Search

We present the results of an association study involving hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with a clinical background during the 3rd pandemic wave of COVID-19 in Slovakia. Seventeen single nucleotide variants (SNVs) in the eleven most relevant genes, according to the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative, were investigated. Our study confirms the validity of the influence of LZTFL1 and 2'-5'-oligoadenylate synthetase (OAS)1/OAS3 genetic variants on the severity of COVID-19. For two LZTFL1 SNVs in complete linkage disequilibrium, rs17713054 and rs73064425, the odds ratios of baseline allelic associations and logistic regressions (LR) adjusted for age and sex ranged in the four tested designs from 2.04 to 2.41 and from 2.05 to 3.98, respectively. The OAS1/OAS3 haplotype 'gttg' carrying a functional allele G of splice-acceptor variant rs10774671 manifested its protective function in the Delta pandemic wave. Significant baseline allelic associations of two DPP9 variants in all tested designs and two IFNAR2 variants in the Omicron pandemic wave were not confirmed by adjusted LR. Nevertheless, adjusted LR showed significant associations of NOTCH4 rs3131294 and TYK2 rs2304256 variants with severity of COVID-19. Hospitalized patients' reported comorbidities were not correlated with genetic variants, except for obesity, smoking (IFNAR2), and hypertension (NOTCH4). The results of our study suggest that host genetic variations have an impact on the severity and duration of acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Considering the differences in allelic associations between pandemic waves, they support the hypothesis that every new SARS-CoV-2 variant may modify the host immune response by reconfiguring involved pathways., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Medical University of Bialystok. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is having a tremendous impact on the global economy, health care systems and the lives of almost all people in the world. The Central European country of Slovakia reached one of the highest daily mortality rates per 100,000 inhabitants in the first 3 months of 2021, despite implementing strong prophylactic measures, lockdowns and repeated nationwide antigen testing. The present study reports a comparison of the performance of the Standard Q COVID-19 antigen test (SD Biosensor) with three commercial RT-qPCR kits (vDetect COVID-19-MultiplexDX, gb SARS-CoV-2 Multiplex-GENERI BIOTECH Ltd. and Genvinset COVID-19 [E]-BDR Diagnostics) in the detection of infected individuals among employees of the Martin University Hospital in Slovakia. Health care providers, such as doctors and nurses, are classified as "critical infrastructure", and there is no doubt about the huge impact that incorrect results could have on patients. Out of 1231 samples, 14 were evaluated as positive for SARS-CoV-2 antigen presence, and all of them were confirmed by RT-qPCR kit 1 and kit 2. As another 26 samples had a signal in the E gene, these 40 samples were re-isolated and subsequently re-analysed using the three kits, which detected the virus in 22, 23 and 12 cases, respectively. The results point to a divergence not only between antigen and RT-qPCR tests, but also within the "gold standard" RT-qPCR testing. Performance analysis of the diagnostic antigen test showed the positive predictive value (PPV) to be 100% and negative predictive value (NPV) to be 98.10%, indicating that 1.90% of individuals with a negative result were, in fact, positive. If these data are extrapolated to the national level, where the mean daily number of antigen tests was 250,000 in April 2021, it points to over 4700 people per day being misinterpreted and posing a risk of virus shedding. While mean Ct values of the samples that were both antigen and RT-qPCR positive were about 20 (kit 1: 20.47 and 20.16 for Sarbeco   E and RdRP , kit 2: 19.37 and 19.99 for Sarbeco   E and RdRP and kit 3: 17.47 for ORF1b / RdRP ), mean Ct values of the samples that were antigen-negative but RT-qPCR-positive were about 30 (kit 1: 30.67 and 30.00 for Sarbeco   E and RdRP , kit 2: 29.86 and 31.01 for Sarbeco   E and RdRP and kit 3: 27.47 for ORF1b / RdRP ). It confirms the advantage of antigen test in detecting the most infectious individuals with a higher viral load. However, the reporting of Ct values is still a matter of ongoing debates and should not be conducted without normalisation to standardised controls of known concentration.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) monitoring in air traffic is important in the prevention of the virus spreading from abroad. The gold standard for SARS-CoV-2 detection is RT-qPCR; however, for early and low viral load detection, a much more sensitive method, such as droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), is required. Our first step was to developed both, ddPCR and RT-qPCR methods, for sensitive SARS-CoV-2 detection. Analysis of ten swab/saliva samples of five Covid-19 patients in different stages of disease showed positivity in 6/10 samples with RT-qPCR and 9/10 with ddPCR. We also used our RT-qPCR method for SARS-CoV-2 detection without the need of RNA extraction, obtaining results in 90--120 minutes. We analyzed 116 self-collected saliva samples from passengers and airport staff arriving from abroad. All samples were negative by RT-qPCR, while 1 was positive, using ddPCR. Lastly, we developed ddPCR assays for SARS-CoV-2 variants identification (alpha, beta, gamma, delta/kappa) that are more economically advantageous when compared to NGS. Our findings demonstrated that saliva samples can be stored at ambient temperature, as we did not observe any significant difference between a fresh sample and the same sample after 24 hours (p = 0.23), hence, saliva collection is the optimal route for sampling airplane passengers. Our results also showed that droplet digital PCR is a more suitable method for detecting virus from saliva, compared to RT-qPCR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]