Genomic investigations of unexplained acute hepatitis in children.

Since its first identification in Scotland, over 1,000 cases of unexplained paediatric hepatitis in children have been reported worldwide, including 278 cases in the UK1. Here we report an investigation of 38 cases, 66 age-matched immunocompetent controls and 21 immunocompromised comparator participants, using a combination of genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic and immunohistochemical methods. We detected high levels of adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) DNA in the liver, blood, plasma or stool from 27 of 28 cases. We found low levels of adenovirus (HAdV) and human herpesvirus 6B (HHV-6B) in 23 of 31 and 16 of 23, respectively, of the cases tested. By contrast, AAV2 was infrequently detected and at low titre in the blood or the liver from control children with HAdV, even when profoundly immunosuppressed. AAV2, HAdV and HHV-6 phylogeny excluded the emergence of novel strains in cases. Histological analyses of explanted livers showed enrichment for T cells and B lineage cells. Proteomic comparison of liver tissue from cases and healthy controls identified increased expression of HLA class 2, immunoglobulin variable regions and complement proteins. HAdV and AAV2 proteins were not detected in the livers. Instead, we identified AAV2 DNA complexes reflecting both HAdV-mediated and HHV-6B-mediated replication. We hypothesize that high levels of abnormal AAV2 replication products aided by HAdV and, in severe cases, HHV-6B may have triggered immune-mediated hepatic disease in genetically and immunologically predisposed children.

Evaluating metagenomics and targeted approaches for diagnosis and surveillance of viruses.

BACKGROUND: Metagenomics is a powerful approach for the detection of unknown and novel pathogens. Workflows based on Illumina short-read sequencing are becoming established in diagnostic laboratories. However, high sequencing depth requirements, long turnaround times, and limited sensitivity hinder broader adoption. We investigated whether we could overcome these limitations using protocols based on untargeted sequencing with Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT), which offers real-time data acquisition and analysis, or a targeted panel approach, which allows the selective sequencing of known pathogens and could improve sensitivity. METHODS: We evaluated detection of viruses with readily available untargeted metagenomic workflows using Illumina and ONT, and an Illumina-based enrichment approach using the Twist Bioscience Comprehensive Viral Research Panel (CVRP), which targets 3153 viruses. We tested samples consisting of a dilution series of a six-virus mock community in a human DNA/RNA background, designed to resemble clinical specimens with low microbial abundance and high host content. Protocols were designed to retain the host transcriptome, since this could help confirm the absence of infectious agents. We further compared the performance of commonly used taxonomic classifiers. RESULTS: Capture with the Twist CVRP increased sensitivity by at least 10-100-fold over untargeted sequencing, making it suitable for the detection of low viral loads (60 genome copies per ml (gc/ml)), but additional methods may be needed in a diagnostic setting to detect untargeted organisms. While untargeted ONT had good sensitivity at high viral loads (60,000 gc/ml), at lower viral loads (600-6000 gc/ml), longer and more costly sequencing runs would be required to achieve sensitivities comparable to the untargeted Illumina protocol. Untargeted ONT provided better specificity than untargeted Illumina sequencing. However, the application of robust thresholds standardized results between taxonomic classifiers. Host gene expression analysis is optimal with untargeted Illumina sequencing but possible with both the CVRP and ONT. CONCLUSIONS: Metagenomics has the potential to become standard-of-care in diagnostics and is a powerful tool for the discovery of emerging pathogens. Untargeted Illumina and ONT metagenomics and capture with the Twist CVRP have different advantages with respect to sensitivity, specificity, turnaround time and cost, and the optimal method will depend on the clinical context.