Search

IntroductionThe I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS hospital networks have been measuring COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in participating European countries since early 2021.AimWe aimed to measure VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in patients ≥ 20 years hospitalised with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) from December 2021 to July 2022 (Omicron-dominant period).MethodsIn both networks, 46 hospitals (13 countries) follow a similar test-negative case-control protocol. We defined complete primary series vaccination (PSV) and first booster dose vaccination as last dose of either vaccine received ≥ 14 days before symptom onset (stratifying first booster into received < 150 and ≥ 150 days after last PSV dose). We measured VE overall, by vaccine category/product, age group and time since first mRNA booster dose, adjusting by site as a fixed effect, and by swab date, age, sex, and presence/absence of at least one commonly collected chronic condition.ResultsWe included 2,779 cases and 2,362 controls. The VE of all vaccine products combined against hospitalisation for laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was 43% (95% CI: 29-54) for complete PSV (with last dose received ≥ 150 days before onset), while it was 59% (95% CI: 51-66) after addition of one booster dose. The VE was 85% (95% CI: 78-89), 70% (95% CI: 61-77) and 36% (95% CI: 17-51) for those with onset 14-59 days, 60-119 days and 120-179 days after booster vaccination, respectively.ConclusionsOur results suggest that, during the Omicron period, observed VE against SARI hospitalisation improved with first mRNA booster dose, particularly for those having symptom onset < 120 days after first booster dose.

IntroductionTwo large multicentre European hospital networks have estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 since 2021.AimWe aimed to measure VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalised severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) patients ≥ 20 years, combining data from these networks during Alpha (March-June)- and Delta (June-December)-dominant periods, 2021.MethodsForty-six participating hospitals across 14 countries follow a similar generic protocol using the test-negative case-control design. We defined complete primary series vaccination (PSV) as two doses of a two-dose or one of a single-dose vaccine ≥ 14 days before onset.ResultsWe included 1,087 cases (538 controls) and 1,669 cases (1,442 controls) in the Alpha- and Delta-dominant periods, respectively. During the Alpha period, VE against hospitalisation with SARS-CoV2 for complete Comirnaty PSV was 85% (95% CI: 69-92) overall and 75% (95% CI: 42-90) in those aged ≥ 80 years. During the Delta period, among SARI patients ≥ 20 years with symptom onset ≥ 150 days from last PSV dose, VE for complete Comirnaty PSV was 54% (95% CI: 18-74). Among those receiving Comirnaty PSV and mRNA booster (any product) ≥ 150 days after last PSV dose, VE was 91% (95% CI: 57-98). In time-since-vaccination analysis, complete all-product PSV VE was > 90% in those with their last dose < 90 days before onset; ≥ 70% in those 90-179 days before onset.ConclusionsOur results from this EU multi-country hospital setting showed that VE for complete PSV alone was higher in the Alpha- than the Delta-dominant period, and addition of a first booster dose during the latter period increased VE to over 90%.

Background: To support the COVID-19 pandemic response, many countries, including Belgium, implemented baseline genomic surveillance (BGS) programs aiming to early detect and characterize new SARS-CoV-2 variants. In parallel, Belgium maintained a sentinel network of six hospitals that samples patients with severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) and integrated SARS-CoV-2 detection within a broader range of respiratory pathogens. We evaluate the ability of the SARI surveillance to monitor general trends and early signals of viral genetic evolution of SARS-CoV-2 and compare it with the BGS as a reference model., Methods: Nine-hundred twenty-five SARS-CoV-2 positive samples from patients fulfilling the Belgian SARI definition between January 2020 and December 2022 were sequenced using the ARTIC Network amplicon tiling approach on a MinION platform. Weekly variant of concern (VOC) proportions and types were compared to those that were circulating between 2021 and 2022, using 96,251 sequences of the BGS., Results: SARI surveillance allowed timely detection of the Omicron (BA.1, BA.2, BA.4, and BA.5) and Delta (B.1.617.2) VOCs, with no to 2 weeks delay according to the start of their epidemic growth in the Belgian population. First detection of VOCs B.1.351 and P.1 took longer, but these remained minor in Belgium. Omicron BA.3 was never detected in SARI surveillance. Timeliness could not be evaluated for B.1.1.7, being already major at the start of the study period., Conclusions: Genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 using SARI sentinel surveillance has proven to accurately reflect VOCs detected in the population and provides a cost-effective solution for long-term genomic monitoring of circulating respiratory viruses., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2023 Sciensano and The Authors. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and potential determinants were assessed in a random sample representative of the Belgian adult population. In total, 14,201 individuals (≥18 years) were invited by mail to provide saliva via an Oracol ® swab. Survey weights were applied, and potential determinants were estimated using multivariable logistic regressions. Between March and August 2021, 2767 individuals participated in the first data collection. During this period, which coincided with the onset of the vaccination campaign, the seroprevalence in the population increased from 25.2% in March/April to 78.1% in July. Among the vaccinated there was an increase from 74,2% to 98.8%; among the unvaccinated, the seroprevalence remained stable (around 17%). Among the vaccinated, factors significantly associated with the presence of antibodies were: having at least one chronic disease (OR a 0.22 (95% CI 0.08-0.62)), having received an mRNA-type vaccine (OR a 5.38 (95% CI 1.72-16.80)), and having received an influenza vaccine in 2020-2021 (OR a 3.79 (95% CI 1.30-11.07)). Among the unvaccinated, having a non-O blood type (OR a 2.00 (95% CI 1.09-3.67)) and having one or more positive COVID-19 tests (OR a 11.04 (95% CI 4.69-26.02)) were significantly associated. This study provides a better understanding of vaccine- and/or natural-induced presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and factors that are associated with this presence.

Background: Several randomised clinical trials have studied convalescent plasma for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using different protocols, with different severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) neutralising antibody titres, at different time-points and severities of illness., Methods: In the prospective multicentre DAWn-plasma trial, adult patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were randomised to 4 units of open-label convalescent plasma combined with standard of care (intervention group) or standard of care alone (control group). Plasma from donors with neutralising antibody titres (50% neutralisation titre (NT 50 )) ≥1/320 was the product of choice for the study., Results: Between 2 May 2020 and 26 January 2021, 320 patients were randomised to convalescent plasma and 163 patients to the control group according to a 2:1 allocation scheme. A median (interquartile range) volume of 884 (806-906) mL) convalescent plasma was administered and 80.68% of the units came from donors with neutralising antibody titres (NT 50 ) ≥1/320. Median time from onset of symptoms to randomisation was 7 days. The proportion of patients alive and free of mechanical ventilation on day 15 was not different between both groups (convalescent plasma 83.74% (n=267) versus control 84.05% (n=137)) (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.59-1.66; p=0.9772). The intervention did not change the natural course of antibody titres. The number of serious or severe adverse events was similar in both study arms and transfusion-related side-effects were reported in 19 out of 320 patients in the intervention group (5.94%)., Conclusions: Transfusion of 4 units of convalescent plasma with high neutralising antibody titres early in hospitalised COVID-19 patients did not result in a significant improvement of clinical status or reduced mortality., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: All authors report support for the present manuscript from the Belgian Healthcare Knowledge Center (KCE). Q. Van Thillo reports grants from Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (FWO)–Vlaanderen Basic Research 2019–2021 outside the submitted work. G. Meyfroidt reports a FWO–Vlaanderen Senior Clinical Researcher Grant outside the submitted work., (Copyright ©The authors 2022.)

To face the continuous emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, broadly protective therapeutic antibodies are highly needed. We here focused on the fusion peptide (FP) region of the viral spike antigen since it is highly conserved among alpha- and betacoronaviruses. First, we found that coronavirus cross-reactive antibodies are commonly formed during infection, being omnipresent in sera from COVID-19 patients, in ~50% of pre-pandemic human sera (rich in antibodies against endemic human coronaviruses), and even in feline coronavirus-infected cats. Pepscan analyses demonstrated that a confined N-terminal region of the FP is strongly immunogenic across diverse coronaviruses. Peptide-purified human antibodies targeting this conserved FP epitope exhibited broad binding of alpha- and betacoronaviruses, besides weak and transient SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing activity. Being frequently elicited by coronavirus infection, these FP-binding antibodies might potentially exhibit Fc-mediated effector functions and influence the kinetics or severity of coronavirus infection and disease., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Vanderheijden, Stevaert, Xie, Ren, Barbezange, Noppen, Desombere, Verhasselt, Geldhof, Vereecke, Stroobants, Oh, Vanhee, Naesens and Nauwynck.)

We compared the performance of SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody testing between 12 European laboratories involved in convalescent plasma trials. Raw titres differed almost 100-fold differences between laboratories when blind-testing 15 plasma samples. Calibration of titres in relation to the reference reagent and standard curve obtained by testing a dilution series reduced the inter-laboratory variability ca 10-fold. The harmonisation of neutralising antibody quantification is a vital step towards determining the protective and therapeutic levels of neutralising antibodies.

Objectives: To describe prevalence and incidence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among Belgian hospital healthcare workers (HCW) in April-December 2020., Design: Prospective cohort study. Follow-up was originally planned until September and later extended., Setting: Multicentre study, 17 hospitals., Participants: 50 HCW were randomly selected per hospital. HCW employed beyond the end of the study and whose profession involved contact with patients were eligible. 850 HCW entered the study in April-May 2020, 673 HCW (79%) attended the September visit and 308 (36%) the December visit., Outcome Measures: A semiquantitative ELISA was used to detect IgG against SARS-CoV-2 in serum (Euroimmun) at 10 time points. In seropositive samples, neutralising antibodies were measured using a virus neutralisation test. Real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) was performed to detect SARS-CoV-2 on nasopharyngeal swabs. Participant characteristics and the presence of symptoms were collected via an online questionnaire., Results: Among all participants, 80% were women, 60% nurses and 21% physicians. Median age was 40 years. The seroprevalence remained relatively stable from April (7.7% (95% CI: 4.8% to 12.1%) to September (8.2% (95% CI: 5.7% to 11.6%)) and increased thereafter, reaching 19.7% (95% CI: 12.0% to 30.6%) in December 2020. 76 of 778 initially seronegative participants seroconverted during the follow-up (incidence: 205/1000 person-years). Among all seropositive individuals, 118/148 (80%) had a positive neutralisation test, 83/147 (56%) presented or reported a positive RT-qPCR, and 130/147 (88%) reported COVID-19-compatible symptoms at least once. However, only 46/73 (63%) of the seroconverters presented COVID-19-compatible symptoms in the month prior to seroconversion., Conclusions: The seroprevalence among hospital HCW was slightly higher than that of the general Belgian population but followed a similar evolution, suggesting that infection prevention and control measures were effective and should be strictly maintained. After two SARS-CoV-2 waves, 80% of HCW remained seronegative, justifying their prioritisation in the vaccination strategy., Trial Registration Number: NCT04373889., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Seasonal human coronaviruses (hCoVs) broadly circulate in humans. Their epidemiology and effect on the spread of emerging coronaviruses has been neglected thus far. We aimed to elucidate the epidemiology and burden of disease of seasonal hCoVs OC43, NL63, and 229E in patients in primary care and hospitals in Belgium between 2015 and 2020., Methods: We retrospectively analysed data from the national influenza surveillance networks in Belgium during the winter seasons of 2015-20. Respiratory specimens were collected through the severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) and the influenza-like illness networks from patients with acute respiratory illness with onset within the previous 10 days, with measured or reported fever of 38°C or greater, cough, or dyspnoea; and for patients admitted to hospital for at least one night. Potential risk factors were recorded and patients who were admitted to hospital were followed up for the occurrence of complications or death for the length of their hospital stay. All samples were analysed by multiplex quantitative RT-PCRs for respiratory viruses, including seasonal hCoVs OC43, NL63, and 229E. We estimated the prevalence and incidence of seasonal hCoV infection, with or without co-infection with other respiratory viruses. We evaluated the association between co-infections and potential risk factors with complications or death in patients admitted to hospital with seasonal hCoV infections by age group. Samples received from week 8, 2020, were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)., Findings: 2573 primary care and 6494 hospital samples were included in the study. 161 (6·3%) of 2573 patients in primary care and 371 (5·7%) of 6494 patients admitted to hospital were infected with a seasonal hCoV. OC43 was the seasonal hCoV with the highest prevalence across age groups and highest incidence in children admitted to hospital who were younger than 5 years (incidence 9·0 [95% CI 7·2-11·2] per 100 000 person-months) and adults older than 65 years (2·6 [2·1-3·2] per 100 000 person-months). Among 262 patients admitted to hospital with seasonal hCoV infection and with complete information on potential risk factors, 66 (73·3%) of 90 patients who had complications or died also had at least one potential risk factor (p=0·0064). Complications in children younger than 5 years were associated with co-infection (24 [36·4%] of 66; p=0·017), and in teenagers and adults (≥15 years), more complications arose in patients with a single hCoV infection (49 [45·0%] of 109; p=0·0097). In early 2020, the Belgian SARI surveillance detected the first SARS-CoV-2-positive sample concomitantly with the first confirmed COVID-19 case with no travel history to China., Interpretation: The main burden of severe seasonal hCoV infection lies with children younger than 5 years with co-infections and adults aged 65 years and older with pre-existing comorbidities. These age and patient groups should be targeted for enhanced observation when in medical care and in possible future vaccination strategies, and co-infections in children younger than 5 years should be considered during diagnosis and treatment. Our findings support the use of national influenza surveillance systems for seasonal hCoV monitoring and early detection, and monitoring of emerging coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV-2., Funding: Belgian Federal Public Service Health, Food Chain Safety, and Environment; Belgian National Insurance Health Care (Institut national d'assurance maladie-invalidité/Rijksinstituut voor ziekte-en invaliditeitsverzekering); and Regional Health Authorities (Flanders Agentschap zorg en gezondheid, Brussels Commission communautaire commune, Wallonia Agence pour une vie de qualité)., (© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed an enormous burden on health care systems around the world. In the past, the administration of convalescent plasma of patients having recovered from SARS and severe influenza to patients actively having the disease showed promising effects on mortality and appeared safe. Whether or not this also holds true for the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus is currently unknown., Methods: DAWn-Plasma is a multicentre nation-wide, randomized, open-label, phase II proof-of-concept clinical trial, evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of the addition of convalescent plasma to the standard of care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium. Patients hospitalized with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 are eligible when they are symptomatic (i.e. clinical or radiological signs) and have been diagnosed with COVID-19 in the 72 h before study inclusion through a PCR (nasal/nasopharyngeal swab or bronchoalveolar lavage) or a chest-CT scan showing features compatible with COVID-19 in the absence of an alternative diagnosis. Patients are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either standard of care and convalescent plasma (active treatment group) or standard of care only. The active treatment group receives 2 units of 200 to 250 mL of convalescent plasma within 12 h after randomization, with a second administration of 2 units 24 to 36 h after ending the first administration. The trial aims to include 483 patients and will recruit from 25 centres across Belgium. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients that require mechanical ventilation or have died at day 15. The main secondary endpoints are clinical status on day 15 and day 30 after randomization, as defined by the WHO Progression 10-point ordinal scale, and safety of the administration of convalescent plasma., Discussion: This trial will either provide support or discourage the use of convalescent plasma as an early intervention for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04429854 . Registered on 12 June 2020 - Retrospectively registered.

Background: The emergence of SARS‐CoV‐2 in late 2019 saw the implementation of public health and social measures (PHSM) by countries across Europe to reduce its transmission and impact on populations. Consequently, countries reported changes in influenza circulation and extensive disruptions to routine surveillance systems. Methods: We describe the epidemiology of influenza in Europe between Weeks 40/2020 and 39/2022 compared to the 2016/17 to 2019/20 seasons, to assess the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic and PHSM on surveillance systems and influenza circulation. Results: Low detections of influenza were observed through primary care sentinel sources during seasonal influenza periods (Week 40 to 20); 56 (of 39,457 specimens tested; < 1% positivity) in 2020/21 and 7261 (of 64,153 specimens tested; 11% positivity) detections in 2021/22 were observed, compared to an average of 18,383 (of 50,544 specimens tested; 36% positivity) detections in 2016/17 to 2019/20. Similarly, 11 (of 19,989 specimens tested; < 1% positivity) and 1488 (of 23,636 specimens tested; 6% positivity) detections were reported through SARI surveillance sources in 2020/21 and 2021/22, respectively, compared to an average of 2850 (of 10,389 specimens tested; 27% positivity) detections in 2016/17 to 2019/20. However, the 2021/22 interseasonal period saw unusual increases in influenza detections across surveillance site types when PHSM were easing. Conclusion: In conclusion, findings suggest that the restriction and easing of PHSM measures were associated with variations in influenza detections. Our observations of out‐of‐season influenza activity highlight the importance of an integrated respiratory surveillance strategy to monitor circulating respiratory viruses throughout the year to inform optimal prevention and control strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Treatment with camostat did not affect the cycle threshold change in the early phase of COVID-19 disease. • Clinical improvement was similar in patients with COVID-19 treated with camostat or a placebo. • Treatment with camostat did not affect the SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody response. • This randomized controlled trial showed the safe use of 300 mg camostat three times daily in patients with COVID-19. • Camostat mesylate is not effective as an antiviral drug for ambulatory patients with COVID-19. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of 300 mg camostat mesylate three times daily in a fasted state to treat early phase COVID-19 in an ambulatory setting. We conducted a phase II randomized controlled trial in symptomatic (maximum 5 days) and asymptomatic patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either camostat mesylate or a placebo. Outcomes included change in nasopharyngeal viral load, time to clinical improvement, the presence of neutralizing antibodies, and safety. Of 96 participants randomized between November 2020 and June 2021, analyses were performed on the data of 90 participants who completed treatment (N = 61 camostat mesylate, N = 29 placebo). The estimated mean change in cycle threshold between day 1 and day 5 between the camostat and placebo group was 1.183 (P = 0.511). The unadjusted hazard ratio for clinical improvement in the camostat group was 0.965 (95% confidence interval, 0.480-1.942, P = 0.921 by Cox regression). The percentage distribution of the 50% neutralizing antibody titer at day 28 visit and frequency of adverse events were similar between the two groups. Under this protocol, camostat mesylate was not found to be effective as an antiviral drug against SARS-CoV-2. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04625114 ; November 12, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]