Search

This study investigated the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection and diagnostics in household members of different ages and with different symptom severity after SARS-CoV-2 exposure during the early phase of the pandemic. Households with a SARS-CoV-2 confirmed positive case and at least one child in the Netherlands were followed for 6 weeks. Naso (NP)- and oropharyngeal (OP) swabs, oral fluid and feces specimens were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and serum for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. The dynamics of the presence of viral RNA and the serological response was modeled to determine the sampling time-frame and sample type with the highest sensitivity to confirm or reject a SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 between adults and children within a household was correlated with symptom severity of index cases. In children higher viral loads compared to adults were detected at symptom onset. Early in infection, higher viral loads were detected in NP and OP specimens, while RNA in especially feces were longer detectable. SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies have a 90% probability of detection from 7 days (total Ig) and 18 days (IgG) since symptom onset. In conclusion this study has shown that on average, children carry higher loads of virus as compared to adults early after infection. For highest probability of detection in SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics early in infection, RT-PCR on NP and OP specimens are more sensitive than on oral fluid and feces. For SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics late after infection, RT-PCR on feces specimens and serology are more valuable.

This study investigated the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection and diagnostics in 242 household members of different ages and with different symptom severity after SARS-CoV-2 exposure early in the pandemic (March-April 2020). Households with a SARS-CoV-2 confirmed positive case and at least one child in the Netherlands were followed for 6 weeks. Naso (NP)- and oropharyngeal (OP) swabs, oral fluid and feces specimens were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and serum for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. The dynamics of the presence of viral RNA and the serological response was modeled to determine the sampling time-frame and sample type with the highest sensitivity to confirm or reject a SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. In children higher viral loads compared to adults were detected at symptom onset. Early in infection, higher viral loads were detected in NP and OP specimens, while RNA in especially feces were longer detectable. SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies have 90% probability of detection from 7 days (total Ig) and 18 days (IgG) since symptom onset. For highest probability of detection in SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics early in infection, RT-PCR on NP and OP specimens are more sensitive than on oral fluid and feces. For SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics late after infection, RT-PCR on feces specimens and serology are more valuable.

We compared the performance of SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody testing between 12 European laboratories involved in convalescent plasma trials. Raw titres differed almost 100-fold differences between laboratories when blind-testing 15 plasma samples. Calibration of titres in relation to the reference reagent and standard curve obtained by testing a dilution series reduced the inter-laboratory variability ca 10-fold. The harmonisation of neutralising antibody quantification is a vital step towards determining the protective and therapeutic levels of neutralising antibodies. ispartof: EUROSURVEILLANCE vol:26 issue:27 ispartof: location:Sweden status: published

Orthohantaviruses (family Hantaviridae, order Bunyavirales) can cause two serious syndromes in humans: hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS), associated with the Old World orthohantaviruses, and hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome (HCPS), associated with orthohantaviruses in the Americas. In Europe, four different orthohantaviruses (DOBV, PUUV, SEOV, and TULV) are associated with human disease. As disease severity and zoonotic source differ between orthohantavirus species, conclusive determination of the infecting species by either RT-PCR or comparative virus neutralization test (VNT) is of importance. Currently, the focus reduction neutralization test (FRNT) is considered the ‘Gold Standard’ for orthohantavirus VNTs, however this test is laborious and time-consuming. Consequently, more high-throughput alternatives are needed. In this study, we developed a comparative orthohantavirus microneutralization test (MNT) including all four human pathogenic orthohantavirus species circulating in Europe. The assay was validated using RT-PCR-confirmed rodent (n=17) and human sera (n=17), DOBV-suspected human sera (n=3) and cohorts of orthohantavirus-negative rodent (n=3) and human sera (n=85). 16/17 RT-PCR-confirmed rodent sera and 18/20 of the RT-PCR-confirmed and DOBV-suspected human sera were serotyped successfully, while for the remaining rodent (n=1) and human sera (n=2) no neutralizing titers could be detected. All negative control sera tested negative in the MNT. The assay was subsequently evaluated using a clinical cohort of 50 orthohantavirus patients. Orthohantavirus infection was confirmed in all 50 patients, and 47/50 (94%) sera were serotyped successfully, confirming PUUV as the major cause of orthohantavirus infections in Netherlands. Notably, two previously unrecognized SEOV cases from 2013 were diagnosed using the MNT, underlining the added value of the MNT in a diagnostic setting. In conclusion, we demonstrate the successful development and clinical implementation of a comparative European orthohantavirus MNT to determine the infecting virus species in European HFRS patients. Identification of the causative species is needed for an adequate Public Health response and can support individual patient care. For many labs, the implementation of orthohantavirus neutralization tests has not been a straightforward procedure. This issue will be addressed by the rollout of the comparative MNT to multiple European laboratories to support patient diagnostics, surveillance and Public Health responses.

To understand SARS-CoV-2 immunity after natural infection or vaccination, functional assays such as virus neutralising assays are needed. So far, assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibodies rely on cell-culture based infection assays either using wild type SARS-CoV-2 or pseudotyped viruses. Such assays are labour-intensive, require appropriate biosafety facilities and are difficult to standardize. Recently, a new surrogate virus neutralisation test (sVNT) was described that uses the principle of an ELISA to measure the neutralisation capacity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies directed against the receptor binding domain. Here, we performed an independent evaluation of the robustness, specificity and sensitivity on an extensive panel of sera from 269 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases and 259 unmatched samples collected before 2020 and compared it to cell-based neutralisation assays. We found a high specificity of 99.2 (95%CI: 96.9–99.9) and overall sensitivity of 80.3 (95%CI: 74.9–84.8) for the sVNT. Clinical sensitivity increased between early (14 dpos/dpd) from 75.0 (64.7–83.2) to 83.1 (76.5–88.1). Also, higher severity was associated with an increase in clinical sensitivity. Upon comparison with cell-based neutralisation assays we determined an analytical sensitivity of 74.3 (56.4–86.9) and 98.2 (89.4–99.9) for titres ≥10 to

To understand SARS-CoV-2 immunity after natural infection or vaccination, functional assays such as virus neutralizing assays are needed. So far, assays to determine SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies rely on cell-culture based infection assays either using wild type SARS-CoV-2 or pseudotyped viruses. Such assays are labour-intensive, require appropriate biosafety facilities and are difficult to standardize.Recently, a new surrogate virus neutralisation assay (sVNT) was described that uses the principle of an ELISA to measure the neutralization capacity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies directed against the receptor binding domain.Here, we performed an independent evaluation of the robustness, specificity and sensitivity on an extensive panel of sera from 269 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases and 259 unmatched samples collected before 2020 and compared it to cell-based neutralization assays. We found a high specificity of 99.2 (95%CI: 96.9-99.9) and overall sensitivity of 80.3 (95%CI: 74.9-84.8) for the sVNT. Clinical sensitivity increased between early (< 14 days post symptom onset or post diagnosis, dpos/dpd) and late sera (>14 dpos/dpd) from 75.0 (64.7-83.2) to 83.1 (76.5-88.1). Also, higher severity was associated with an increase in clinical sensitivity. Upon comparison with cell-based neutralisation assays we determined an analytical sensitivity of 74.3 (56.4-86.9) and 98.2 (89.4-99.9) for titres ≥10 to < 40 and ≥40 to < 160, respectively. Only samples with a titre ≥160 were always positive in the sVNT.In conclusion, the sVNT can be used as an additional assay to determine the immune status of COVID-19 infected of vaccinated individuals but its value needs to be assessed for the specific context of use.

We describe a patient with leucocyte adhesion deficiency (LAD). Clinically, the patient had delayed umbilical cord detachment, omphalitis, impaired wound healing and persistent leucocytosis. The patient had the severe form of LAD, with a total absence of leucocyte cell adhesion molecules (LeuCAMs) and undetectable mRNA for the beta chain, the common subunit of the LeuCAMs. In vitro neutrophil chemotaxis, aggregation and oxygen consumption were severely impaired. In vitro incubation of neutrophils with recombinant human interferon-gamma (rIFN-gamma) showed an increase in oxygen consumption, but no effect on the expression of the LeuCAMs, or the beta chain mRNA. In vivo treatment with IFN-gamma was started. The Fc gamma RI receptor appeared on the neutrophils, the LeuCAMs remained undetectable, while the neutrophil functions remained disturbed. The patient died of surgical complications after 10 weeks of rIFN-gamma treatment. No new infections or side-effects due to rIFN-gamma were observed.

Neutrophil adherence to cytokine-activated endothelial cell (EC) monolayers depends on the expression of the endothelial leukocyte adhesion molecule-1 (ELAM-1). The ligand for ELAM-1 is the sialylated Lewis-x antigen (SLe(x)) structure. The selectin LAM-1 (or LECAM-1) has been described as one of the SLe(x)-presenting glycoproteins involved in neutrophil binding to ELAM-1. Other presenter molecules have not yet been described. Our data demonstrate that the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-like surface molecules on neutrophils--known as the nonspecific cross-reacting antigens (NCAs)--are involved in neutrophil adherence to monolayers of IL-1-beta-activated EC. The NCAs are recognized by CD66 (NCA-160 and NCA-90) and CD67 (NCA-95). Because NCA-95 and NCA-90 have previously been found to be phosphatidylinositol (PI)-linked, paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) neutrophils (which lack PI-linked surface proteins) were tested as well. PNH neutrophils showed a diminished binding to activated EC. CD66 (on PNH cells still recognizing the transmembrane NCA-160 form) still inhibited the adherence of PNH cells to IL-1-beta-activated EC, but to a limited extent. Soluble CEA(-related) antigens inhibited normal neutrophil adherence as well, whereas neutrophil transmigration was unaffected. Sialidase-treatment as well as CD66 preclearing abolished the inhibitory capacity of the CEA(-related) antigens. The binding of soluble CEA antigens to IL-1-beta-pretreated EC was blocked by anti-ELAM-1. These soluble antigens, as well as the neutrophil NCA-160 and NCA-90, both recognized by CD66 antibodies, presented the SLe(x) determinant. Together, these findings indicate that the CD66 antigens (i.e., NCA-160/NCA-90) function as presenter molecules of the SLe(x) oligosaccharide structures on neutrophils that bind to ELAM-1 on EC.