Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
medRxiv ; 2024 Apr 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38712295

ABSTRACT

Background: Measuring malaria transmission intensity using the traditional entomological inoculation rate is difficult. Antibody responses to mosquito salivary proteins such as SG6 have previously been used as biomarkers of exposure to Anopheles mosquito bites. Here, we investigate four mosquito salivary proteins as potential biomarkers of human exposure to mosquitoes infected with P. falciparum: mosGILT, SAMSP1, AgSAP, and AgTRIO. Methods: We tested population-level human immune responses in longitudinal and cross-sectional plasma samples from individuals with known P. falciparum infection from low and moderate transmission areas in Senegal using a multiplexed magnetic bead-based assay. Results: AgSAP and AgTRIO were the best indicators of recent exposure to infected mosquitoes. Antibody responses to AgSAP, in a moderate endemic area, and to AgTRIO in both low and moderate endemic areas, were significantly higher than responses in a healthy non-endemic control cohort (p-values = 0.0245, 0.0064, and <0.0001 respectively). No antibody responses significantly differed between the low and moderate transmission area, or between equivalent groups during and outside the malaria transmission seasons. For AgSAP and AgTRIO, reactivity peaked 2-4 weeks after clinical P. falciparum infection and declined 3 months after infection. Discussion: Reactivity to both AgSAP and AgTRIO peaked after infection and did not differ seasonally nor between areas of low and moderate transmission, suggesting reactivity is likely reflective of exposure to infectious mosquitos or recent biting rather than general mosquito exposure. Kinetics suggest reactivity is relatively short-lived. AgSAP and AgTRIO are promising candidates to incorporate into multiplexed assays for serosurveillance of population-level changes in P. falciparum-infected mosquito exposure.

2.
Nat Commun ; 14(1): 5055, 2023 08 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37598213

ABSTRACT

Whether SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccines confer exposure-dependent ("leaky") protection against infection remains unknown. We examined the effect of prior infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity on infection risk among residents of Connecticut correctional facilities during periods of predominant Omicron and Delta transmission. Residents with cell, cellblock, and no documented exposure to SARS-CoV-2 infected residents were matched by facility and date. During the Omicron period, prior infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity reduced the infection risk of residents without a documented exposure (HR: 0.36 [0.25-0.54]; 0.57 [0.42-0.78]; 0.24 [0.15-0.39]; respectively) and with cellblock exposures (0.61 [0.49-0.75]; 0.69 [0.58-0.83]; 0.41 [0.31-0.55]; respectively) but not with cell exposures (0.89 [0.58-1.35]; 0.96 [0.64-1.46]; 0.80 [0.46-1.39]; respectively). Associations were similar during the Delta period and when analyses were restricted to tested residents. Although associations may not have been thoroughly adjusted due to dataset limitations, the findings suggest that prior infection and vaccination may be leaky, highlighting the potential benefits of pairing vaccination with non-pharmaceutical interventions in crowded settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Prisoners , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
3.
Front Public Health ; 11: 1003158, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36817891

ABSTRACT

While considerable attention was placed on SARS-CoV-2 testing and surveillance programs in the K-12 setting, younger age groups in childcare centers were largely overlooked. Childcare facilities are vital to communities, allowing parents/guardians to remain at work and providing safe environments for both children and staff. Therefore, early in the COVID-19 pandemic (October 2020), we established a PCR-based COVID-19 surveillance program in childcare facilities, testing children and staff with the goal of collecting actionable public health data and aiding communities in the progressive resumption of standard operations and ways of life. In this study we describe the development of a weekly saliva testing program and provide early results from our experience implementing this in childcare centers. We enrolled children (aged 6 months to 7 years) and staff at seven childcare facilities and trained participants in saliva collection using video chat technology. Weekly surveys were sent out to assess exposures, symptoms, and vaccination status changes. Participants submitted weekly saliva samples at school. Samples were transported to a partnering clinical laboratory or RT-PCR testing using SalivaDirect and results were uploaded to each participant's online patient portal within 24 h. SARS-CoV-2 screening and routine testing programs have focused less on the childcare population, resulting in knowledge gaps in this critical age group, especially as many are still ineligible for vaccination. SalivaDirect testing for SARS-CoV-2 provides a feasible method of asymptomatic screening and symptomatic testing for children and childcare center staff. Given the relative aversion to nasal swabs in younger age groups, an at-home saliva collection method provides an attractive alternative, especially as a routine surveillance tool. Results can be shared rapidly electronically through participants' private medical chart portals, and video chat technology allows for discussion and instruction between investigators and participants. This study fosters a cooperative partnership with participating childcare centers, parents/guardians, and staff with the goal of mitigating COVID-19 transmission in childcare centers. Age-related challenges in saliva collection can be overcome by working with parents/guardians to conceptualize new collection strategies and by offering parents/guardians continued virtual guidance and support.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Child , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Saliva , Pandemics/prevention & control , Child Care
4.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 22175, 2022 12 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36550362

ABSTRACT

Sero-surveillance can monitor and project disease burden and risk. However, SARS-CoV-2 antibody test results can produce false positive results, limiting their efficacy as a sero-surveillance tool. False positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody results are associated with malaria exposure, and understanding this association is essential to interpret sero-surveillance results from malaria-endemic countries. Here, pre-pandemic samples from eight malaria endemic and non-endemic countries and four continents were tested by ELISA to measure SARS-CoV-2 Spike S1 subunit reactivity. Individuals with acute malaria infection generated substantial SARS-CoV-2 reactivity. Cross-reactivity was not associated with reactivity to other human coronaviruses or other SARS-CoV-2 proteins, as measured by peptide and protein arrays. ELISAs with deglycosylated and desialated Spike S1 subunits revealed that cross-reactive antibodies target sialic acid on N-linked glycans of the Spike protein. The functional activity of cross-reactive antibodies measured by neutralization assays showed that cross-reactive antibodies did not neutralize SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. Since routine use of glycosylated or sialated assays could result in false positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody results in malaria endemic regions, which could overestimate exposure and population-level immunity, we explored methods to increase specificity by reducing cross-reactivity. Overestimating population-level exposure to SARS-CoV-2 could lead to underestimates of risk of continued COVID-19 transmission in sub-Saharan Africa.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Malaria , Humans , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Cross Reactions , N-Acetylneuraminic Acid , Epitopes
6.
medRxiv ; 2021 May 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34013301

ABSTRACT

Individuals with acute malaria infection generated high levels of antibodies that cross-react with the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein. Cross-reactive antibodies specifically recognized the sialic acid moiety on N-linked glycans of the Spike protein and do not neutralize in vitro SARS-CoV-2. Sero-surveillance is critical for monitoring and projecting disease burden and risk during the pandemic; however, routine use of Spike protein-based assays may overestimate SARS-CoV-2 exposure and population-level immunity in malaria-endemic countries.

7.
PLoS Biol ; 18(10): e3000867, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33027248

ABSTRACT

The current quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) assay recommended for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing in the United States requires analysis of 3 genomic targets per sample: 2 viral and 1 host. To simplify testing and reduce the volume of required reagents, we devised a multiplex RT-qPCR assay to detect SARS-CoV-2 in a single reaction. We used existing N1, N2, and RP primer and probe sets by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but substituted fluorophores to allow multiplexing of the assay. The cycle threshold (Ct) values of our multiplex RT-qPCR were comparable to those obtained by the single assay adapted for research purposes. Low copy numbers (≥500 copies/reaction) of SARS-CoV-2 RNA were consistently detected by the multiplex RT-qPCR. Our novel multiplex RT-qPCR improves upon current single diagnostics by saving reagents, costs, time, and labor.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , RNA, Viral/genetics , Reagent Kits, Diagnostic/standards , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/standards , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Case-Control Studies , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Coronavirus Infections/virology , DNA Primers/standards , HEK293 Cells , Humans , Limit of Detection , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
9.
Nature ; 588(7837): 315-320, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32846427

ABSTRACT

There is increasing evidence that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) produces more severe symptoms and higher mortality among men than among women1-5. However, whether immune responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) differ between sexes, and whether such differences correlate with the sex difference in the disease course of COVID-19, is currently unknown. Here we examined sex differences in viral loads, SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody titres, plasma cytokines and blood-cell phenotyping in patients with moderate COVID-19 who had not received immunomodulatory medications. Male patients had higher plasma levels of innate immune cytokines such as IL-8 and IL-18 along with more robust induction of non-classical monocytes. By contrast, female patients had more robust T cell activation than male patients during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Notably, we found that a poor T cell response negatively correlated with patients' age and was associated with worse disease outcome in male patients, but not in female patients. By contrast, higher levels of innate immune cytokines were associated with worse disease progression in female patients, but not in male patients. These findings provide a possible explanation for the observed sex biases in COVID-19, and provide an important basis for the development of a sex-based approach to the treatment and care of male and female patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Cytokines/immunology , Immunity, Innate/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Sex Characteristics , T-Lymphocytes/immunology , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/virology , Chemokines/blood , Chemokines/immunology , Cohort Studies , Cytokines/blood , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Lymphocyte Activation , Male , Monocytes/immunology , Phenotype , Prognosis , RNA, Viral/analysis , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Viral Load
10.
Nat Microbiol ; 5(10): 1299-1305, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32651556

ABSTRACT

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 (Charité) 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.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/genetics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Genetic Variation , Genome, Viral , Humans , Molecular Probe Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , RNA/genetics , RNA Probes/genetics , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity
11.
Nature ; 584(7821): 463-469, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32717743

ABSTRACT

Recent studies have provided insights into the pathogenesis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)1-4. However, the longitudinal immunological correlates of disease outcome remain unclear. Here we serially analysed immune responses in 113 patients with moderate or severe COVID-19. Immune profiling revealed an overall increase in innate cell lineages, with a concomitant reduction in T cell number. An early elevation in cytokine levels was associated with worse disease outcomes. Following an early increase in cytokines, patients with moderate COVID-19 displayed a progressive reduction in type 1 (antiviral) and type 3 (antifungal) responses. By contrast, patients with severe COVID-19 maintained these elevated responses throughout the course of the disease. Moreover, severe COVID-19 was accompanied by an increase in multiple type 2 (anti-helminths) effectors, including interleukin-5 (IL-5), IL-13, immunoglobulin E and eosinophils. Unsupervised clustering analysis identified four immune signatures, representing growth factors (A), type-2/3 cytokines (B), mixed type-1/2/3 cytokines (C), and chemokines (D) that correlated with three distinct disease trajectories. The immune profiles of patients who recovered from moderate COVID-19 were enriched in tissue reparative growth factor signature A, whereas the profiles of those with who developed severe disease had elevated levels of all four signatures. Thus, we have identified a maladapted immune response profile associated with severe COVID-19 and poor clinical outcome, as well as early immune signatures that correlate with divergent disease trajectories.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Cytokines/analysis , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Cluster Analysis , Cytokines/immunology , Eosinophils/immunology , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin E/analysis , Immunoglobulin E/immunology , Interleukin-13/analysis , Interleukin-13/immunology , Interleukin-5/analysis , Interleukin-5/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , T-Lymphocytes/cytology , T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Viral Load , Young Adult
12.
medRxiv ; 2020 Jun 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32577695

ABSTRACT

A growing body of evidence indicates sex differences in the clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)1-4. However, whether immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 differ between sexes, and whether such differences explain male susceptibility to COVID-19, is currently unknown. In this study, we examined sex differences in viral loads, SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody titers, plasma cytokines, as well as blood cell phenotyping in COVID-19 patients. By focusing our analysis on patients with mild to moderate disease who had not received immunomodulatory medications, our results revealed that male patients had higher plasma levels of innate immune cytokines and chemokines including IL-8, IL-18, and CCL5, along with more robust induction of non-classical monocytes. In contrast, female patients mounted significantly more robust T cell activation than male patients during SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was sustained in old age. Importantly, we found that a poor T cell response negatively correlated with patients' age and was predictive of worse disease outcome in male patients, but not in female patients. Conversely, higher innate immune cytokines in female patients associated with worse disease progression, but not in male patients. These findings reveal a possible explanation underlying observed sex biases in COVID-19, and provide important basis for the development of sex-based approach to the treatment and care of men and women with COVID-19.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...