Search

As the number of individuals vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 rises worldwide, population-level data regarding the vaccines' ability to reduce infection are being generated. Randomised trials have shown that these vaccines dramatically reduce symptomatic COVID-19; however, less is known about their effects on transmission between individuals. The natural course of infection with SARS-CoV-2 involves infection of the respiratory epithelia and replication within the mucosa to sufficient viral titres for transmission via aerosol particles and droplets. Here we discuss the available data on the existing, approved SARS-CoV-2 vaccines' capacity to reduce transmissibility by reducing primary infection, viral replication, capacity for transmission, and symptomaticity. The potential for mucosal-targeted SARS-CoV-2 vaccine strategies to more effectively limit transmission than intramuscular vaccines is considered with regard to known immunological mechanisms. Finally, we enumerate the population-level effects of approved vaccines on transmission through observational studies following clinical trials and vaccine distribution in real-world settings.

COVID-19 manifests with a wide spectrum of clinical phenotypes that are characterized by exaggerated and misdirected host immune responses1-6. Although pathological innate immune activation is well-documented in severe disease1, the effect of autoantibodies on disease progression is less well-defined. Here we use a high-throughput autoantibody discovery technique known as rapid extracellular antigen profiling7 to screen a cohort of 194 individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2, comprising 172 patients with COVID-19 and 22 healthcare workers with mild disease or asymptomatic infection, for autoantibodies against 2,770 extracellular and secreted proteins (members of the exoproteome). We found that patients with COVID-19 exhibit marked increases in autoantibody reactivities as compared to uninfected individuals, and show a high prevalence of autoantibodies against immunomodulatory proteins (including cytokines, chemokines, complement components and cell-surface proteins). We established that these autoantibodies perturb immune function and impair virological control by inhibiting immunoreceptor signalling and by altering peripheral immune cell composition, and found that mouse surrogates of these autoantibodies increase disease severity in a mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our analysis of autoantibodies against tissue-associated antigens revealed associations with specific clinical characteristics. Our findings suggest a pathological role for exoproteome-directed autoantibodies in COVID-19, with diverse effects on immune functionality and associations with clinical outcomes.

We reconstructed the 2016-2017 Zika virus epidemic in Puerto Rico by using complete genomes to uncover the epidemic's origin, spread, and evolutionary dynamics. Our study revealed that the epidemic was propelled by multiple introductions that spread across the island, intricate evolutionary patterns, and ≈10 months of cryptic transmission.

Saliva Specimens to Detect SARS-CoV-2 Infection In this letter, the investigators report that saliva specimens and nasopharyngeal swab specimens had similar sensitivity in the detection of SARS-CoV...

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants continues to shape the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. The detection and rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 ‘ Omicron’ variant (lineage B.1.1.529) in Botswana and South Africa became a global concern because it contained 15 mutations in the spike protein immunogenic receptor binding domain and was less neutralized by sera derived from vaccinees compared to the previously dominant Delta variant. To investigate if Omicron is more likely than Delta to cause infections in vaccinated persons, we analyzed 37,877 nasal swab PCR tests conducted from 12-26 December 2021 and calculated the test positivity rates for each variant by vaccination status. We found that the positivity rate among unvaccinated persons was higher for Delta (5.2%) than Omicron (4.5%). We found similar results in persons who received a single vaccine dose. Conversely, our results show that Omicron had higher positivity rates than Delta among those who received two doses within five months (Omicron = 4.7% vs. Delta = 2.6%), two doses more than five months ago (4.2% vs. 2.9%), and three vaccine doses (2.2% vs. 0.9%). Our estimates of Omicron positivity rates in persons receiving one or two vaccine doses were not significantly lower than unvaccinated persons but were 49.7% lower after three doses. In comparison, the reduction in Delta positivity rates from unvaccinated to 2 vaccine doses was 45.6-49.6% and to 3 vaccine doses was 83.2%. Despite the higher positivity rates for Omicron in vaccinated persons, we still found that 91.2% of the Omicron infections in our study occurred in persons who were eligible for 1 or more vaccine doses at the time of PCR testing. In conclusion, escape from vaccine-induced immunity likely contributed to the rapid rise in Omicron infections.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Delta variant quickly rose to dominance in mid-2021, displacing other variants, including Alpha. Studies using data from the United Kingdom and India estimated that Delta was 40-80% more transmissible than Alpha, allowing Delta to become the globally dominant variant. However, it was unclear if the ostensible difference in relative transmissibility was due mostly to innate properties of Delta’s infectiousness or differences in the study populations. To investigate, we formed a partnership with SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance programs from all six New England US states. By comparing logistic growth rates, we found that Delta emerged 37-163% faster than Alpha in early 2021 (37% Massachusetts, 75% New Hampshire, 95% Maine, 98% Rhode Island, 151% Connecticut, and 163% Vermont). We next computed variant-specific effective reproductive numbers and estimated that Delta was 58-120% more transmissible than Alpha across New England (58% New Hampshire, 68% Massachusetts, 76% Connecticut, 85% Rhode Island, 98% Maine, and 120% Vermont). Finally, using RT-PCR data, we estimated that Delta infections generate on average ∼6 times more viral RNA copies per mL than Alpha infections. Overall, our evidence indicates that Delta’s enhanced transmissibility could be attributed to its innate ability to increase infectiousness, but its epidemiological dynamics may vary depending on the underlying immunity and behavior of distinct populations.

Effectively monitoring the spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants is essential to efforts to counter the ongoing pandemic. Wastewater monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 RNA has proven an effective and efficient technique to approximate COVID-19 case rates in the population. Predicting variant abundances from wastewater, however, is technically challenging. Here we show that by sequencing SARS-CoV-2 RNA in wastewater and applying computational techniques initially used for RNA-Seq quantification, we can estimate the abundance of variants in wastewater samples. We show by sequencing samples from wastewater and clinical isolates in Connecticut U.S.A. between January and April 2021 that the temporal dynamics of variant strains broadly correspond. We further show that this technique can be used with other wastewater sequencing techniques by expanding to samples taken across the United States in a similar timeframe. We find high variability in signal among individual samples, and limited ability to detect the presence of variants with clinical frequencies

BackgroundThe underlying immunologic deficiencies enabling severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection are currently unknown. We describe deep longitudinal immune profiling of a transplant recipient hospitalized twice for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsA 66-year-old male renal transplant recipient was hospitalized with COVID-19 March 2020 then readmitted to the hospital with COVID-19 233 days after initial diagnosis. Virologic and immunologic investigations were performed on samples from the primary and secondary infections.ResultsWhole viral genome sequencing and phylogenetic analysis revealed that viruses causing both infections were caused by distinct genetic lineages without evidence of immune escape mutations. Longitudinal comparison of cellular and humoral responses during primary SARS-CoV-2 infection revealed that this patient responded to the primary infection with low neutralization titer anti–SARS-CoV-2 antibodies that were likely present at the time of reinfection.ConclusionsThe development of neutralizing antibodies and humoral memory responses in this patient failed to confer protection against reinfection, suggesting that they were below a neutralizing titer threshold or that additional factors may be required for efficient prevention of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Development of poorly neutralizing antibodies may have been due to profound and relatively specific reduction in naive CD4 T-cell pools. Seropositivity alone may not be a perfect correlate of protection in immunocompromised patients.

Emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants have shaped the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic and the public health discourse around effective control measures. Evaluating the public health threat posed by a new variant is essential for appropriately adapting response efforts when community transmission is detected. However, this assessment requires that a true comparison can be made between the new variant and its predecessors because factors other than the virus genotype may influence spread and transmission. In this study, we develop a framework that integrates genomic surveillance data to estimate the relative effective reproduction number (Rt) of co-circulating lineages. We use Connecticut, a state in the northeastern United States in which the SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.1.7 and B.1.526 co-circulated in early 2021, as a case study for implementing this framework. We find that the Rt of B.1.1.7 was 6-10% larger than that of B.1.526 in Connecticut in the midst of a COVID-19 vaccination campaign. To assess the generalizability of this framework, we apply it to genomic surveillance data from New York City and observe the same trend. Finally, we use discrete phylogeography to demonstrate that while both variants were introduced into Connecticut at comparable frequencies, clades that resulted from introductions of B.1.1.7 were larger than those resulting from B.1.526 introductions. Our framework, which uses open-source methods requiring minimal computational resources, may be used to monitor near real-time variant dynamics in a myriad of settings.

After the Zika virus (ZIKV) epidemic in the Americas in 2016, both Zika and dengue incidence declined to record lows in many countries in 2017-2018, but in 2019 dengue resurged in Brazil, causing ~2.1 million cases. In this study we use epidemiological, climatological and genomic data to investigate dengue dynamics in recent years in Brazil. First, we estimate dengue virus force of infection (FOI) and model mosquito-borne transmission suitability since the early 2000s. Our estimates reveal that DENV transmission was low in 2017-2018, despite conditions being suitable for viral spread. Our study also shows a marked decline in dengue susceptibility between 2002 and 2019, which could explain the synchronous decline of dengue in the country, partially as a result of protective immunity from prior ZIKV and/or DENV infections. Furthermore, we performed phylogeographic analyses using 69 newly sequenced genomes of dengue virus serotype 1 and 2 from Brazil, and found that the outbreaks in 2018-2019 were caused by local DENV lineages that persisted for 5-10 years, circulating cryptically before and after the Zika epidemic. We hypothesize that DENV lineages may circulate at low transmission levels for many years, until local conditions are suitable for higher transmission, when they cause major outbreaks. ispartof: NATURE COMMUNICATIONS vol:12 issue:1 ispartof: location:England status: published

The underlying immunologic deficiencies enabling SARS-CoV-2 reinfections are currently unknown. Here we describe a renal-transplant recipient who developed recurrent, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection 7 months after primary infection. To elucidate the immunological mechanisms responsible for reinfection, we performed longitudinal profiling of cellular and humoral responses during both primary and recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found that the patient responded to the primary infection with transient, poor-quality adaptive immune responses that was further compromised by intervening treatment for acute rejection of the renal allograft prior to reinfection. Importantly, we identified the development of neutralizing antibodies and humoral memory responses prior to SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. However, these neutralizing antibodies failed to confer protection against reinfection, suggesting that additional factors are required for efficient prevention of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Further, we found no evidence supporting viral evasion of primary adaptive immune responses, suggesting that susceptibility to reinfection may be determined by host factors rather than pathogen adaptation.

SummaryPrior to the emergence of antigenically distinct SARS-CoV-2 variants, reinfections were reported infrequently - presumably due to the generation of durable and protective immune responses. However, case reports also suggested that rare, repeated infections may occur as soon as 48 days following initial disease onset. The underlying immunologic deficiencies enabling SARS-CoV-2 reinfections are currently unknown. Here we describe a renal transplant recipient who developed recurrent, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection - confirmed by whole virus genome sequencing - 7 months after primary infection. To elucidate the immunological mechanisms responsible for SARS-CoV-2 reinfection, we performed longitudinal profiling of cellular and humoral responses during both primary and recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found that the patient responded to the primary infection with transient, poor-quality adaptive immune responses. The patient’s immune system was further compromised by intervening treatment for acute rejection of the renal allograft prior to reinfection. Importantly, we also identified the development of neutralizing antibodies and the formation of humoral memory responses prior to SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. However, these neutralizing antibodies failed to confer protection against reinfection, suggesting that additional factors are required for efficient prevention of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Further, we found no evidence supporting viral evasion of primary adaptive immune responses, suggesting that susceptibility to reinfection may be determined by host factors rather than pathogen adaptation in this patient. In summary, our study suggests that a low neutralizing antibody presence alone is not sufficient to confer resistance against reinfection. Thus, patients with solid organ transplantation, or patients who are otherwise immunosuppressed, who recover from infection with SARS-CoV-2 may not develop sufficient protective immunity and are at risk of reinfection.

Most currently approved strategies for the collection of saliva for COVID-19 diagnostics require specialized tubes containing buffers promoted for the stabilization of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and virus inactivation. Yet many of these are expensive, in limited supply, and not necessarily validated specifically for viral RNA. While saliva is a promising sample type as it can be reliably self-collected for the sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2, the expense and availability of these collection tubes are prohibitive to mass testing efforts. Therefore, we investigated the stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and infectious virus detection from saliva without supplementation. We tested RNA stability over extended periods of time (2-25 days) and at temperatures representing at-home storage and elevated temperatures which might be experienced when cold chain transport may be unavailable. We found SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva from infected individuals is stable at 4°C, room temperature (~19°C), and 30°C for prolonged periods and found limited evidence for viral replication in stored saliva samples. This work demonstrates that expensive saliva collection options involving RNA stabilization and virus inactivation buffers are not always needed, permitting the use of cheaper collection options. Affordable testing methods are urgently needed to meet current testing demands and for continued surveillance in reopening strategies.

SalivaDirect™ is an RNA-extraction free, dual-plexed RT-qPCR method for SARS-CoV-2 detection. It can be broadly implemented as it (1) does not require saliva collection tubes containing preservatives, (2) does not require specialized equipment for RNA extraction, and (3) is validated for use with products from multiple vendors. Thus, the simplicity and flexibility of SalivaDirect™ means that it is not as affected by supply chain bottlenecks as some other assays. Our method is RNA-extraction free which enables testing of low volume and minimally processed saliva in dual-plexed RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Saliva will be treated with proteinase K followed by a heat inactivation step, and is then directly used as input in the dual-plexed RT-qPCR test. Our aim was not to design new primers and probes for RT-qPCR testing, but rather to use validated primer and probe sets (N1 and RP) developed by the US CDC. The human Ribonuclease P (RP) probe was modified with a different fluorophore so that the primer/probe set could be combined in a dualplex assay, reducing the number of tests to 1 assay with 2 sets. Version 2 includes: Optimized thermocycler conditions Locally validated alternative options for Proteinase K, RT-qPCR master mix, and thermocyclers Use of 8-strip tubes for sample processing step, due to contamination issues in 96-well plates. Version 3 has been updated to remove steps for sample self-collection. Version 4 has updated Ct thresholds for the ABI 7500 Fast Dx. Version 5 has an updated description for use, additional RP probe with ATTO647 fluorophore, and a detailed table with catalog numbers. Version 6 includes: Introducing multiple workflows for sample processing including heat Pre-treatment as an alternative to Proteinase K Updated list of RT-qPCR reagents, theromcyclers and protocol for 384 well format.

SummaryThe emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7, first detected in the United Kingdom, has become a global public health concern because of its increased transmissibility. Over 2500 COVID-19 cases associated with this variant have been detected in the US since December 2020, but the extent of establishment is relatively unknown. Using travel, genomic, and diagnostic data, we highlight the primary ports of entry for B.1.1.7 in the US and locations of possible underreporting of B.1.1.7 cases. Furthermore, we found evidence for many independent B.1.1.7 establishments starting in early December 2020, followed by interstate spread by the end of the month. Finally, we project that B.1.1.7 will be the dominant lineage in many states by mid to late March. Thus, genomic surveillance for B.1.1.7 and other variants urgently needs to be enhanced to better inform the public health response.

While several clinical and immunological parameters correlate with disease severity and mortality in SARS-CoV-2 infection, work remains in identifying unifying correlates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that can be used to guide clinical practice. Here, we examine saliva and nasopharyngeal (NP) viral load over time and correlate them with patient demographics, and cellular and immune profiling. We found that saliva viral load was significantly higher in those with COVID-19 risk factors; that it correlated with increasing levels of disease severity and showed a superior ability over nasopharyngeal viral load as a predictor of mortality over time (AUC=0.90). A comprehensive analysis of immune factors and cell subsets revealed strong predictors of high and low saliva viral load, which were associated with increased disease severity or better overall outcomes, respectively. Saliva viral load was positively associated with many known COVID-19 inflammatory markers such as IL-6, IL-18, IL-10, and CXCL10, as well as type 1 immune response cytokines. Higher saliva viral loads strongly correlated with the progressive depletion of platelets, lymphocytes, and effector T cell subsets including circulating follicular CD4 T cells (cTfh). Anti-spike (S) and anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG levels were negatively correlated with saliva viral load showing a strong temporal association that could help distinguish severity and mortality in COVID-19. Finally, patients with fatal COVID-19 exhibited higher viral loads, which correlated with the depletion of cTfh cells, and lower production of anti-RBD and anti-S IgG levels. Together these results demonstrated that viral load – as measured by saliva but not nasopharyngeal — is a dynamic unifying correlate of disease presentation, severity, and mortality over time.

With the emergence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants that may increase transmissibility and/or cause escape from immune responses, there is an urgent need for the targeted surveillance of circulating lineages. It was found that the B.1.1.7 (also 501Y.V1) variant, first detected in the United Kingdom, could be serendipitously detected by the Thermo Fisher TaqPath Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) PCR assay because a key deletion in these viruses, spike Δ69-70, would cause a "spike gene target failure" (SGTF) result. However, a SGTF result is not definitive for B.1.1.7, and this assay cannot detect other variants of concern (VOC) that lack spike Δ69-70, such as B.1.351 (also 501Y.V2), detected in South Africa, and P.1 (also 501Y.V3), recently detected in Brazil. We identified a deletion in the ORF1a gene (ORF1a Δ3675-3677) in all 3 variants, which has not yet been widely detected in other SARS-CoV-2 lineages. Using ORF1a Δ3675-3677 as the primary target and spike Δ69-70 to differentiate, we designed and validated an open-source PCR assay to detect SARS-CoV-2 VOC. Our assay can be rapidly deployed in laboratories around the world to enhance surveillance for the local emergence and spread of B.1.1.7, B.1.351, and P.1.

COVID-19 manifests with a wide spectrum of clinical phenotypes that are characterized by exaggerated and misdirected host immune responses1–8. While pathological innate immune activation is well documented in severe disease1, the impact of autoantibodies on disease progression is less defined. Here, we used a high-throughput autoantibody discovery technique called Rapid Extracellular Antigen Profiling (REAP) to screen a cohort of 194 SARS-CoV-2 infected COVID-19 patients and healthcare workers for autoantibodies against 2,770 extracellular and secreted proteins (the “exoproteome”). We found that COVID-19 patients exhibit dramatic increases in autoantibody reactivities compared to uninfected controls, with a high prevalence of autoantibodies against immunomodulatory proteins including cytokines, chemokines, complement components, and cell surface proteins. We established that these autoantibodies perturb immune function and impair virological control by inhibiting immunoreceptor signaling and by altering peripheral immune cell composition, and found that murine surrogates of these autoantibodies exacerbate disease severity in a mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Analysis of autoantibodies against tissue-associated antigens revealed associations with specific clinical characteristics and disease severity. In summary, these findings implicate a pathological role for exoproteome-directed autoantibodies in COVID-19 with diverse impacts on immune functionality and associations with clinical outcomes.

COVID-19 manifests with a wide spectrum of clinical phenotypes that are characterized by exaggerated and misdirected host immune responses

The emergence of the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2 has led to increases in both infections and hospitalizations among adolescents. Little is known about the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine in adolescents in the general population, as opposed to a clinical trial population.To estimate the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years.This was a matched case-control study among adolescents (aged 12-18 years) who had results from a SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. Immunization histories, relevant clinical data, and RT-PCR test results were obtained from the Yale New Haven Health System's medical records between June 1, 2021, and August 15, 2021, when the Delta variant caused 92% of infections in Connecticut. Case participants were defined as adolescents who had a positive test result and an associated medical encounter. Control participants were defined as those who had a negative test result and were matched to a case participant by age, county of residence, and date of testing.Adolescents were defined as fully immunized if they had received 2 doses of vaccine at least 14 days before focal time.The primary outcome measured was SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by RT-PCR. The vaccine's effectiveness (VE) was estimated using matched odds ratios from conditional logistic regression models. Secondary measures included estimated VE by clinical symptoms, number of vaccine doses received, and elapsed time from immunization.A total of 6901 adolescents were tested for SARS-CoV-2. The final sample comprised 186 case participants and 356 matched control participants. The median age was 14 (IQR, 13-16) years, 262 (48%) identified as female, 81 (15%) as Black, 82 (15%) as Hispanic, and 297 (55%) as White. Overall, 134 (25%) were fully immunized (case participants, 10 [5%]; control participants, 124 [35%]). The median time between immunization and the SARS-CoV-2 test was 62 days (range, 17-129 days). Within 4 months of receiving 2 doses, VE against any infection was estimated to be 91% (95% CI, 80%-96%); against asymptomatic infection, 85% (95% CI, 57%-95%). Effectiveness after a single dose was estimated to be 74% (95% CI, 18%-92%).In this retrospective case-control study of US adolescents, 2 doses of BNT162b2 vaccine appeared to provide excellent protection for at least 4 months after immunization against both symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Background SARS-CoV-2 infections are characterized by viral proliferation and clearance phases and can be followed by low-level viral RNA shedding. The dynamics of viral RNA concentration, particularly in the early stages of infection, can inform clinical measures and interventions such as test-based screening. Methods We used prospective longitudinal RT-qPCR testing to measure the viral RNA trajectories for 68 individuals during the resumption of the 2019-20 National Basketball Association season. For 46 individuals with acute infections, we inferred the peak viral concentration and the duration of the viral proliferation and clearance phases. Findings On average, viral RNA concentrations peaked 2.7 days (95% credible interval [1.2, 3.8]) after first detection at a cycle threshold value of 22.4 [20.6, 24.1]. The viral clearance phase lasted longer for symptomatic individuals (10.5 days [6.5, 14.0]) than for asymptomatic individuals (6.7 days [3.2, 9.2]). A second test within 2 days after an initial positive PCR substantially improves certainty about a patient’s infection phase. The effective sensitivity of a test intended to identify infectious individuals declines substantially with test turnaround time. Interpretation SARS-CoV-2 viral concentrations peak rapidly regardless of symptoms. Sequential tests can help reveal a patient’s progress through infection stages. Frequent rapid-turnaround testing is needed to effectively screen individuals before they become infectious. Funding NWO Rubicon 019.181EN.004 (CBFV); clinical research agreement with the NBA and NBPA (NDG); Huffman Family Donor Advised Fund (NDG); Fast Grant funding from the Emergent Ventures at the Mercatus Center; George Mason University (NDG); the Morris-Singer Fund for the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (YHG). Research in Context Evidence before this study SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamics affect clinical and public health measures, informing patient care, testing algorithms, contact tracing protocols, and clinical trial design. We searched Web of Science using the search terms “ALL = ((SARS-CoV-2 OR COVID-19) AND (viral OR RNA) AND (load OR concentration OR shedding) AND (dynamic* OR kinetic* OR trajector*))” which returned 83 references. Of these, 22 were not pertinent to within-host SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamics. The remaining 61 studies tracked SARS-CoV-2 viral trajectories in a variety of geographic locations and patient populations. Together, these studies report that viral titers normally peak at or before the onset of symptoms and that a long tail of intermittent positive tests can follow a period of acute infection. Plasma but not nasopharyngeal viral concentration is associated with increased disease severity. Most studies tracked hospitalized patients after the onset of symptoms. Two of the studies tracked pre-symptomatic and/or asymptomatic patients, but these were too sparsely sampled to clearly discern viral dynamics during the earliest stage of infection. Added value of this study We implemented prospective longitudinal real time quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 in a cohort of individuals during the resumption of the 2019-20 National Basketball Association season. This allowed us to explicitly measure viral titers during the full course of 46 acute infections. Consistent with other studies, we find that peak viral concentrations do not differ substantially between symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals but that symptomatic individuals take longer to clear the virus than asymptomatic individuals. For both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals, viral titers normally peak within 3 days of the first positive test. This study is the first to describe the time course of viral concentrations during the earliest stage of infection when individuals are most likely to be infectious. Implications of all the available evidence Symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals follow similar SARS-CoV-2 viral trajectories. Due to the rapid progression from first possible detection to peak viral concentration, frequent rapid-turnaround testing is needed to screen individuals prior to them becoming infectious.

SalivaDirect™ is an RNA-extraction free, dual-plexed RT-qPCR method for SARS-CoV-2 detection. It can be broadly implemented as it (1) does not require saliva collection tubes containing preservatives, (2) does not require specialized equipment for RNA extraction, and (3) is validated for use with products from multiple vendors. Thus, the simplicity and flexibility of SalivaDirect™ means that it is not as affected by supply chain bottlenecks as some other assays. Our method is RNA-extraction free which enables testing of low volume and minimally processed saliva in dual-plexed RT-qPCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Saliva will be treated with proteinase K followed by a heat inactivation step, and is then directly used as input in the dual-plexed RT-qPCR test. Our aim was not to design new primers and probes for RT-qPCR testing, but rather to use validated primer and probe sets (N1 and RP) developed by the US CDC. The human Ribonuclease P (RP) probe was modified with a different fluorophore so that the primer/probe set could be combined in a dualplex assay, reducing the number of tests to 1 assay with 2 sets. Version 2 includes: Optimized thermocycler conditions Locally validated alternative options for Proteinase K, RT-qPCR master mix, and thermocyclers Use of 8-strip tubes for sample processing step, due to contamination issues in 96-well plates. Version 3 has been updated to remove steps for sample self-collection. Version 4 has updated Ct thresholds for the ABI 7500 Fast Dx. Version 5 has an updated description for use, additional RP probe with ATTO647 fluorophore, and a detailed table with catalog numbers.

After Zika virus (ZIKV) emerged and caused an epidemic in the Americas in 2016, both Zika and dengue incidence declined in the following years (2017-2018) to a record low in many countries. Following this period of low incidence, dengue resurged in 2019 in Brazil, causing ~2.1 million cases. The reasons for the recent fluctuations in dengue incidence and the maintenance of dengue virus (DENV) through periods of low transmission are unknown. To investigate this, we used a combination of epidemiological and climatological data to estimate dengue force of infection (FOI) and model mosquito-borne transmission suitability since the early 2000s in Brazil. Our estimates of FOI revealed that the rate of DENV transmission in 2018-2019 was exceptionally low, due to a low proportion of susceptible population rather than changes to ecological conditions. This supports the hypothesis that the synchronous decline of dengue in Brazil may be explained by protective immunity from pre-exposure to ZIKV and/or DENV in prior years. Furthermore, we sequenced 69 genomes of dengue virus serotype 1 (DENV-1) and DENV-2 circulating in Northeast and Southeast Brazil, and performed phylogeographic analyses to uncover patterns of viral spread. We found that the outbreaks in Brazil in 2019 were caused by DENV lineages that were circulating locally prior to the Zika epidemic and spread cryptically during the period of low transmission. Despite the period of low transmission, endemic DENV lineages persisted for 5-10 years in Brazil before causing major outbreaks. Our study challenges the paradigm that dengue outbreaks are caused by recently introduced new lineages, but rather they may be driven by established lineages circulating at low levels until the conditions are conducive for outbreaks.

Most currently approved strategies for the collection of saliva for COVID-19 diagnostics require specialized tubes containing buffers promoted for the stabilization of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and virus inactivation. Yet many of these are expensive, in limited supply, and not necessarily validated specifically for viral RNA. While saliva is a promising sample type as it can be reliably self-collected for the sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2, the expense and availability of these collection tubes are prohibitive to mass testing efforts. Therefore, we investigated the stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and infectious virus detection from saliva without supplementation. We tested RNA stability over extended periods of time (2-25 days) and at temperatures representing at-home storage and elevated temperatures which might be experienced when cold chain transport may be unavailable. We found SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva from infected individuals is stable at 4°C, room temperature (∼19°C), and 30°C for prolonged periods and found limited evidence for viral replication in stored saliva samples. This work demonstrates that expensive saliva collection options involving RNA stabilization and virus inactivation buffers are not always needed, permitting the use of cheaper collection options. Affordable testing methods are urgently needed to meet current testing demands and for continued surveillance in reopening strategies.

The recent spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exemplifies the critical need for accurate and rapid diagnostic assays to prompt clinical and public health interventions. Currently, several quantitative reverse transcription–PCR (RT–qPCR) assays are being used by clinical, research and public health laboratories. However, it is currently unclear whether results from different tests are comparable. Our goal was to make independent evaluations of primer–probe sets used in four common SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic assays. From our comparisons of RT–qPCR analytical efficiency and sensitivity, we show that all primer–probe sets can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2 at 500 viral RNA copies per reaction. The exception for this is the RdRp-SARSr (Charite) confirmatory primer–probe set which has low sensitivity, probably due to a mismatch to circulating SARS-CoV-2 in the reverse primer. We did not find evidence for background amplification with pre-COVID-19 samples or recent SARS-CoV-2 evolution decreasing sensitivity. Our recommendation for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing is to select an assay with high sensitivity and that is regionally used, to ease comparability between outcomes. This is a comparative analysis of the performance of the primer–probe sets from four open-source molecular diagnostic assays for SARS-CoV-2 recommended by the World Health Organization.

BackgroundHighly sensitive, non-invasive, and easily accessible diagnostics for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are essential for the control of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. There is a clear need to establish a gold standard diagnostic for SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans using respiratory tract specimens.MethodsSearches will be conducted in the bibliographic databases Medline, Embase, bioRxiv, medRxiv, F1000, ChemRxiv, PeerJ Preprints, Preprints.org, Beilstein Archive, and Research Square. Relevant government documents and grey literature will be sought on the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorizations website, the ECDC’s website, and the website of the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics. Finally, papers categorized as diagnosis papers by the EPPI Centre’s COVID-19 living systematic map will be added to our screening process; those papers are tagged with the diagnosis topic based on human review, rather than database searches, and thus this set of papers might include ones that have not been captured by our search strategy.

The recent spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exemplifies the critical need for accurate and rapid diagnostic assays to prompt clinical and public health interventions. Currently, several quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) assays are being used by clinical, research, and public health laboratories. However, it is currently unclear if results from different tests are comparable. Our goal was to evaluate the primer-probe sets used in four common diagnostic assays available on the World Health Organization (WHO) website. To facilitate this effort, we generated RNA transcripts to be used as assay standards and distributed them to other laboratories for internal validation. We then used these (1) RNA transcript standards, (2) full-length SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and (3) pre-COVID-19 nasopharyngeal swabs, and (4) clinical samples from COVID-19 patients to determine analytical efficiency and sensitivity of the qRT-PCR primer-probe sets. We show that all primer-probe sets can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2, but there are clear differences in the ability to differentiate between true negatives and positives with low amounts of virus. We found that several primer-probe sets cross-react with SARS-CoV-2-negative nasopharyngeal swabs. However, background cross-reactivity by the 2019-nCoV_N2 set issued by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention did not interfere with outcomes of the combined 9N19 and 9N29 assay when testing COVID-19 clinical samples. Our findings characterize the limitations of currently used primer-probe sets and can assist other laboratories in selecting appropriate assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Summary The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States in January 2020, with subsequent COVID-19 outbreaks detected in all 50 states by early March. To uncover the sources of SARS-CoV-2 introductions and patterns of spread within the United States, we sequenced nine viral genomes from early reported COVID-19 patients in Connecticut. Our phylogenetic analysis places the majority of these genomes with viruses sequenced from Washington state. By coupling our genomic data with domestic and international travel patterns, we show that early SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Connecticut was likely driven by domestic introductions. Moreover, the risk of domestic importation to Connecticut exceeded that of international importation by mid-March regardless of our estimated effects of federal travel restrictions. This study provides evidence of widespread sustained transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within the United States and highlights the critical need for local surveillance., Graphical Abstract, Highlights • Connecticut’s COVID-19 outbreak resulted from multiple domestic virus introductions • SARS-CoV-2 genomic data indicate that coast-to-coast spread occurred in the United States • Risk of introduction by domestic air travel exceeded international travel in March • Restrictions on international travel did not significantly alter risk estimates, Using genomics and air travel information, the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States from coast to coast is shown to be more a consequence of domestic introductions than of international travel.

The emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7, first detected in the United Kingdom, has become a global public health concern because of its increased transmissibility. Over 2500 COVID-19 cases associated with this variant have been detected in the US since December 2020, but the extent of establishment is relatively unknown. Using travel, genomic, and diagnostic data, we highlight that the primary ports of entry for B.1.1.7 in the US were in New York, California, and Florida. Furthermore, we found evidence for many independent B.1.1.7 establishments starting in early December 2020, followed by interstate spread by the end of the month. Finally, we project that B.1.1.7 will be the dominant lineage in many states by mid to late March. Thus, genomic surveillance for B.1.1.7 and other variants urgently needs to be enhanced to better inform the public health response., The SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 was introduced to the United States in early December 2020 and soon became established within many communities. The primary points of entry into the US are identified as NY, CA, and FL, and exponential growth in these states resulted in spread to neighboring states.

Cancer patients display immunomodulation related to malignancy and anti-cancer therapies, but how these factors impact COVID-19 remains unknown. To investigate immune responses in cancer patients with COVID-19, we undertook a prospective case-control study, enrolling hospitalized solid tumor patients with acute COVID-19, as well as age-, gender-, and comorbidity-matched COVID-19 patients without cancer as controls. Using biospecimens collected during hospitalization, we performed virologic measurements as well as in-depth immunophenotyping of cellular, antibody and cytokine responses. We enrolled 17 cancer patients (cases) admitted to Yale-New Haven Hospital between March 15 and June 30, 2020 with COVID-19, as well as 17 matched non-cancer patients (controls) admitted with COVID-19. No significant differences were observed between cases and controls based on patient characteristics (age, gender, race, co-morbidities, smoking history, days from symptom onset to COVID-19 diagnosis) or outcomes (COVID-19 severity, length of hospital stay, rate of intubation or mortality). The most common primary tumor sites were lung (4/17) and gastrointestinal (4/17); all cases had received cancer-directed therapy within 6 months of COVID-19 diagnosis, with 13/17 receiving treatment less than 1 month prior to hospitalization. Three of 17 cases had received immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies. Despite having similar SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA loads at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis when compared with controls, cancer cases had increased viral RNA abundance during hospitalization, suggesting slower clearance. Antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 were preserved in cancer cases, with cases displaying similar levels of IgM and IgG antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2 epitopes compared to controls. Cytokine profiling revealed higher plasma levels of CCL3, IL1A and CXCL12 in cancer cases compared to controls. Using flow cytometric immunophenotyping, we found that innate immune and non-T cell adaptive immune parameters were similar between cases and controls hospitalized with COVID-19. However, among cancer cases on conventional therapies, T cell lymphopenia was more profound, and these cases demonstrated higher levels of CD8+ exhausted (CD8+CD45RA−PD1+TIM3+), CD8+GranzymeB+ and CD4+CD38+HLA-DR+ and CD8+CD38+HLA-DR+ activated T cells when compared with controls; interestingly, these differences were not observed in patients who had received immune checkpoint inhibition. Thus, we found reduced viral RNA clearance and specific alterations in T cell and cytokine responses in cancer patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with matched controls with COVID-19. This dysregulated T cell response in cancer patients, which may reflect immune modulation due to chronic antigen stimulation as well as cancer therapies, may lead to altered virologic and clinical outcomes in this population. Citation Format: Michael Chiorazzi, Erin Silva, Kristina Brower, Patrick Wong, Carolina Lucas, Jon Klein, Feimei Liu, Maura Nakahata, Jun Zhao, Nur-Taz Rahman, Camila Odio, Santos Bermejo, Shelli F. Farhadian, Charles Dela Cruz, Arnau Casanovas-Massana, John Fournier, Catherine Muenker, Anne L. Wyllie, Chantal B.F. Vogels, Chaney C. Kalinich, Mary E. Petrone, Isabel M. Ott, Anne E. Watkins, Adam J. Moore, Tara Alpert, Yuval Kluger, Aaron Ring, Nathan D. Grubaugh, Akiko Iwasaki, Albert I. Ko, Roy S. Herbst. Cancer patients display diminished viral RNA clearance and altered T cell responses during SARS-CoV-2 infection [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer; 2021 Feb 3-5. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2021;27(6_Suppl):Abstract nr S03-03.

Background Scaling SARS-CoV-2 testing to meet demands of safe reopenings continues to be plagued by assay costs and supply chain shortages. In response, we developed SalivaDirect, which received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Methods We simplified our saliva-based diagnostic test by (1) not requiring collection tubes with preservatives, (2) replacing nucleic acid extraction with a simple enzymatic and heating step, and (3) testing specimens with a dualplex qRT-PCR assay. Moreover, we validated SalivaDirect with reagents and instruments from multiple vendors to minimize supply chain issues. Findings From our hospital cohort, we show a high positive agreement (94%) between saliva tested with SalivaDirect and nasopharyngeal swabs tested with a commercial qRT-PCR kit. In partnership with the National Basketball Association (NBA) and National Basketball Players Association (NBPA), we tested 3,779 saliva specimens from healthy individuals and detected low rates of invalid (0.3%) and false-positive (, Context and Significance Frequent testing is critical to limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission. In response to this need, we developed SalivaDirect, a sensitive, simplified, and flexible testing framework, which received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We tested saliva collected from a hospital cohort and showed a high positive agreement (94%) as compared to paired nasopharyngeal swabs tested with a commercial diagnostic kit. Then, we partnered with the National Basketball Association (NBA) to test a large cohort of mostly healthy individuals, and we detected low rates of invalid (0.3%) and false-positive (0.03%–0.05%) results. Our study shows that SalivaDirect can help to increase testing capacity by providing access to an affordable framework that is less prone to supply chain shortages., Graphical Abstract, Highlights SalivaDirect is a simplified saliva-based test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 The testing framework is flexible to minimize the risk of supply chain issues SalivaDirect is sensitive, with low rates of invalid and false-positive results Laboratories can be designated to use SalivaDirect to increase testing capacity, SalivaDirect is a sensitive saliva-based COVID-19 diagnostic test, which received Emergency Use Authorization from the U.S. FDA. With the ability to designate other laboratories, the flexible and simplified framework helps to increase the capacity of existing laboratory infrastructure for SARS-CoV-2 testing.

Genomic epidemiology can provide a unique, real-time understanding of SARS-CoV-2 transmission patterns. Yet the potential for genomic analyses to guide local policy and community-based behavioral decisions is limited because they are often oriented towards specially trained scientists and conducted on a national or global scale. Here, we propose a new paradigm: Phylogenetic analyses performed on a local level (municipal, county, or state), with results communicated in a clear, timely, and actionable manner to strengthen public health responses. We believe that presenting results rapidly, and tailored to a non-expert audience, can serve as a template for effective public health response to COVID-19 and other emerging viral diseases., This Perspective article proposes a new paradigm to present SARS-CoV-2 phylogenetic analyses performed on a local level (municipal, county, or state), with results communicated in a clear, timely, and actionable manner. The authors believe that presenting results rapidly, and tailored to a non-expert audience, can serve as a template for effective public health communication for COVID-19 and other emerging viral diseases.

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States in January 2020, with subsequent COVID-19 outbreaks detected in all 50 states by early March. To uncover the sources of SARS-CoV-2 introductions and patterns of spread within the United States, we sequenced nine viral genomes from early reported COVID-19 patients in Connecticut. Our phylogenetic analysis places the majority of these genomes with viruses sequenced from Washington state. By coupling our genomic data with domestic and international travel patterns, we show that early SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Connecticut was likely driven by domestic introductions. Moreover, the risk of domestic importation to Connecticut exceeded that of international importation by mid-March regardless of our estimated effects of federal travel restrictions. This study provides evidence of widespread sustained transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within the United States and highlights the critical need for local surveillance.

The underlying immunologic deficiencies enabling SARS-CoV-2 reinfections are currently unknown. Here we describe a renal-transplant recipient who developed recurrent, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection 7 months after primary infection. To elucidate the immunological mechanisms responsible for reinfection, we performed longitudinal profiling of cellular and humoral responses during both primary and recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found that the patient responded to the primary infection with transient, poor-quality adaptive immune responses that was further compromised by intervening treatment for acute rejection of the renal allograft prior to reinfection. Importantly, we identified the development of neutralizing antibodies and humoral memory responses prior to SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. However, these neutralizing antibodies failed to confer protection against reinfection, suggesting that additional factors are required for efficient prevention of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection. Further, we found no evidence supporting viral evasion of primary adaptive immune responses, suggesting that susceptibility to reinfection may be determined by host factors rather than pathogen adaptation.