Search

The world is combating an ongoing COVID-19 pandemic with health-care systems, society and economies impacted in an unprecedented way. It is unclear how many people have contracted the causative coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) unknowingly and are asymptomatic. Therefore, reported COVID-19 cases do not reflect the true scale of outbreak. Here we present the prevalence and distribution of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in a healthy adult population of the Netherlands, which is a highly affected country, using a high-performance immunoassay. Our results indicate that one month into the outbreak (i) the seroprevalence in the Netherlands was 2.7% with substantial regional variation, (ii) the hardest-hit areas showed a seroprevalence of up to 9.5%, (iii) the seroprevalence was sex-independent throughout age groups (18-72 years), and (iv) antibodies were significantly more often present in younger people (18-30 years). Our study provides vital information on the extent of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in a country where social distancing is in place.

A new coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has recently emerged to cause a human pandemic. Although molecular diagnostic tests were rapidly developed, serologic assays are still lacking, yet urgently needed. Validated serologic assays are needed for contact tracing, identifying the viral reservoir, and epidemiologic studies. We developed serologic assays for detection of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing, spike protein-specific, and nucleocapsid-specific antibodies. Using serum samples from patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, other coronaviruses, or other respiratory pathogenic infections, we validated and tested various antigens in different in-house and commercial ELISAs. We demonstrated that most PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected persons seroconverted by 2 weeks after disease onset. We found that commercial S1 IgG or IgA ELISAs were of lower specificity, and sensitivity varied between the 2 assays; the IgA ELISA showed higher sensitivity. Overall, the validated assays described can be instrumental for detection of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies for diagnostic, seroepidemiologic, and vaccine evaluation studies.

The final months of 2019 witnessed the emergence of a novel coronavirus in the human population. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has since spread across the globe and is posing a major burden on society. Measures taken to reduce its spread critically depend on timely and accurate identification of virus-infected individuals by the most sensitive and specific method available, i.e. real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR). Many commercial kits have recently become available, but their performance has not yet been independently assessed. The aim of this study was to compare basic analytical and clinical performance of selected RT-PCR kits from seven different manufacturers (Altona Diagnostics, BGI, CerTest Biotec, KH Medical, PrimerDesign, R-Biopharm AG, and Seegene). We used serial dilutions of viral RNA to establish PCR efficiency and estimate the 95 % limit of detection (LOD95). Furthermore, we ran a panel of SARS-CoV-2-positive clinical samples (n = 13) for a preliminary evaluation of clinical sensitivity. Finally, we used clinical samples positive for non-coronavirus respiratory viral infections (n = 6) and a panel of RNA from related human coronaviruses to evaluate assay specificity. PCR efficiency was ≥96 % for all assays and the estimated LOD95 varied within a 6-fold range. Using clinical samples, we observed some variations in detection rate between kits. Importantly, none of the assays showed cross-reactivity with other respiratory (corona)viruses, except as expected for the SARS-CoV-1 E-gene. We conclude that all RT-PCR kits assessed in this study may be used for routine diagnostics of COVID-19 in patients by experienced molecular diagnostic laboratories., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

We developed and validated 2 species-independent protein-based assays to detect Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus functional antibodies that can block virus receptor-binding or sialic acid-attachment. Antibody levels measured in both assays correlated strongly with virus-neutralizing antibody titers, proving their use for serologic confirmatory diagnosis of Middle East respiratory syndrome.

Timely detection of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infection cases is crucial to interrupt the spread of this virus. We assessed the required expertise and capacity for molecular detection of 2019-nCoV in specialised laboratories in 30 European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) countries. Thirty-eight laboratories in 24 EU/EEA countries had diagnostic tests available by 29 January 2020. A coverage of all EU/EEA countries was expected by mid-February. Availability of primers/probes, positive controls and personnel were main implementation barriers.

Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infections in humans can cause asymptomatic to fatal lower respiratory lung disease. Despite posing a probable risk for virus transmission, asymptomatic to mild infections can go unnoticed; a lack of seroconversion among some PCR-confirmed cases has been reported. We found that a MERS-CoV spike S1 protein-based ELISA, routinely used in surveillance studies, showed low sensitivity in detecting infections among PCR-confirmed patients with mild clinical symptoms and cross-reactivity of human coronavirus OC43-positive serum samples. Using in-house S1 ELISA and protein microarray, we demonstrate that most PCR-confirmed MERS-CoV case-patients with mild infections seroconverted; nonetheless, some of these samples did not have detectable levels of virus-neutralizing antibodies. The use of a sensitive and specific serologic S1-based assay can be instrumental in the accurate estimation of MERS-CoV prevalence.

Dromedary camels have been shown to be the main reservoir for human Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) infections. This systematic review aims to compile and analyse all published data on MERS-coronavirus (CoV) in the global camel population to provide an overview of current knowledge on the distribution, spread and risk factors of infections in dromedary camels. We included original research articles containing laboratory evidence of MERS-CoV infections in dromedary camels in the field from 2013 to April 2018. In general, camels only show minor clinical signs of disease after being infected with MERS-CoV. Serological evidence of MERS-CoV in camels has been found in 20 countries, with molecular evidence for virus circulation in 13 countries. The seroprevalence of MERS-CoV antibodies increases with age in camels, while the prevalence of viral shedding as determined by MERS-CoV RNA detection in nasal swabs decreases. In several studies, camels that were sampled at animal markets or quarantine facilities were seropositive more often than camels at farms as well as imported camels vs. locally bred camels. Some studies show a relatively higher seroprevalence and viral detection during the cooler winter months. Knowledge of the animal reservoir of MERS-CoV is essential to develop intervention and control measures to prevent human infections.

The transmission routes and risk factors for zoonotic Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infections are still unknown. We used the World Health Organization questionnaire for MERS-CoV case-control studies to assess risk factors for human MERS-CoV seropositivity at a farm complex in Qatar. Nine camel workers with MERS-CoV antibodies and 43 workers without antibodies were included. Some camel-related activities may pose a higher risk of MERS-CoV infection, as may cross-border movements of camels, poor hand hygiene, and overnight hospital stays with respiratory complaints. The risk factors identified in this study can be used to develop infection prevention and control measures for human MERS-CoV infections., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)