A Comprehensive Review on the Current Vaccines and Their Efficacies to Combat SARS-CoV-2 Variants.

Since the first case of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2019, SARS-CoV-2 infection has affected many individuals worldwide. Eventually, some highly infectious mutants-caused by frequent genetic recombination-have been reported for SARS-CoV-2 that can potentially escape from the immune responses and induce long-term immunity, linked with a high mortality rate. In addition, several reports stated that vaccines designed for the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type variant have mixed responses against the variants of concern (VOCs) and variants of interest (VOIs) in the human population. These results advocate the designing and development of a panvaccine with the potential to neutralize all the possible emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2. In this context, recent discoveries suggest the design of SARS-CoV-2 panvaccines using nanotechnology, siRNA, antibodies or CRISPR-Cas platforms. Thereof, the present comprehensive review summarizes the current vaccine design approaches against SARS-CoV-2 infection, the role of genetic mutations in the emergence of new viral variants, the efficacy of existing vaccines in limiting the infection of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants, and efforts or challenges in designing SARS panvaccines.

Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 epidemiology in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVES: The influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus caused a worldwide pandemic in 2009-2010 and has since remained in seasonal circulation. This study was conducted to determine any variations in the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 status according to sex, age group, sample type, or location within the Eastern Province of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Samples from 749 patients with suspected Middle East respiratory coronavirus who presented to Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare facilities in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia were tested reflexively for influenza A/H1N1 2009 by the Ministry of Health using the RealTime ready Influenza A/H1N1 Detection Set for real-time PCR. The sample types included nasopharyngeal swabs (n=677), expectorated deep cough sputum (n=32), induced sputum (n=17), and tracheal aspirates (n=23). RESULTS: The incidence of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was higher among younger patients; 27.94% of patients in the 0-19-year age group tested positive compared to only 3.51% of patients in the ≥80-year age group. The incidence of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was higher in Ras Tanura city compared to other locations in the Eastern Province. CONCLUSIONS: Younger individuals in the Eastern Province of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia had a relatively higher risk of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection. Additionally, an outbreak of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 may have occurred in Ras Tanura city between April 2015 and February 2016.

Comparison of Cepheid® Xpert Flu and Roche RealTime Ready Influenza A/H1N1 Detection Set for detection of influenza A/H1N1.

OBJECTIVE: To compare two influenza polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods. METHODS: A total of 749 suspected MERS-CoV patients presenting at Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare, Saudi Arabia, each submitted a clinical sample for influenza A reflex testing using the on-site Cepheid® Xpert Flu assay and at the Ministry of Health laboratory by the Roche PCR assay. RESULTS: There was 92.12% overall agreement between the two methods. Specificity of the Cepheid® Xpert Flu was 95.8% for H1N1 and 94.4% for total influenza A. Cepheid® Xpert Flu sensitivity for influenza A was 100% for younger patients (0-19-year age group) but significantly lower both for older patients (68.2% for 60-79-year and 50% for ≥80-year age groups) and overall for males compared to females (72.6% and 94.0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Specificity of the Cepheid® Xpert Flu test was high; however, sensitivity for total influenza A was lower particularly in males and older patients.