The Omicron variant is highly resistant against antibody-mediated neutralization: Implications for control of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant suggests that the virus might become globally dominant. Further, the high number of mutations in the viral spike protein raised concerns that the virus might evade antibodies induced by infection or vaccination. Here, we report that the Omicron spike was resistant against most therapeutic antibodies but remained susceptible to inhibition by sotrovimab. Similarly, the Omicron spike evaded neutralization by antibodies from convalescent patients or individuals vaccinated with the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine (BNT162b2) with 12- to 44-fold higher efficiency than the spike of the Delta variant. Neutralization of the Omicron spike by antibodies induced upon heterologous ChAdOx1 (Astra Zeneca-Oxford)/BNT162b2 vaccination or vaccination with three doses of BNT162b2 was more efficient, but the Omicron spike still evaded neutralization more efficiently than the Delta spike. These findings indicate that most therapeutic antibodies will be ineffective against the Omicron variant and that double immunization with BNT162b2 might not adequately protect against severe disease induced by this variant.

What is the best way to keep the patient warm during technical rescue? Results from two prospective randomised controlled studies with healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Accidental hypothermia is a manifest problem during the rescue of entrapped victims and results in different subsequent problems as coagulopathy and wound infection. Different warming methods are available for the preclinicial use. However, their effectiveness has hardly been evaluated. METHODS: In a first step a survey among German fire brigades was performed with questions about the most used warming methods. In a second step two crossover studies were conducted. In each study two different warming method were compared with forced air warming - which is the most frequently used and highly effective warming method in operation rooms (Study A: halogen floodlight vs. forced air warming; Study B: forced air warming vs. fleece blanket). In both studies healthy volunteers (Study A: 30 volunteers, Study B: 32 volunteers) were sitting 60 min in a cold store. In the first 21 min there was no subject warming. Afterwards the different warming methods were initiated. Every 3 min parameters like skin temperature, core body temperature and cold perception on a 10-point numeric rating scale were recorded. Linear mixed models were fitted for each parameter to check for differences in temperature trajectories and cold perception with regard to the different warming methods. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one German fire brigades responded to the survey. The most frequently used warming methods were different rescue blankets (gold/silver, wool) and work light (halogen floodlights). Both studies (A and B) showed significantly (p < 0.05) higher values in mean skin temperature, mean body temperature and total body heat for the forced air warming methods compared to halogen floodlight respectively fleece blanket shortly after warming initiation. In contrast, values for the cold perception were significantly lower (less unpleasant cold perception) during the phase the forced air warming methods were used, compared to the fleece blanket or the halogen floodlight was used. CONCLUSION: Forced air warming methods used under the standardised experimental setting are an effective method to keep patients warm during technical rescue. Halogen floodlight has an insufficient effect on the patient's heat preservation. In healthy subjects, fleece blankets will stop heat loss but will not correct heat that has already been lost. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The studies were registered retrospectively on 14/02/2022 on the German Clinical Trials registry (DRKS) with the number DRKS00028079.

[Prehospital stroke treatment in German-speaking countries]. / Praxis der präklinischen Schlaganfallversorgung im deutschsprachigen Raum: Eine Umfrage unter den ärztlichen Leitungen Rettungsdienst in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz.

Background: The prognosis of stroke patients can be improved by adherence to clinical guidelines. Objective: To analyse the current state of organisation of prehospital stroke treatment in Germany, Austria and Switzerland with a focus on guideline adherence. Materials and methods: All medical directors of emergency medical services (MDEMS) in Germany (n = 178), Austria (n = 9) and Switzerland (n = 32) were invited to complete an anonymous online survey (unipark.com, Tivian XI GmbH, Cologne, Germany) which was available for 10 weeks from April-June 2020. Participants were asked for information regarding structural organisation, clinical treatment and strategic/tactical aspects. Results: The survey was completed 69 times and 65 datasets were analysed (4 participants without MDEMS status): 73.8% (n = 48) were MDEMS from Germany, 15.4% (n = 10) from Switzerland and 10.8% from Austria (n = 7). The survey results show relevant differences in the infrastructure of and the approach to prehospital stroke treatment. Standard operating procedures for stroke treatment were in place in 93.3% (n = 61) of the EMS areas. Furthermore, 37% (n = 24) of the EMS areas differentiated between stroke with mild and severe symptoms and 15.4% (n = 10) used specific scores for the prehospital prediction of large vessel occlusion strokes (LVOS). Conclusions: Our data highlight the heterogeneity of prehospital stroke treatment in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Consistent use of appropriate scores for LVOS prediction and a higher adherence to recent clinical guideline in general are measures that should be taken to optimise the prehospital treatment of stroke patients.

No evidence for increased cell entry or antibody evasion by Delta sublineage AY.4.2.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants have emerged. While some variants spread only locally, others, referred to as variants of concern, disseminated globally and became drivers of the pandemic. All SARS-CoV-2 variants harbor mutations relative to the virus circulating early in the pandemic, and mutations in the viral spike (S) protein are considered of particular relevance since the S protein mediates host cell entry and constitutes the key target of the neutralizing antibody response. As a consequence, mutations in the S protein may increase SARS-CoV-2 infectivity and enable its evasion of neutralizing antibodies. Furthermore, mutations in the S protein can modulate viral transmissibility and pathogenicity.

SARS-CoV-2 variants C.1.2 and B.1.621 (Mu) partially evade neutralization by antibodies elicited upon infection or vaccination.

Rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants C.1.2 and B.1.621 (Mu variant) in Africa and the Americas, respectively, as well as a high number of mutations in the viral spike proteins raised concerns that these variants might pose an elevated threat to human health. Here, we show that C.1.2 and B.1.621 spike proteins mediate increased entry into certain cell lines but do not exhibit increased ACE2 binding. Further, we demonstrate that C.1.2 and B.1.621 are resistant to neutralization by bamlanivimab but remain sensitive to inhibition by antibody cocktails used for COVID-19 therapy. Finally, we show that C.1.2 and B.1.621 partially escape neutralization by antibodies induced upon infection and vaccination, with escape of vaccine-induced antibodies being as potent as that measured for B.1.351 (Beta variant), which is known to be highly neutralization resistant. Collectively, C.1.2 and B.1.621 partially evade control by vaccine-induced antibodies, suggesting that close monitoring of these variants is warranted.

Host Cell Entry and Neutralization Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Lineages B.1.620 and R.1.

The spike (S) protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) facilitates viral entry into host cells and is the key target for neutralizing antibodies. The SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.620 carries fifteen mutations in the S protein and is spread in Africa, the US and Europe, while lineage R.1 harbors four mutations in S and infections were observed in several countries, particularly Japan and the US. However, the impact of the mutations in B.1.620 and R.1 S proteins on antibody-mediated neutralization and host cell entry are largely unknown. Here, we report that these mutations are compatible with robust ACE2 binding and entry into cell lines, and they markedly reduce neutralization by vaccine-induced antibodies. Our results reveal evasion of neutralizing antibodies by B.1.620 and R.1, which might have contributed to the spread of these lineages.

High class filtering facepiece (FFP) are fundamental and effective in protection of emergency health care workers: an observational cohort study in a German community.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly contagious airborne virus inducing pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This is most relevant for medical staff working under harmful conditions in emergencies often dealing with patients and an undefined SARS-CoV-2 status. We aimed to measure the effect of high-class filtering facepieces (FFP) in emergency medical service (EMS) staff by analyzing seroprevalence and history of positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2. METHOD: This observational cohort study included workers in EMS, who were compared with hospital staff (HS) and staff, which was not directly involved in patient care (NPC). All direct patient contacts of EMS workers were protected by FFP2/N95 (filtering face piece protection class 2/non-oil-based particulates filter efficiency 95%) masks, whereas HS was protected by FFP2/N95 exclusively when a patient had a proven or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. NPC was not protected by higher FFP. The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was analyzed by immunoassay by end of 12/2020 together with the history of a positive PCR. In addition, a self-assessment was performed regarding the quantity of SARS-CoV-2 positive contacts, about flu symptoms and personal belief of previous COVID-19 infections. RESULTS: The period in which contact to SARS-CoV-2 positive patients has been possible was 10 months (March to December 2020)-with 54,681 patient contacts documented for EMS-either emergencies (n = 33,241) or transportation services (n = 21,440). Seven hundred-thirty (n = 730) participants were included into the study (n = EMS: 325, HS: 322 and NPC: 83). The analysis of the survey showed that the exposure to patients with an unknown and consecutive positive SARS-CoV-2 result was significantly higher for EMS when compared to HS (EMS 55% vs. HS 30%, p = 0.01). The incidence of a SARS-CoV-2 infection in our cohort was 1.2% (EMS), 2.2% (HS) and 2.4% (NPC) within the three groups (ns) and lowest in EMS. Furthermore, the belief of previous COVID-19 was significant higher in EMS (19% vs. 10%), CONCLUSION: The consistent use of FFP2/N95 in EMS is able to prevent work-related SARS-CoV-2 infections in emergency situations. The significance of physical airway protection in exposed medical staff is still relevant especially under the aspect of new viral variants and unclear effectiveness of new vaccines.