Clinical and laboratory features of SARS-CoV-2 variants across multiple rounds of pandemic waves in hospitalized children in an Iranian referral hospital.

BACKGROUND: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 has evolved into independent new forms, variants of concern (VOCs). While epidemiological data showed increased transmissibility of VOCs, their impact on clinical outcomes is less clear. This study aimed to investigate the differences between the clinical and laboratory features of children infected with VOCs. METHODS: This study included all cases with SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swabs obtained from patients referred to Children's Medical Center (CMC), an Iranian referral hospital, between July 2021 and March 2022. The inclusion criteria for this study included all patients, regardless of age, who had a positive test anywhere in the hospital setting. Exclusion criteria for the study included those whose data was obtained from non-hospital outpatient settings, or referred from another hospital. The SARS-CoV-2 genome area encoding the S1 domain was amplified and sequenced. The type of variant in each sample was identified based on the mutations in the S1 gene. Demographic characteristics, clinical data, and laboratory findings were collected from the patient's medical records. RESULTS: This study included 87 pediatric cases with confirmed COVID-19, with a median age of 3.5 years (IQR: 1-8.12). Data from sequencing reveals the type of variants as 5 (5.7%) alpha, 53 (60.9%) Delta, and 29 (33.3%) Omicron. The incidence of seizure was higher in patients with Alpha and Omicron infection compared to the Delta group. A higher incidence of diarrhea was reported in Alpha-infected patients, and a higher risk of disease severity, distress, and myalgia was associated with Delta infection. CONCLUSION: Laboratory parameters did not mostly differ among the patients infected with Alpha, Delta, and Omicron. However, these variants may manifest different clinical features. Further studies with larger sample sizes are required to fully understand the clinical manifestations of each variant.

Gastrointestinal viral shedding in children with SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has different manifestations in pediatric cases. It is assumed that they might present more gastrointestinal symptoms with a different viral shedding pattern in gastrointestinal samples. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the viral shedding pattern in gastrointestinal specimens of children with COVID-19. METHODS: We searched all published studies in English language in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, up to date as of October 2021. Our search included the term "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, novel coronavirus, or coronavirus; and shed, excrete, secret, or carriage; and stool or rectal; and children or pediatrics". We included studies evaluating SARS-CoV-2 shedding in gastrointestinal specimens, including rectal swabs and stool samples of children with COVID-19 infection. We excluded duplicated data, case reports, and studies without original data. RESULTS: Twelve studies met the eligibility criteria for the qualitative synthesis, 10 of which were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of gastrointestinal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA in children with COVID-19 was 86% (95% confidence interval 73%-96%, I2 = 62.28%). After respiratory specimen had become negative, 72% (43/60) had persistent shedding in gastrointestinal specimens. The gastrointestinal RNA had a positive test result for more than 70 days after symptoms onset. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrointestinal shedding of SARS-CoV-2 might occur in a substantial portion of children and might persist long after negative respiratory testing. Further research is recommended to find the role of SARS-CoV-2 gastrointestinal shedding in transmission in children.

Can Interferon-γ Release Assays Be Useful for Monitoring the Response to Anti-tuberculosis Treatment?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The number of studies which evaluated interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs) results after anti-tuberculosis (TB) treatment has been rapidly increasing. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential use of IGRAs (QFT-GIT, T-SPOT.TB, QFT-Plus) in assessing the response to anti-TB treatment. We searched all studies in English language published from 1 October 2011 to 18 November 2018 in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. Our search included the term "tuberculosis treatment AND interferon-γ release assay". We included studies evaluating the performance of commercial IGRAs (including QFT-GIT, T-SPOT.TB and QFT-Plus) before and after the anti-TB treatment. We performed subgroup analysis based on the age (children, adults), type of TB (active, latent, active and latent, and contacts exposed to MDR defined as MDR LTBI), type of IGRAs (QFT-GIT and T-SPOT.TB), and follow-up interval (2, 3, 4, 6, 9 months). Of the 18 included studies, 12 used QFT-GIT for assessment of IGRA performance after therapy, 1 used T-SPOT.TB, and 3 used both QFT-GIT and T-SPOT.TB. Since then, only two studies have assessed the QFT-Plus performance during therapy. According to the results of the meta-analysis, the pooled rate of positive IGRAs (QFT-GIT and T-SPOT.TB) following anti-TB therapy was estimated at 76% [95% CI 70-81%] and no difference was found compared to the pooled positive rate of IGRAs before initiation of therapy which was 76% [95% CI 60-89%]. The subgroup analysis showed that the pooled rate of positive IGRAs (QFT-GIT and T-SPOT.TB) after anti-TB therapy was significantly higher in monitoring active TB subjects [80% (95% CI 74-88%)] than LTBI [71% (95% CI 70-81%)]. Available data are now sufficient to suggest that monitoring changes in the IGRAs (QFT-GIT and T-SPOT.TB) response during anti-TB treatment may have limited use in evaluating the effectiveness of treatment, while the monitoring changes in QFT-Plus during anti-tubercular treatment are recommended to determine treatment efficacy or for treatment monitoring. Further research is needed to establish the efficacy of this new assay as marker on a larger scale for treatment monitoring.

Comparison of the QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus and QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube interferon-γ release assays: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) is a new generation of QuantiFERON assay that differs from QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube test (QFT-GIT). The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the new FDA-approved QFT-Plus interferon (IFN)-γ release assays (IGRAs) with the QFT-GIT version of this assay. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched all studies published in English in electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. RESULTS: The positive proportion of positive results by QFT-Plus was higher than QFT-GIT in cured tuberculosis (TB) cases (82% vs. 73%). The two tests showed a substantial agreement and the majority of the latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) subjects responded concomitantly to both QFT-Plus and QFT-GIT. However, QFT-Plus showed a stronger association with surrogate measures of TB suspects than QFT-GIT. The QFT-Plus test demonstrated a higher sensitivity than QFT-GIT in the older adults. The sensitivity, specificity, LR+, LR- and DOR overall were 94% (95% CI 89-97), 96% (95% CI 94-98), 24.4 (95% CI 15-39), 0.05 (95% CI 0.03-0.11) and 414 (95% CI 251-685), respectively. The area under summary ROC curve was 0.99 (95% CI 0.97-0.99). CONCLUSION: QFT-Plus performs equivalently to the QFT-GIT for detection of patients at risk for LTBI; however, QFT-Plus test had higher sensitivity than the QFT-GIT test, with similar specificity among the older participants. Higher IFN-γ release in TB2 compared to TB1 might be due to recent LTBI.