Immunologically distinct responses occur in the CNS of COVID-19 patients

One third of COVID-19 patients develop significant neurological symptoms, yet SARS-CoV-2 is rarely detected in central nervous system (CNS) tissue, suggesting a potential role for parainfectious processes, including neuroimmune responses. We therefore examined immune parameters in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood samples from a cohort of patients with COVID-19 and significant neurological complications. We found divergent immunological responses in the CNS compartment, including increased levels of IL-12 and IL-12-associated innate and adaptive immune cell activation. Moreover, we found increased proportions of B cells in the CSF relative to the periphery and evidence of clonal expansion of CSF B cells, suggesting a divergent intrathecal humoral response to SARS-CoV-2. Indeed, all COVID-19 cases examined had anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in the CSF whose target epitopes diverged from serum antibodies. We directly examined whether CSF resident antibodies target self-antigens and found a significant burden of CNS autoimmunity, with the CSF from most patients recognizing neural self-antigens. Finally, we produced a panel of monoclonal antibodies from patients CSF and show that these target both anti-viral and anti-neural antigens--including one mAb specific for the spike protein that also recognizes neural tissue. This exploratory immune survey reveals evidence of a compartmentalized and self-reactive immune response in the CNS meriting a more systematic evaluation of neurologically impaired COVID-19 patients. One Sentence SummaryA subset of COVID-19 patients with neurologic impairment show cerebrospinal fluid-specific immune alterations that point to both neuroinvasion and anti-neural autoimmunity as potential causes of impairment.

Tracking Smell Loss to Identify Healthcare Workers with SARS-CoV-2 Infection

BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCW) treating COVID-19 patients are at high risk for infection and may also spread infection through their contact with vulnerable patients. Smell loss has been associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it is unknown whether monitoring for smell loss can be used to identify asymptomatic infection among high risk individuals, like HCW. MethodsWe performed a prospective cohort study, tracking 473 HCW across three months to determine if smell loss could predict SARS-CoV-2 infection in this high-risk group. HCW subjects completed a longitudinal, novel behavioral at-home assessment of smell function with household items, as well as detailed symptom surveys that included a parosmia screening questionnaire, and RT-qPCR testing to identify SARSCoV-2 infection. ResultsSARS-CoV-2 was identified in 17 (3.6%) of 473 HCW. Among the 17 infected HCW, 53% reported smell loss, and were more likely to report smell loss than COVID-negative HCW on both the at-home assessment and the screening questionnaire (P < .01). 67% reported smell loss prior to having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and smell loss was reported a median of two days before testing positive. Neurological symptoms were reported more frequently among COVID-positive HCW who reported smell loss (P < .01). ConclusionsIn this prospective study of HCW, self-reported changes in smell using two different measures were predictive of COVID-19 infection. Smell loss frequently preceded a positive test and was associated with neurological symptoms.

First case of placental infection with SARS-CoV-2

BackgroundThe effects of Covid-19 in pregnancy remain relatively unknown. We present a case of second trimester pregnancy with symptomatic Covid-19 complicated by severe preeclampsia and placental abruption. MethodsWe analyzed placenta for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 through molecular and immunohistochemical assays and by and electron microscopy, and we measured the maternal antibody response in blood to this infection. ResultsSARS-CoV-2 localized predominantly to syncytiotrophoblast cells at the maternal-fetal interface of the placenta. Histological examination of the placenta revealed a dense macrophage infiltrate, but no evidence for vasculopathy typically associated with preeclampsia. ConclusionThis case demonstrates, for the first time, SARS-CoV-2 invasion of the placenta, highlighting the potential for severe morbidity among pregnant women with Covid-19.

Saliva is more sensitive for SARS-CoV-2 detection in COVID-19 patients than nasopharyngeal swabs

Rapid and accurate SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing is essential for controlling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The current gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis is real-time RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 from nasopharyngeal swabs. Low sensitivity, exposure risks to healthcare workers, and global shortages of swabs and personal protective equipment, however, necessitate the validation of new diagnostic approaches. Saliva is a promising candidate for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics because (1) collection is minimally invasive and can reliably be self-administered and (2) saliva has exhibited comparable sensitivity to nasopharyngeal swabs in detection of other respiratory pathogens, including endemic human coronaviruses, in previous studies. To validate the use of saliva for SARS-CoV-2 detection, we tested nasopharyngeal and saliva samples from confirmed COVID-19 patients and self-collected samples from healthcare workers on COVID-19 wards. When we compared SARS-CoV-2 detection from patient-matched nasopharyngeal and saliva samples, we found that saliva yielded greater detection sensitivity and consistency throughout the course of infection. Furthermore, we report less variability in self-sample collection of saliva. Taken together, our findings demonstrate that saliva is a viable and more sensitive alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs and could enable at-home self-administered sample collection for accurate large-scale SARS-CoV-2 testing.

Analytical sensitivity and efficiency comparisons of SARS-COV-2 qRT-PCR assays

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 polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) assays are being used by clinical, research, and public health laboratories. However, it is currently unclear if results from different tests are comparable. Our goal was to evaluate the primer-probe sets used in four common diagnostic assays available on the World Health Organization (WHO) website. To facilitate this effort, we generated RNA transcripts to be used as assay standards and distributed them to other laboratories for internal validation. We then used (1) RNA transcript standards, (2) full-length SARS-CoV-2 RNA, (3) pre-COVID-19 nasopharyngeal swabs, and (4) clinical samples from COVID-19 patients to determine analytical efficiency and sensitivity of the qRT-PCR primer-probe sets. We show that all primer-probe sets can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2 at 500 virus copies per reaction, except for the RdRp-SARSr (Charite) confirmatory primer-probe set which has low sensitivity. Our findings characterize the limitations of currently used primer-probe sets and can assist other laboratories in selecting appropriate assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.