Enhancing epidemiological investigation of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection with whole genome sequencing: A retrospective cohort study across four hospitals in the UK.

BackgroundDespite robust efforts, patients and staff acquire SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitals. In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated whether whole-genome sequencing (WGS) could enhance the epidemiological investigation of healthcare-associated SARS-CoV-2 acquisition. Methods and findingsFrom 17-November-2020 to 5-January-2021, 803 inpatients and 329 staff were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection across four teaching hospitals in Oxfordshire, UK. We classified cases according to epidemiological definitions, sought epidemiological evidence of a potential source for each nosocomial infection, and evaluated if epidemiologically-linked cases had genomic evidence supporting transmission. We compared epidemiological and genomic outbreak identification. Using national epidemiological definitions, 109/803 (14%) inpatient infections were classified as definite/probable nosocomial, 615 (77%) as community-acquired and 79 (10%) as indeterminate. There was strong epidemiological evidence to support definite/probable cases as nosocomial: 107/109 (98%) had a prior-negative PCR in the same hospital stay before testing positive, and 101(93%) shared time and space with known infected patients/staff. Many indeterminate cases were likely infected in hospital: 53/79 (67%) had a prior-negative PCR and 75 (95%) contact with a potential source. 89/615 (11% of all 803 patients) with apparent community-onset had a recent hospital exposure. WGS highlighted SARS-CoV-2 is mainly imported into hospitals: within 764 samples sequenced 607 genomic clusters were identified (>1 SNP distinct). Only 43/607 (7%) clusters contained evidence of onward transmission (subsequent cases within [≤]1 SNP). 20/21 epidemiologically-identified outbreaks contained multiple genomic introductions. Most (80%) nosocomial acquisition occurred in rapid super-spreading events in settings with a mix of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Hospitals not routinely admitting COVID-19 patients had low rates of transmission. Undiagnosed/unsequenced individuals prevent genomic data from excluding nosocomial acquisition. ConclusionsOur findings suggest current surveillance definitions underestimate nosocomial acquisition and reveal most nosocomial transmission occurs from a relatively limited number of highly infectious individuals.

Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are associated with protection against reinfection

BackgroundIt is critical to understand whether infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) protects from subsequent reinfection. MethodsWe investigated the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive results in seropositive and seronegative healthcare workers (HCWs) attending asymptomatic and symptomatic staff testing at Oxford University Hospitals, UK. Baseline antibody status was determined using anti-spike and/or anti-nucleocapsid IgG assays and staff followed for up to 30 weeks. We used Poisson regression to estimate the relative incidence of PCR-positive results and new symptomatic infection by antibody status, accounting for age, gender and changes in incidence over time. ResultsA total of 12219 HCWs participated and had anti-spike IgG measured, 11052 were followed up after negative and 1246 after positive antibody results including 79 who seroconverted during follow up. 89 PCR-confirmed symptomatic infections occurred in seronegative individuals (0.46 cases per 10,000 days at risk) and no symptomatic infections in those with anti-spike antibodies. Additionally, 76 (0.40/10,000 days at risk) anti-spike IgG seronegative individuals had PCR-positive tests in asymptomatic screening, compared to 3 (0.21/10,000 days at risk) seropositive individuals. Overall, positive baseline anti-spike antibodies were associated with lower rates of PCR-positivity (with or without symptoms) (adjusted rate ratio 0.24 [95%CI 0.08-0.76, p=0.015]). Rate ratios were similar using anti-nucleocapsid IgG alone or combined with anti-spike IgG to determine baseline status. ConclusionsPrior SARS-CoV-2 infection that generated antibody responses offered protection from reinfection for most people in the six months following infection. Further work is required to determine the long-term duration and correlates of post-infection immunity.

Stringent thresholds for SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays result in under-detection of cases reporting loss of taste/smell

Thresholds for SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays have typically been determined using samples from symptomatic, often hospitalised, patients. Assay performance following mild/asymptomatic infection is unclear. We assessed IgG responses in asymptomatic healthcare workers with a high pre-test probability of Covid-19, e.g. 807/9292(8.9%) reported loss of smell/taste. The proportion reporting anosmia/ageusia increased at antibody titres below diagnostic thresholds for both an in-house ELISA and the Abbott Architect chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA): 424/903(47%) reported anosmia/ageusia with a positive ELISA, 59/387(13.2%) with high-negative titres, and 324/7943(4.1%) with low-negative results. Adjusting for the proportion of staff reporting anosmia/ageusia suggests the sensitivity of both assays is lower than previously reported: Oxford ELISA 90.8% (95%CI 86.1-92.1%) and Abbott CMIA 80.9% (77.5-84.3%). However, the sensitivity may be lower if some anosmia/ageusia in those with low-negative titres is Covid-19-associated. Samples from individuals with mild/asymptomatic infection should be included in SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay evaluations. Reporting equivocal SARS-CoV-2 antibody results should be considered.

Differential occupational risks to healthcare workers from SARS-CoV-2: A prospective observational study

BackgroundPersonal protective equipment (PPE) and social distancing are designed to mitigate risk of occupational SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitals. Why healthcare workers nevertheless remain at increased risk is uncertain. MethodsWe conducted voluntary Covid-19 testing programmes for symptomatic and asymptomatic staff at a UK teaching hospital using nasopharyngeal PCR testing and immunoassays for IgG antibodies. A positive result by either modality determined a composite outcome. Risk-factors for Covid-19 were investigated using multivariable logistic regression. Results1083/9809(11.0%) staff had evidence of Covid-19 at some time and provided data on potential risk-factors. Staff with a confirmed household contact were at greatest risk (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.63 [95%CI 3.30-6.50]). Higher rates of Covid-19 were seen in staff working in Covid-19-facing areas (21.2% vs. 8.2% elsewhere) (aOR 2.49 [2.00-3.12]). Controlling for Covid-19-facing status, risks were heterogenous across the hospital, with higher rates in acute medicine (1.50 [1.05-2.15]) and sporadic outbreaks in areas with few or no Covid-19 patients. Covid-19 intensive care unit (ICU) staff were relatively protected (0.46 [0.29-0.72]). Positive results were more likely in Black (1.61 [1.20-2.16]) and Asian (1.58 [1.34-1.86]) staff, independent of role or working location, and in porters and cleaners (1.93 [1.25-2.97]). Contact tracing around asymptomatic staff did not lead to enhanced case identification. 24% of staff/patients remained PCR-positive at [≥]6 weeks post-diagnosis. ConclusionsIncreased Covid-19 risk was seen in acute medicine, among Black and Asian staff, and porters and cleaners. A bundle of PPE-related interventions protected staff in ICU.