathogens and co-infections decrease to 75% and 22%, respectively. The most commonly detected pathogens during the spring period were Parainfluenza type 3 (PIV3) followed by Adenovirus (AdV) and Respiratory syncytial virus type B (RSVB) with frequency rate of 23%, 19% and 19%, respectively. During the autumn period, the most common were RSVB and Streptococcus pneumoniae with frequency rate of 31% and 17%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Multiplex qPCR is a powerful tool for diagnosing RTIs. Semi-quantification of the viral load by reporting Ct values added higher level of evidence for accurate diagnosis. Seasonal detection of the examined viruses was notable with higher prevalence of PIV3 in spring and RSVB in autumn period.

Surveillance of the respiratory syncytial virus outside infancy: impact of testing methods, a retrospective observational study

Background

The European Medicines Agency has approved several vaccines to protect the elderly against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections. However, differences in performance between antigen and PCR tests, especially in adults, can make monitoring RSV difficult. This study aims to assess the impact of the chosen diagnostic methods on the surveillance of RSV.

Methods

RSV and influenza test results obtained from July 2022 to June 2023 in a consolidated clinical laboratory in Brussels, Belgium, were collected. These results included antigen tests, quadruplex PCR tests and viral cultures on respiratory samples. Epidemiological trends related to the age of patients and the diagnostic methods were analysed.

Results

Among 14 761 RSV tests, the overall number of positive tests for infants until 1 year of age peaked on 5 November 2022 (67 per 7 days) whereas it peaked on 22 December 2022 for adults (33 per 7 days). Positive antigen tests peaked on 7 November 2022 (56 per 7 days) whereas positive PCRs peaked on 19 December 2022 (36 per 7 days). Nevertheless, the positivity rate of RSV PCRs had peaked 1 month previously. Infants were mainly diagnosed through antigen testing, contrary to older patients. The influenza epidemic was probably the cause of the increased use of a quadruplex PCR, leading to a delayed increase in the absolute number of PCRs positive for RSV.

Conclusion

This study shows that the use of different diagnostic methods could lead to an erroneous representation of RSV epidemiology in adults due to the lack of sensitivity of antigen detection. RSV surveillance in the elderly should rely rather on molecular methods.

Nationwide quality assurance of high-throughput diagnostic molecular testing during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: role of the Belgian National Reference Centre

Since the onset of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in Belgium, UZ/KU Leuven has played a crucial role as the National Reference Centre (NRC) for respiratory pathogens, to be the first Belgian laboratory to develop and implement laboratory developed diagnostic assays for SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) and later to assess the quality of commercial kits. To meet the growing demand for decentralised testing, both clinical laboratories and government-supported high-throughput platforms were gradually deployed across Belgium. Consequently, the role of the NRC transitioned from a specialised testing laboratory to strengthening capacity and coordinating quality assurance. Here, we outline the measures taken by the NRC, the national public health institute Sciensano and the executing clinical laboratories to ensure effective quality management of molecular testing throughout the initial two years of the pandemic (March 2020 to March 2022).

Assessment of the clinical and analytical performance of three Seegene Allplex SARS-CoV-2 assays within the VALCOR framework

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic demonstrated the need for accurate diagnostic testing for the early detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although the pandemic has ended, accurate assays are still needed to monitor viral spread at national levels and beyond through population and wastewater surveillance. To enhance early detection, SARS-CoV-2 assays should have high diagnostic accuracy and should be validated to assure accurate results. Three distinct SARS-CoV-2 assays were evaluated with clinical samples using the VALCOR (VALidation of SARS-CORona Virus-2 assays) framework, with the TaqPath COVID-19 assay (ThermoFisher Scientific, USA) as a comparator. We evaluated clinical sensitivity, specificity, limit of detection (LOD), and overall concordance between comparator and three index Allplex SARS-CoV-2 assays (Seegene, South Korea): Allplex-SC2, Allplex-SC2Fast (Fast PCR), and Allplex-SC2FabR (SARS-CoV-2/FluA/FluB/respiratory syncytial virus). Analytical performance and LOD of index assays were assessed using a dilution series of three synthetic SARS-CoV-2 sequence reference materials (RMs). Ninety SARS-CoV-2 positives and 90 SARS-CoV-2 negatives were tested. All Allplex assays had 100.0% sensitivity (95%CI = 95.9%-100.0%). Allplex-SC2 and Allplex-SC2Fast assays had 97.8% specificity (95%CI = 92.3%-99.7%) and 98.9% overall concordance [κ = 0.978 (95%CI = 0.947-1.000)]. Allplex-SC2FabR assay showed 100.0% specificity (95%CI = 95.9%-100.0%) and 100.0% overall concordance [κ = 1.000 (95%CI = 1.000-1.000)]. LOD assessment of index assays revealed detection down to 2.61 × 102 copies/mL in clinical samples, while the analytical LOD was 9.00 × 102 copies/mL. In conclusion, the evaluation of the three Seegene Allplex SARS-CoV-2 assays showed high sensitivity and specificity and an overall good assay concordance with the comparator. The assays showed low analytical LOD using RM and even a slightly lower LOD in clinical samples. Non-overlapping target gene sequences between SARS-CoV-2 assays and RMs emphasize the need for aligning targeted sequences of diagnostic assays and RMs.IMPORTANCEThe coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has a significant impact on global public health, economies, and societies. As shown through the first phases of the pandemic, accurate and timely diagnosis is crucial for disease control, prevention, and monitoring. Though the pandemic phase of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has concluded, diagnostic assays remain in demand to monitor SARS-CoV-2 at the individual patient level, regionally, and nationally, as well as to remain an infectious disease preparedness instrument to monitor any new SARS-CoV-2 dissemination across borders using population and wastewater surveillance. The anticipation by WHO and central health care policy entities such as the Center for Disease Control, EMA, and multiple national health authorities is that SARS-CoV-2 will reside as an endemic respiratory disease for years to come. The key strategic consideration is hence shifting from combating a pandemic situation with a high number of patients to instead allowing precise diagnostics of suspected patients with the intention of correct management in a low-prevalence setting.

The value of point-of-care tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid

BACKGROUND

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from donor to recipient is a clinically relevant risk for developing severe COVID-19 after lung transplantation (LTx). This risk of iatrogenic transmission can be reduced by timely detection of viral RNA or antigen in samples of bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid obtained at the time of lung procurement. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen in BAL fluid samples using three point-of-care tests (POCTs).

METHODS

BAL fluid samples came from patients hospitalized in an intensive care unit during the COVID-19 pandemic. These pandemic samples were scored as positive or negative for SARS-CoV-2 by a RT-qPCR comparator assay for orf1ab. Three commercially available POCTs were then evaluated: cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B assay with the cobas Liat RT-qPCR system (Roche Diagnostics), ID NOW COVID-19 and COVID-19 2.0 (Abbott), and SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (RAT) (Roche Diagnostics). Samples from the pre-pandemic era served as negative controls.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 98 BAL fluid samples, each from a different patient: 58 positive pandemic samples (orf1ab Ct<38), 20 putatively negative pandemic samples (orf1ab Ct≥38), and 20 pre-pandemic samples. Univariate logistic regression shows that the probability of detection was highest for cobas Liat, followed by ID NOW, and then RAT. Of clinical relevance, cobas Liat detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 30 of the 31 positive pandemic samples that were collected within 10 days after RT-qPCR diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. None of the 20 pre-pandemic samples had a false-positive result for any POCT.

CONCLUSIONS

POCTs enable the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen in BAL fluid samples and may provide additional information to decide if donor lungs are suitable for transplantation. Detection of respiratory pathogens with POCTs at the time of donor lung procurement is a potential strategy to increase safety in LTx by preventing iatrogenic transmission and severe postoperative infections.

Clinical performance of the STANDARD M10 SARS-CoV-2 rapid RT-PCR assay in patients visiting an emergency department

In emergency departments, rapid screening of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was important for arranging limited isolation resources and patient care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. STANDARD M10 SARS-CoV-2 (SD Biosensor) is a recently developed cartridge-based RT-PCR that provides a turnaround time of 1 h, which is shorter than that for conventional RT-PCR. This study evaluated the clinical performance of STANDARD M10 in patients visiting an emergency department. From March to June 2022, two specimens were collected from patients visiting an emergency department. Each specimen comprised one nasopharyngeal and one oropharyngeal swab. Respective specimens underwent rapid RT-PCR using STANDARD M10 and conventional RT-PCR using Allplex SARS-CoV-2 (Seegene). When discordant results occurred, specimens undergoing the STANDARD M10 were retested with the Allplex to exclude specimen variations. Retest results replaced initial results of the Allplex. Clinical performance of STANDARD M10 was compared with Allplex. The study enrolled 1971 patients. COVID-19 prevalence was 6.2% based on the Allplex. Compared with the Allplex, overall agreement, positive percent agreement, and negative percent agreement of STANDARD M10 were 99.5% (95% CI: 99.1%-99.8%), 95.9% (95% CI: 90.8%-98.3%), and 99.8% (95% CI: 99.4%-99.9%), respectively. Nine discordant results were all positive on droplet digital PCR, except for one specimen that was positive with STANDARD M10. The STANDARD M10 showed reliable diagnostic performance for detecting SARS-CoV-2 from patients visiting in emergency departments and is a useful tool in emergency healthcare systems because of its easy-to-use cartridge-based assay and short resulting time for detecting SARS-CoV-2.

Standardization and Comparison of Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 Assays and Testing Laboratories

Motivation

The motivation for this work was the need to establish a predefined cutoff based on genome copies per ml (GE/ml) rather than Ct, which can vary depending on the laboratory and assay used. A GE/ml-based threshold was necessary to define what constituted 'low positives" for samples that were included in data sets submitted to the FDA for emergency use approval for SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests.

Summary

SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent of the global COVID-19 pandemic, made its appearance at the end of 2019 and is still circulating in the population. The pandemic led to an urgent need for fast, reliable, and widely available testing. After December 2020, the emergence of new variants of SARS-CoV-2 led to additional challenges since new and existing tests had to detect variants to the same extent as the original Wuhan strain. When an antigen-based test is submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) consideration it is benchmarked against PCR comparator assays, which yield cycle threshold (CT) data as an indirect indicator of viral load - the lower the CT, the higher the viral load of the sample and the higher the CT, the lower the viral load. The FDA mandates that 10-20% of clinical samples used to evaluate the antigen test have to be low positive. Low positive, as defined by the FDA, are clinical samples in which the CT of the SARS-CoV-2 target gene is within 3 CT of the mean CT value of the approved comparator test's Limit of Detection (LOD). While all comparator tests are PCR-based, the results from different PCR assays used are not uniform. Results vary depending on assay platform, target gene, LOD and laboratory methodology. The emergence and dominance of the Omicron variant further challenged this approach as the fraction of low positive clinical samples dramatically increased as compared to earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants. This led to 20-40% of clinical samples having high CT values and therefore assays vying for an EUA were failing to achieve the 80% Percent Positive Agreement (PPA) threshold required. Here we describe the methods and statistical analyses used to establish a predefined cutoff, based on genome copies per ml (GE/ml) to classify samples as low positive (less than the cutoff GE/ml) or high positive (greater than the cutoff GE/mL). CT 30 for the E gene target using Cobas® SARS-CoV-2-FluA/B platform performed at TriCore Reference Laboratories, and this low positive cutoff value was used for two EUA authorizations. Using droplet digital PCR and methods described here, a value 49,447.72 was determined as the GE/ml equivalent for the low positive cutoff. The CT cutoff corresponding to 49447.72 GE/ml was determined across other platforms and laboratories. The methodology and statistical analysis described here can now be used for standardization of all comparators used for FDA submissions with a goal towards establishing uniform criteria for EUA authorization.

Genomic monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 variants using sentinel SARI hospital surveillance

Background

To support the COVID-19 pandemic response, many countries, including Belgium, implemented baseline genomic surveillance (BGS) programs aiming to early detect and characterize new SARS-CoV-2 variants. In parallel, Belgium maintained a sentinel network of six hospitals that samples patients with severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) and integrated SARS-CoV-2 detection within a broader range of respiratory pathogens. We evaluate the ability of the SARI surveillance to monitor general trends and early signals of viral genetic evolution of SARS-CoV-2 and compare it with the BGS as a reference model.

Methods

Nine-hundred twenty-five SARS-CoV-2 positive samples from patients fulfilling the Belgian SARI definition between January 2020 and December 2022 were sequenced using the ARTIC Network amplicon tiling approach on a MinION platform. Weekly variant of concern (VOC) proportions and types were compared to those that were circulating between 2021 and 2022, using 96,251 sequences of the BGS.

Results

SARI surveillance allowed timely detection of the Omicron (BA.1, BA.2, BA.4, and BA.5) and Delta (B.1.617.2) VOCs, with no to 2 weeks delay according to the start of their epidemic growth in the Belgian population. First detection of VOCs B.1.351 and P.1 took longer, but these remained minor in Belgium. Omicron BA.3 was never detected in SARI surveillance. Timeliness could not be evaluated for B.1.1.7, being already major at the start of the study period.

Conclusions

Genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 using SARI sentinel surveillance has proven to accurately reflect VOCs detected in the population and provides a cost-effective solution for long-term genomic monitoring of circulating respiratory viruses.

Minimal requirements for ISO15189 validation and accreditation of three next generation sequencing procedures for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in clinical setting

Rapid and recurrent breakthroughs of new SARS-CoV-2 strains (variants) have prompted public health authorities worldwide to set up surveillance networks to monitor the circulation of variants of concern. The use of next-generation sequencing technologies has raised the need for quality control assessment as required in clinical laboratories. The present study is the first to propose a validation guide for SARS-CoV-2 typing using three different NGS methods fulfilling ISO15189 standards. These include the assessment of the risk, specificity, accuracy, reproducibility, and repeatability of the methods. Among the three methods used, two are amplicon-based involving reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (Artic v3 and Midnight v1) on Oxford Nanopore Technologies while the third one is amplicon-based using reverse complement polymerase chain reaction (Nimagen) on Illumina technology. We found that all methods met the quality requirement (e.g., 100% concordant typing results for accuracy, reproducibility, and repeatability) for SARS-CoV-2 typing in clinical setting. Additionally, the typing results emerging from each of the three sequencing methods were compared using three widely known nomenclatures (WHO, Pangolineage, and Nextclade). They were also compared regarding single nucleotide variations. The outcomes showed that Artic v3 and Nimagen should be privileged for outbreak investigation as they provide higher quality results for samples that do not meet inclusion criteria for analysis in a clinical setting. This study is a first step towards validation of laboratory developed NGS tests in the context of the new European regulation for medical devices and in vitro diagnostics.

Technical and health governance aspects of the External Quality Assessment Scheme for the SARS-CoV-2 molecular tests: institutional experience performed in all clinical laboratories of a Regional Health Service

OBJECTIVES

Since December 2019, the worldwide public health has been threatened by a severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by Coronavirus-2. From the beginning, a turning point has been the identification of new cases of infection, in order to minimize the virus spreading among the population. For this reason, it was necessary introducing a panel of tests able to identify positive cases, which became crucial for all countries.

METHODS

As a Regional Reference Centre, the CRQ Laboratory (Regional Laboratory for the Quality Control) developed and conducted an External Quality Assessment (EQA) panel of assay, so as to evaluate the quality of real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which were used by 62 Sicilian laboratories, previously authorized to issue certificates for the COVID-19 diagnosis, on behalf of the Public Health Service.

RESULTS

The qualitative performance test was based on pooled samples with different viral loads of SARS-CoV-2 or human Coronavirus OC43. 75% of the participating laboratories tested all core samples correctly, while the remaining 25% interpreted incorrectly the EQA exercise samples matching negatively the standards required.

CONCLUSIONS

Subsequent inspection visits confirmed the issue of incorrect positive and negative certifications for COVID-19 by private and public laboratories, despite the possession of the authorization requirements currently provided for by current regulations, with a significant impact on the SSR.

Healthcare-Associated SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection after 3 Months with a Phylogenetically Distinct Omicron Variant: A Case Report

This case report describes a 60-year-old female patient suffering from systemic sclerosis, for which she received immunomodulatory drugs. Her first SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal sample was obtained in the emergency department, on 31 January 2022. Whole genome sequencing confirmed infection with Omicron BA.1.1. Her hospital stay was long and punctuated by many complications, including admission to the intensive care unit. At the beginning of April 2022, she started complaining of increased coughing, for which another SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR test was performed. The latter nasopharyngeal swab showed a strongly positive result. To support the theory of healthcare-associated reinfection, whole genome sequencing was performed and confirmed reinfection with Omicron BA.2. Since this patient was one of ten positive cases in this particular ward, a hospital outbreak investigation was performed. Whole genome sequencing data were available for five of these ten patients and showed a cluster of four patients with ≤2 small nucleotide polymorphisms difference.

A Hierarchical Framework for Assessing Transmission Causality of Respiratory Viruses

Systematic reviews of 591 primary studies of the modes of transmission for SARS-CoV-2 show significant methodological shortcomings and heterogeneity in the design, conduct, testing, and reporting of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. While this is partly understandable at the outset of a pandemic, evidence rules of proof for assessing the transmission of this virus are needed for present and future pandemics of viral respiratory pathogens. We review the history of causality assessment related to microbial etiologies with a focus on respiratory viruses and suggest a hierarchy of evidence to integrate clinical, epidemiologic, molecular, and laboratory perspectives on transmission. The hierarchy, if applied to future studies, should narrow the uncertainty over the twin concepts of causality and transmission of human respiratory viruses. We attempt to address the translational gap between the current research evidence and the assessment of causality in the transmission of respiratory viruses with a focus on SARS-CoV-2. Experimentation, consistency, and independent replication of research alongside our proposed framework provide a chain of evidence that can reduce the uncertainty over the transmission of respiratory viruses and increase the level of confidence in specific modes of transmission, informing the measures that should be undertaken to prevent transmission.

Overview of case definitions and contact tracing indications in the 2022 monkeypox outbreak

Background

In 2022, a new outbreak of the Mpox virus occurred outside of Africa, its usual endemic area. The virus was detected in European, American, Asian, and Oceanian countries where Mpox is uncommon or had not been reported previously and where the spread was rapid. The study aims to compare the case definition and the indications for contact tracing in case of Mpox infection among the World Health Organization (WHO), the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), and four European Countries.

Methods

From August 2022 to November 2022, we conducted research, first on the WHO and ECDC official websites and then on the official websites of the Ministry of Health or National Health Agencies of four European Countries (Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal). All reports found were compared to enlighten the differences in the definition of the case and indications for contact tracing.

Results

The WHO divides the case definition into four categories: suspected, probable, confirmed, and discarded, while the ECDC divides cases into confirmed and probable. The ECDC defines contact as close and others, while the WHO divides it into high, medium, and minimal risk. The four countries analyzed show heterogeneity in both the case definitions and the indications for contact tracing.

Conclusions

Our analysis revealed heterogeneity in the case definition between the WHO and ECDC. Different countries followed different indications or have given their indications for both the case definition and contact tracing indications. Harmonization strengthens public health preparedness and response and creates unified communication.