Update of European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases coronavirus disease 2019 guidelines: diagnostic testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

SCOPE: Since the onset of COVID-19, several assays have been deployed for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. The European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) published the first set of guidelines on SARS-CoV-2 in vitro diagnosis in February 2022. Because the COVID-19 landscape is rapidly evolving, the relevant ESCMID guidelines panel releases an update of the previously published recommendations on diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. This update aims to delineate the best diagnostic approach for SARS-CoV-2 in different populations based on current evidence. METHODS: An ESCMID COVID-19 guidelines task force was established by the ESCMID Executive Committee. A small group was established, half appointed by the chair, and the remaining selected with an open call. The panel met virtually once a week. For all decisions, a simple majority vote was used. A list of clinical questions using the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) format was developed at the beginning of the process. For each PICO, 2 panel members performed a literature search focusing on systematic reviews with a third panellist involved in case of inconsistent results. The panel reassessed the PICOs previously defined as priority in the first set of guidelines and decided to address 49 PICO questions, because 6 of them were discarded as outdated/non-clinically relevant. The 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)-adoption, adaptation, and de novo development of recommendations (ADOLOPMENT)' evidence-to-decision framework was used to produce the guidelines. QUESTIONS ADDRESSED BY THE GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS: After literature search, we updated 16 PICO questions; these PICOs address the use of antigen-based assays among symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with different ages, COVID-19 severity status or risk for severe COVID-19, time since the onset of symptoms/contact with an infectious case, and finally, types of biomaterials used.

T cell response against SARS-CoV-2 persists after one year in patients surviving severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: In critically ill COVID-19 patients, the initial response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is characterized by major immune dysfunctions. The capacity of these severe patients to mount a robust and persistent SARS-CoV-2 specific T cell response despite the presence of severe immune alterations during the ICU stay is unknown. METHODS: Critically ill COVID-19 patients were sampled five times during the ICU stay and 9 and 13 months afterwards. Immune monitoring included counts of lymphocyte subpopulations, HLA-DR expression on monocytes, plasma IL-6 and IL-10 concentrations, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels and T cell proliferation in response to three SARS-CoV-2 antigens. FINDINGS: Despite the presence of major lymphopenia and decreased monocyte HLA-DR expression during the ICU stay, convalescent critically ill COVID-19 patients consistently generated adaptive and humoral immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 maintained for more than one year after hospital discharge. Patients with long hospital stays presented with stronger anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific T cell response but no difference in anti-SARS-CoV2 IgG levels. INTERPRETATION: Convalescent critically ill COVID-19 patients consistently generated a memory immune response against SARS-CoV-2 maintained for more than one year after hospital discharge. In recovered individuals, the intensity of SARS-CoV-2 specific T cell response was dependent on length of hospital stay. FUNDING: This observational study was supported by funds from the Hospices Civils de Lyon, Fondation HCL, Claude Bernard Lyon 1 University and Région Auvergne Rhône-Alpes and by partial funding by REACTing (Research and ACTion targeting emerging infectious diseases) INSERM, France and a donation from Fondation AnBer (http://fondationanber.fr/).

ESCMID COVID-19 guidelines: diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2.

SCOPE: The objective of these guidelines is to identify the most appropriate diagnostic test and/or diagnostic approach for SARS-CoV-2. The recommendations are intended to provide guidance to clinicians, clinical microbiologists, other health care personnel, and decision makers. METHODS: An ESCMID COVID-19 guidelines task force was established by the ESCMID Executive Committee. A small group was established, half appointed by the chair and the remaining selected with an open call. Each panel met virtually once a week. For all decisions, a simple majority vote was used. A list of clinical questions using the PICO (population, intervention, comparison, outcome) format was developed at the beginning of the process. For each PICO, two panel members performed a literature search focusing on systematic reviews, with a third panellist involved in case of inconsistent results. Quality of evidence assessment was based on the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation - adoption, adaptation, and de novo development of recommendations) approach. RECOMMENDATIONS: A total of 43 PICO questions were selected that involve the following types of populations: (a) patients with signs and symptoms of COVID-19; (b) travellers, healthcare workers, and other individuals at risk for exposure to SARS-CoV-2; (c) asymptomatic individuals, and (d) close contacts of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. The type of diagnostic test (commercial rapid nucleic acid amplification tests and rapid antigen detection), biomaterial, time since onset of symptoms/contact with an infectious case, age, disease severity, and risk of developing severe disease are also taken into consideration.

ESCMID COVID-19 guidelines: diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 [Pré-print]

The present guideline has the objective of identifying the most appropriate diagnostic test and/or diagnostic/screening approach for1) patients with signs and symptoms of COVID-19; 2) travelers from areas with low and high COVID-19 prevalence, healthcare workers, and other individuals at risk for exposure to SARS-CoV-2; 3) asymptomatic individuals (including general population) and 4) those with close contact with a person infected with SARS-CoV-2; and 5) symptomatic individuals following re-infection and/or vaccination. However, evidence for re-infection and post-vaccination testing approach was scarce when the literature search for the index guidelines was performed. Hence, associated PICOs could not be addressed. Additional considerations include the type of biomaterial, time since onset of symptoms/contact with infectious case, age, disease severity, and risk of developing severe disease. The document is intended to provide guidance to clinicians, clinical microbiologists, other health care personnel, and decision makers.

Impact of Host Immune Status on Discordant Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Circulating B Cell Frequencies and Antibody Levels.

Individuals with pre-existing chronic systemic low-grade inflammation are prone to develop severe COVID-19 and stronger anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses. Whether this phenomenon reflects a differential expansion of antiviral B cells or a failure to regulate antibody synthesis remains unknown. Here, we compared the antiviral B cell repertoire of convalescent healthcare personnel to that of hospitalized patients with pre-existing comorbidities. Out of 277,500 immortalized B cell clones, antiviral B cell frequencies were determined by indirect immunofluorescence screening on SARS-CoV-2 infected cells. Surprisingly, frequencies of SARS-CoV-2 specific clones from the two groups were not statistically different, despite higher antibody levels in hospitalized patients. Moreover, functional analyses revealed that several B cell clones from healthcare personnel with low antibody levels had neutralizing properties. This study reveals for the first time a key qualitative defect of antibody synthesis in severe patients and calls for caution regarding estimated protective immunity based only on circulating antiviral antibodies.

Evaluation of High-Throughput SARS-CoV-2 Serological Assays in a Longitudinal Cohort of Patients with Mild COVID-19: Clinical Sensitivity, Specificity, and Association with Virus Neutralization Test.

BACKGROUND: The association between SARS-CoV-2 commercial serological assays and virus neutralization test (VNT) has been poorly explored in mild patients with COVID-19. METHODS: 439 serum specimens were longitudinally collected from 76 healthcare workers with RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19. The clinical sensitivity (determined weekly) of 9 commercial serological assays were evaluated. Clinical specificity was assessed using 69 pre-pandemic sera. Correlation, agreement, and concordance with the VNT were also assessed on a subset of 170 samples. Area under the ROC curve (AUC) was estimated at 2 neutralizing antibody titers. RESULTS: The Wantai Total Ab assay targeting the receptor binding domain (RBD) within the S protein presented the best sensitivity at different times during the course of disease. The clinical specificity was greater than 95% for all tests except for the Euroimmun IgA assay. The overall agreement with the presence of neutralizing antibodies ranged from 62.2% (95%CI; 56.0-68.1) for bioMérieux IgM to 91.2% (87.0-94.2) for Siemens. The lowest negative percent agreement (NPA) was found with the Wantai Total Ab assay (NPA 33% (21.1-48.3)). The NPA for other total Ab or IgG assays targeting the S or the RBD was 80.7% (66.7-89.7), 90.3% (78.1-96.1), and 96.8% (86.8-99.3) for Siemens, bioMérieux IgG, and DiaSorin, respectively. None of the commercial assays have sufficient performance to detect a neutralizing titer of 80 (AUC < 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Although some assays show a better agreement with VNT than others, the present findings emphasize that commercialized serological tests, including those targeting the RBD, cannot substitute a VNT for the assessment of functional antibody response.

Clinical management and viral genomic diversity analysis of a child's influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection in the context of a severe combined immunodeficiency.

INTRODUCTION: A child with severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) had an influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection with viral excretion longer than 6 months, during 2013-2014 influenza season, despite cord blood transplantation and antiviral treatments. METHODS: Conventional real-time RT-PCR methods were used to estimate viral load and to detect the presence of the common N1 neuraminidase (NA) H275Y substitution responsible for oseltamivir resistance. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of influenza viruses was performed retrospectively to characterize viral quasispecies in specimens. RESULTS: The patient was first treated with oral oseltamivir, leading to detection of low-levels of NA-H275Y substitution. Concomitant cord blood cell transplantation, intravenous administration of zanamivir and immunoglobulins led to an increase in white blood cells and influenza viral load decrease. A viral rebound occurred as soon as the antiviral treatment was discontinued. Eventually, influenza viral load was negated with immune reconstitution. NGS found influenza quasispecies harboring NA-E119A substitution (10.3%). Moreover, NGS showed that viral genomic diversity evolved under antiviral treatment and immune status. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional virological techniques were sufficient for influenza infection follow-up but NGS performances allowed characterization of viral variants evolution in this specific case of prolonged influenza virus infection. New and efficient treatments against influenza in immunocompromised patients are needed.

Acute chest pain in an adolescent with cystic fibrosis in September: Would you have thought about this?

Acute chest pain is common in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). Here we report the case of an adolescent who suffered acute chest pain in September after an history of acute abdominal pain and fever. The reason for this clinical sceneriao was found to be Coxsackievirus B3, known to be responsible of Bornholm disease, a frequent but under recognized viral myositis. The diagnosis is mainly clinical, but evocating this diagnosis may avoid unnecessary exam.