Virucidal efficacy of guanidine-free inactivants and rapid test buffers against SARS-CoV-2.

A pathogen inactivation step during collection or processing of clinical samples has the potential to reduce infectious risks associated with diagnostic procedures. It is essential that these inactivation methods are demonstrated to be effective, particularly for non-traditional inactivation reagents or for commercial products where the chemical composition is undisclosed. This study assessed inactivation effectiveness of twenty-four next-generation (guanidine-free) nucleic acid extraction lysis buffers and twelve rapid antigen test buffers against SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19. These data have significant safety implications for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing and support the design and evidence-based risk assessment of these procedures.

Effective in vitro inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 by commercially available mouthwashes.

Infectious SARS-CoV-2 can be recovered from the oral cavities and saliva of COVID-19 patients with potential implications for disease transmission. Reducing viral load in patient saliva using antiviral mouthwashes may therefore have a role as a control measure in limiting virus spread, particularly in dental settings. Here, the efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 inactivation by seven commercially available mouthwashes with a range of active ingredients were evaluated in vitro. We demonstrate ≥4.1 to ≥5.5 log10 reduction in SARS-CoV-2 titre following a 1 min treatment with commercially available mouthwashes containing 0.01-0.02 % stabilised hypochlorous acid or 0.58 % povidone iodine, and non-specialist mouthwashes with both alcohol-based and alcohol-free formulations designed for home use. In contrast, products containing 1.5 % hydrogen peroxide or 0.2 % chlorhexidine gluconate were ineffective against SARS-CoV-2 in these tests. This study contributes to the growing body of evidence surrounding virucidal efficacy of mouthwashes/oral rinses against SARS-CoV-2, and has important applications in reducing risk associated with aerosol generating procedures in dentistry and potentially for infection control more widely.

The effect of heat-treatment on SARS-CoV-2 viability and detection.

The development of safe diagnostic protocols for working with SARS-CoV-2 clinical samples at Biosafety Level 2 (BSL2) requires understanding of the effect of heat-treatment on SARS-CoV-2 viability and downstream RT-PCR sensitivity. In this study heating SARS-CoV-2/England/2/2020 to 56 °C and 60 °C for 15, 30 and 60 min reduced the virus titre by between 2.1 and 4.9 log10 pfu/mL (as determined by plaque assay). Complete inactivation did not occur and there was significant variability between replicates. Viable virus was detected by plaque assay after heat-treatment at 80 °C for 15 or 30 min but not 60 or 90 min. After heat-treatment at 80 °C for 60 min infectious virus was only detected by more sensitive virus culture. No viable virus was detected after heating to 80 °C for 90 min or 95 °C for 1 or 5 min. RT-PCR sensitivity was not compromised by heating to 56 °C and 60 °C. However, RT-PCR sensitivity was reduced (≥3 Ct value increase) after heating the virus to 80 °C for 30 min or longer, or 95 °C for 1 or 5 min. In summary we found that the efficacy of heat-inactivation varies greatly depending on temperature and duration. Local validation of heat-inactivation and its effects downstream is therefore essential for molecular testing.

Analysis of Inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 by Specimen Transport Media, Nucleic Acid Extraction Reagents, Detergents, and Fixatives.

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated a multifaceted rapid response by the scientific community, bringing researchers, health officials, and industry together to address the ongoing public health emergency. To meet this challenge, participants need an informed approach for working safely with the etiological agent, the novel human coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Work with infectious SARS-CoV-2 is currently restricted to high-containment laboratories, but material can be handled at a lower containment level after inactivation. Given the wide array of inactivation reagents that are being used in laboratories during this pandemic, it is vital that their effectiveness is thoroughly investigated. Here, we evaluated a total of 23 commercial reagents designed for clinical sample transportation, nucleic acid extraction, and virus inactivation for their ability to inactivate SARS-CoV-2, as well as seven other common chemicals, including detergents and fixatives. As part of this study, we have also tested five filtration matrices for their effectiveness at removing the cytotoxic elements of each reagent, permitting accurate determination of levels of infectious virus remaining following treatment. In addition to providing critical data informing inactivation methods and risk assessments for diagnostic and research laboratories working with SARS-CoV-2, these data provide a framework for other laboratories to validate their inactivation processes and to guide similar studies for other pathogens.

Assessment of the protective effect of Imvamune and Acam2000 vaccines against aerosolized monkeypox virus in cynomolgus macaques.

To support the licensure of a new and safer vaccine to protect people against smallpox, a monkeypox model of infection in cynomolgus macaques, which simulates smallpox in humans, was used to evaluate two vaccines, Acam2000 and Imvamune, for protection against disease. Animals vaccinated with a single immunization of Imvamune were not protected completely from severe and/or lethal infection, whereas those receiving either a prime and boost of Imvamune or a single immunization with Acam2000 were protected completely. Additional parameters, including clinical observations, radiographs, viral load in blood, throat swabs, and selected tissues, vaccinia virus-specific antibody responses, immunophenotyping, extracellular cytokine levels, and histopathology were assessed. There was no significant difference (P > 0.05) between the levels of neutralizing antibody in animals vaccinated with a single immunization of Acam2000 (132 U/ml) and the prime-boost Imvamune regime (69 U/ml) prior to challenge with monkeypox virus. After challenge, there was evidence of viral excretion from the throats of 2 of 6 animals in the prime-boost Imvamune group, whereas there was no confirmation of excreted live virus in the Acam2000 group. This evaluation of different human smallpox vaccines in cynomolgus macaques helps to provide information about optimal vaccine strategies in the absence of human challenge studies.