Search

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529 lineage) escapes antibodies that neutralize the ancestral virus. We tested human serum panels from participants with differing infection and vaccination status using a multiplex surrogate virus neutralization assay targeting 20 sarbecoviruses. We found that bat and pangolin sarbecoviruses showed significantly less neutralization escape than the Omicron variant. We propose that SARS-CoV-2 variants have emerged under immune selection pressure and are evolving differently from animal sarbecoviruses.

BackgroundBaricitinib and dexamethasone have randomised trials supporting their use for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. We assessed the combination of baricitinib plus remdesivir versus dexamethasone plus remdesivir in preventing progression to mechanical ventilation or death in hospitalised patients with COVID-19.MethodsIn this randomised, double-blind, double placebo-controlled trial, patients were enrolled at 67 trial sites in the USA (60 sites), South Korea (two sites), Mexico (two sites), Singapore (two sites), and Japan (one site). Hospitalised adults (≥18 years) with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen administered by low-flow (≤15 L/min), high-flow (>15 L/min), or non-invasive mechanical ventilation modalities who met the study eligibility criteria (male or non-pregnant female adults ≥18 years old with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection) were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either baricitinib, remdesivir, and placebo, or dexamethasone, remdesivir, and placebo using a permuted block design. Randomisation was stratified by study site and baseline ordinal score at enrolment. All patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (or matching oral placebo) for a maximum of 14 days or dexamethasone (or matching intravenous placebo) for a maximum of 10 days. The primary outcome was the difference in mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 between the two treatment groups in the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the as-treated population, comprising all participants who received one dose of the study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04640168.FindingsBetween Dec 1, 2020, and April 13, 2021, 1047 patients were assessed for eligibility. 1010 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 516 (51%) to baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo and 494 (49%) to dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo. The mean age of the patients was 58·3 years (SD 14·0) and 590 (58%) of 1010 patients were male. 588 (58%) of 1010 patients were White, 188 (19%) were Black, 70 (7%) were Asian, and 18 (2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native. 347 (34%) of 1010 patients were Hispanic or Latino. Mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29 was similar between the study groups (Kaplan-Meier estimates of 87·0% [95% CI 83·7 to 89·6] in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 87·6% [84·2 to 90·3] in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group; risk difference 0·6 [95% CI -3·6 to 4·8]; p=0·91). The odds ratio for improved status in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group compared with the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group was 1·01 (95% CI 0·80 to 1·27). At least one adverse event occurred in 149 (30%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 179 (37%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·5% [1·6 to 13·3]; p=0·014). 21 (4%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group had at least one treatment-related adverse event versus 49 (10%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 6·0% [2·8 to 9·3]; p=0·00041). Severe or life-threatening grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 143 (28%) of 503 patients in the baricitinib plus remdesivir plus placebo group and 174 (36%) of 482 patients in the dexamethasone plus remdesivir plus placebo group (risk difference 7·7% [1·8 to 13·4]; p=0·012).InterpretationIn hospitalised patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen by low-flow, high-flow, or non-invasive ventilation, baricitinib plus remdesivir and dexamethasone plus remdesivir resulted in similar mechanical ventilation-free survival by day 29, but dexamethasone was associated with significantly more adverse events, treatment-related adverse events, and severe or life-threatening adverse events. A more individually tailored choice of immunomodulation now appears possible, where side-effect profile, ease of administration, cost, and patient comorbidities can all be considered.FundingNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Summary Background Studies have found different waning rates of neutralising antibodies compared with binding antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. The impact of neutralising antibody waning rate at the individual patient level on the longevity of immunity remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the peak levels and dynamics of neutralising antibody waning and IgG avidity maturation over time, and correlate this with clinical parameters, cytokines, and T-cell responses. Methods We did a longitudinal study of patients who had recovered from COVID-19 up to day 180 post-symptom onset by monitoring changes in neutralising antibody levels using a previously validated surrogate virus neutralisation test. Changes in antibody avidities and other immune markers at different convalescent stages were determined and correlated with clinical features. Using a machine learning algorithm, temporal change in neutralising antibody levels was classified into five groups and used to predict the longevity of neutralising antibody-mediated immunity. Findings We approached 517 patients for participation in the study, of whom 288 consented for outpatient follow-up and collection of serial blood samples. 164 patients were followed up and had adequate blood samples collected for analysis, with a total of 546 serum samples collected, including 128 blood samples taken up to 180 days post-symptom onset. We identified five distinctive patterns of neutralising antibody dynamics as follows: negative, individuals who did not, at our intervals of sampling, develop neutralising antibodies at the 30% inhibition level (19 [12%] of 164 patients); rapid waning, individuals who had varying levels of neutralising antibodies from around 20 days after symptom onset, but seroreverted in less than 180 days (44 [27%] of 164 patients); slow waning, individuals who remained neutralising antibody-positive at 180 days post-symptom onset (46 [28%] of 164 patients); persistent, although with varying peak neutralising antibody levels, these individuals had minimal neutralising antibody decay (52 [32%] of 164 patients); and delayed response, a small group that showed an unexpected increase of neutralising antibodies during late convalescence (at 90 or 180 days after symptom onset; three [2%] of 164 patients). Persistence of neutralising antibodies was associated with disease severity and sustained level of pro-inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors. By contrast, T-cell responses were similar among the different neutralising antibody dynamics groups. On the basis of the different decay dynamics, we established a prediction algorithm that revealed a wide range of neutralising antibody longevity, varying from around 40 days to many decades. Interpretation Neutralising antibody response dynamics in patients who have recovered from COVID-19 vary greatly, and prediction of immune longevity can only be accurately determined at the individual level. Our findings emphasise the importance of public health and social measures in the ongoing pandemic outbreak response, and might have implications for longevity of immunity after vaccination. Funding National Medical Research Council, Biomedical Research Council, and A*STAR, Singapore.

Summary Background Three clusters of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) linked to a tour group from China, a company conference, and a church were identified in Singapore in February, 2020. Methods We gathered epidemiological and clinical data from individuals with confirmed COVID-19, via interviews and inpatient medical records, and we did field investigations to assess interactions and possible modes of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Open source reports were obtained for overseas cases. We reported the median (IQR) incubation period of SARS-CoV-2. Findings As of Feb 15, 2020, 36 cases of COVID-19 were linked epidemiologically to the first three clusters of circumscribed local transmission in Singapore. 425 close contacts were quarantined. Direct or prolonged close contact was reported among affected individuals, although indirect transmission (eg, via fomites and shared food) could not be excluded. The median incubation period of SARS-CoV-2 was 4 days (IQR 3–6). The serial interval between transmission pairs ranged between 3 days and 8 days. Interpretation SARS-CoV-2 is transmissible in community settings, and local clusters of COVID-19 are expected in countries with high travel volume from China before the lockdown of Wuhan and institution of travel restrictions. Enhanced surveillance and contact tracing is essential to minimise the risk of widespread transmission in the community. Funding None.

Severe SARS-CoV-2 infection can trigger uncontrolled innate and adaptive immune responses, which are commonly associated with lymphopenia and increased neutrophil counts. However, whether the immune abnormalities observed in mild to severely infected patients persist into convalescence remains unclear. Herein, comparisons were drawn between the immune responses of COVID-19 infected and convalescent adults. Strikingly, survivors of severe COVID-19 had decreased proportions of NKT and Vδ2 T cells, and increased proportions of low-density neutrophils, IgA+/CD86+/CD123+ non-classical monocytes and hyperactivated HLADR+CD38+ CD8+ T cells, and elevated levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as hepatocyte growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor A, long after virus clearance. Our study suggests potential immune correlates of "long COVID-19", and defines key cells and cytokines that delineate true and quasi-convalescent states. Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) National Medical Research Council (NMRC) National Research Foundation (NRF) Published version This work was supported by A*STAR Infectious Diseases Labs and Singapore Immunology Network (SIgN) core research grants, and the A*STAR COVID-19 Research funding (H/20/04/g1/006) provided to SIgN by the Biomedical Research Council (BMRC). Subject recruitment, sample collection and analyses were funded by the National Medical Research Council (NMRC) COVID-19 Research Fund (COVID19RF-001, COVID19-RF007, COVID190RF-060). The SIgN Immunomonitoring Platform is supported by a BMRC IAF 311006 grant and BMRC transition funds #H16/99/b0/011. The SIgN Flow Cytometry and the Multiple Analyte Platforms were supported by a grant from the National Research Foundation, Immunomonitoring Service Platform ISP) (#NRF2017_SISFP09) and the National Research Foundation Singapore (NRF).

Summary Background Functional impairment of interferon, a natural antiviral component of the immune system, is associated with the pathogenesis and severity of COVID-19. We aimed to compare the efficacy of interferon beta-1a in combination with remdesivir compared with remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. Methods We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at 63 hospitals across five countries (Japan, Mexico, Singapore, South Korea, and the USA). Eligible patients were hospitalised adults (aged ≥18 years) with SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by a positive RT-PCR test, and who met one of the following criteria suggestive of lower respiratory tract infection: the presence of radiographic infiltrates on imaging, a peripheral oxygen saturation on room air of 94% or less, or requiring supplemental oxygen. Patients were excluded if they had either an alanine aminotransferase or an aspartate aminotransferase concentration more than five times the upper limit of normal; had impaired renal function; were allergic to the study product; were pregnant or breast feeding; were already on mechanical ventilation; or were anticipating discharge from the hospital or transfer to another hospital within 72 h of enrolment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous remdesivir as a 200 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by a 100 mg maintenance dose administered daily for up to 9 days and up to four doses of either 44 μg interferon beta-1a (interferon beta-1a group plus remdesivir group) or placebo (placebo plus remdesivir group) administered subcutaneously every other day. Randomisation was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrolment. Patients, investigators, and site staff were masked to interferon beta-1a and placebo treatment; remdesivir treatment was given to all patients without masking. The primary outcome was time to recovery, defined as the first day that a patient attained a category 1, 2, or 3 score on the eight-category ordinal scale within 28 days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all randomised patients who were classified according to actual clinical severity. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04492475 . Findings Between Aug 5, 2020, and Nov 11, 2020, 969 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (n=487) or to the placebo plus remdesivir group (n=482). The mean duration of symptoms before enrolment was 8·7 days (SD 4·4) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 8·5 days (SD 4·3) days in the placebo plus remdesivir group. Patients in both groups had a time to recovery of 5 days (95% CI not estimable) (rate ratio of interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group vs placebo plus remdesivir 0·99 [95% CI 0·87–1·13]; p=0·88). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of mortality at 28 days was 5% (95% CI 3–7%) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 3% (2–6%) in the placebo plus remdesivir group (hazard ratio 1·33 [95% CI 0·69–2·55]; p=0·39). Patients who did not require high-flow oxygen at baseline were more likely to have at least one related adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (33 [7%] of 442 patients) than in the placebo plus remdesivir group (15 [3%] of 435). In patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline, 24 (69%) of 35 had an adverse event and 21 (60%) had a serious adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group compared with 13 (39%) of 33 who had an adverse event and eight (24%) who had a serious adverse event in the placebo plus remdesivir group. Interpretation Interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir was not superior to remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline had worse outcomes after treatment with interferon beta-1a compared with those given placebo. Funding The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (USA).

Objectives: Highly effective vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV-2) have been developed but variants of concerns are worrisome, especially B.1.617.2 (Delta) which has rapidly spread across the world. We aim to study if vaccination alters virological and serological kinetics in breakthrough infections. Methods: We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients in Singapore who had received a licensed mRNA vaccine and been admitted to hospital with B.1.617.2 SARS-CoV-2 infection. We compared clinical features, virological and serological kinetics (anti-nucleocapsid, anti-spike and surrogate virus neutralization titres) between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Results: Out of 218 individuals with B.1.617.2 infection, 84 received an mRNA vaccine of which 71 were fully vaccinated, 130 were unvaccinated and four received a non-mRNA vaccine. Despite significantly older age in the vaccine breakthrough group, only 2.8% (2/71) developed severe COVID-19 requiring oxygen supplementation compared with 53.1% (69/130) in the unvaccinated group (p < 0.001). Odds of severe COVID-19 following vaccination were significantly lower (adjusted odds ratio 0.07 95% CI 0.015 e0.335, p 0.001). PCR cycle threshold values were similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups at diagnosis, but viral loads decreased faster in vaccinated individuals. Early, robust boosting of anti-spike protein antibodies was observed in vaccinated patients; however, these titres were significantly lower against B.1.617.2 than the wildtype vaccine strain. Discussion: The mRNA vaccines are highly effective at preventing symptomatic and severe COVID-19 associated with B.1.617.2 infection. Vaccination is associated with faster decline in viral RNA load and a robust serological response. Vaccination remains a key strategy for control of the COVID-19 pandemic. National Medical Research Council (NMRC) Published version B.E.Y. reports personal fees from Roche, Sanofi and Gilead, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests. This study was funded by grants from the Singapore National Medical Research Council (COVID19RF-001, COVID19RF-008). The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; preparation, review or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

The immune responses and mechanisms limiting symptom progression in asymptomatic cases of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection remain unclear. We comprehensively characterized transcriptomic profiles, cytokine responses, neutralization capacity of antibodies, and cellular immune phenotypes of asymptomatic patients with acute SARS‐CoV‐2 infection to identify potential protective mechanisms. Compared to symptomatic patients, asymptomatic patients had higher counts of mature neutrophils and lower proportion of CD169+ expressing monocytes in the peripheral blood. Systemic levels of pro‐inflammatory cytokines were also lower in asymptomatic patients, accompanied by milder pro‐inflammatory gene signatures. Mechanistically, a more robust systemic Th2 cell signature with a higher level of virus‐specific Th17 cells and a weaker yet sufficient neutralizing antibody profile against SARS‐CoV‐2 was observed in asymptomatic patients. In addition, asymptomatic COVID‐19 patients had higher systemic levels of growth factors that are associated with cellular repair. Together, the data suggest that asymptomatic patients mount less pro‐inflammatory and more protective immune responses against SARS‐CoV‐2 indicative of disease tolerance. Insights from this study highlight key immune pathways that could serve as therapeutic targets to prevent disease progression in COVID‐19., We show that asymptomatic patients elicit a different repertoire of immune responses from symptomatic patients. Our data suggest that asymptomatic patients could limit symptom development with a well‐balanced inflammatory response and more protective immune responses against SARS‐CoV‐2.

Background: Host determinants of severe coronavirus disease 2019 include advanced age, comorbidities and male sex. Virologic factors may also be important in determining clinical outcome and transmission rates, but limited patient-level data is available. Methods: We conducted an observational cohort study at seven public hospitals in Singapore. Clinical and laboratory data were collected and compared between individuals infected with different SARS-CoV-2 clades. Firth's logistic regression was used to examine the association between SARS-CoV-2 clade and development of hypoxia, and quasi-Poisson regression to compare transmission rates. Plasma samples were tested for immune mediator levels and the kinetics of viral replication in cell culture were compared. Findings: 319 patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection had clinical and virologic data available for analysis. 29 (9%) were infected with clade S, 90 (28%) with clade L/V, 96 (30%) with clade G (containing D614G variant), and 104 (33%) with other clades ‘O’ were assigned to lineage B.6. After adjusting for age and other covariates, infections with clade S (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0·030 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 0·0002–0·29)) or clade O (B·6) (aOR 0·26 (95% CI 0·064–0·93)) were associated with lower odds of developing hypoxia requiring supplemental oxygen compared with clade L/V. Patients infected with clade L/V had more pronounced systemic inflammation with higher concentrations of pro-inflammatory cytokines, chemokines and growth factors. No significant difference in the severity of clade G infections was observed (aOR 0·95 (95% CI: 0·35–2·52). Though viral loads were significantly higher, there was no evidence of increased transmissibility of clade G, and replicative fitness in cell culture was similar for all clades. Interpretation: Infection with clades L/V was associated with increased severity and more systemic release of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Infection with clade G was not associated with changes in severity, and despite higher viral loads there was no evidence of increased transmissibility. Published version

We aim to describe a case series of critically and non-critically ill COVID-19 patients in Singapore. This was a multicentered prospective study with clinical and laboratory details. Details for fifty uncomplicated COVID-19 patients and ten who required mechanical ventilation were collected. We compared clinical features between the groups, assessed predictors of intubation, and described ventilatory management in ICU patients. Ventilated patients were significantly older, reported more dyspnea, had elevated C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase. A multivariable logistic regression model identified respiratory rate (aOR 2.83, 95% CI 1.24–6.47) and neutrophil count (aOR 2.39, 95% CI 1.34–4.26) on admission as independent predictors of intubation with area under receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.928 (95% CI 0.828–0.979). Median APACHE II score was 19 (IQR 17–22) and PaO2/FiO2 ratio before intubation was 104 (IQR 89–129). Median peak FiO2 was 0.75 (IQR 0.6–1.0), positive end-expiratory pressure 12 (IQR 10–14) and plateau pressure 22 (IQR 18–26) in the first 24 h of ventilation. Median duration of ventilation was 6.5 days (IQR 5.5–13). There were no fatalities. Most COVID-19 patients in Singapore who required mechanical ventilation because of ARDS were extubated with no mortality.

A significant proportion of COVID-19 patients will progress to critical illness requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. This accentuates the need for a therapy that can reduce the severity of COVID-19. Clinical trials have shown the effectiveness of remdesivir in shortening recovery time and decreasing progression to respiratory failure and mechanical ventilation. However, some studies have highlighted its lack of efficacy in patients on high-flow oxygen and mechanical ventilation. This study uncovers some underlying immune response differences between responders and non-responders to remdesivir treatment. Immunological analyses revealed an upregulation of tissue repair factors BDNF, PDGF-BB and PIGF-1, as well as an increase in ratio of Th2-associated cytokine IL-4 to Th1-associated cytokine IFN-γ. Serological profiling of IgG subclasses corroborated this observation, with significantly higher magnitude of increase in Th2-associated IgG2 and IgG4 responses. These findings help to identify the mechanisms of immune regulation accompanying successful remdesivir treatment in severe COVID-19 patients. Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) National Medical Research Council (NMRC) National Research Foundation (NRF) Published version This work was supported by Singapore Immunology Network (SIgN) core research grant and the A*STAR COVID-19 Research funding (H/20/04/g1/006) provided to SIgN by the Biomedical Research Council (BMRC). Subject recruitment and sample collection were funded by the National Medical Research Council (NMRC) COVID-19 Research Fund (COVID19RF001). The SIgN Immunomonitoring Platform is supported by a BMRC IAF 311006 grant and BMRC transition funds #H16/99/ b0/011. The SIgN Flow Cytometry and the Multiple Analyte Platforms were supported by a grant from the National Research Foundation, Immunomonitoring Service Platform ISP) (#NRF2017_SISFP09) and the National Research Foundation Singapore (NRF).

Early detection of infections is crucial to limit the spread of coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19). Here, we develop a flow cytometry-based assay to detect SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein (S protein) antibodies in COVID-19 patients. The assay detects specific IgM, IgA and IgG in COVID-19 patients and also the acquisition of all IgG subclasses, with IgG1 being the most dominant. The antibody response is significantly higher at a later stage of the infection. Furthermore, asymptomatic COVID-19 patients also develop specific IgM, IgA and IgG, with IgG1 as the most dominant subclass. Although the antibody levels are lower in asymptomatic infections, the assay is highly sensitive and detect 97% of asymptomatic infections. These findings demonstrate that the assay can be used for serological analysis of symptomatic infections, and also asymptomatic infections, which may, otherwise, go undetected., Graphical Abstract, Highlights Flow cytometry assay detects specific antibodies in symptomatic COVID-19 patients. Asymptomatic COVID-19 patients also develop specific antibodies. IgG1 is the dominant IgG subclass in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. The assay is highly sensitive and detects 97% of asymptomatic infections., Using a flow cytometry-based assay, Goh et al. finds specific antibodies in symptomatic COVID-19 patients’ plasma samples. IgG1 is the most dominant IgG subclass. Despite lower antibody levels, the assay detects 97% of asymptomatic infections, suggesting the feasibility of the assay to detect asymptomatic infections, which may otherwise go undetected.

The rapid spreading of SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.1.7 originated from the United Kingdom and B.1.351 from South Africa has contributed to the second wave of COVID-19 cases in the respective countries and also around the world. In this study, we employed advanced biochemical and virological methodologies to evaluate the impact of Spike mutations of these strains on the degree of protection afforded by humoral immune responses following natural infection of the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain during the early stages of the outbreak. We found that antibody-mediated neutralization activity was partially reduced for B.1.1.7 variant and significantly attenuated for the B.1.351 strain. We also found that mutations outside the receptor-binding domain (RBD) can strongly influence antibody binding and neutralization, cautioning the use of solely RBD mutations in evaluating vaccine efficacy. These findings highlight an urgent need to develop new SARS-CoV-2 vaccines that are not based exclusively on the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 Spike gene sequence. Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) National Medical Research Council (NMRC) Published version This work was supported by the Biomedical Research Council (BMRC), the A*ccelerate GAP-funded project (ACCL/19-GAP064-R20H-H) (C.-I.W and L.R.) from the Agency of Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), and National Medical Research Council (NMRC) COVID-19 Research fund (COVID-19RF-001 [L.F.P.N. and L.R.], COVID-19RF-007 [L.R., L.F.P.N., and C.-I.W.], COVID-19RF-060 [L.F.P.N. and L.R.], and COVID-19RF-004 [S.M.-S.]). This work was also partially funded by the US Food and Drug Administration Medical Countermeasures Initiative contract (75F40120C00085). The article reflects the views of the authors and does not represent the views or policies of the FDA (J.A.H.). This work was also supported by the MRC (MR/W005611/1) G2P-UK: A national virology consortium to address phenotypic consequences of SARS-CoV-2 genomic variation (J.A.H.). J.A.H. and L.F.P.N. are supported by the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at the University of Liverpool in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford (award 200907).

Objectives The emergence of a SARS‐CoV‐2 variant with a point mutation in the spike (S) protein, D614G, has taken precedence over the original Wuhan isolate by May 2020. With an increased infection and transmission rate, it is imperative to determine whether antibodies induced against the D614 isolate may cross‐neutralise against the G614 variant. Methods Antibody profiling against the SARS‐CoV‐2 S protein of the D614 variant by flow cytometry and assessment of neutralising antibody titres using pseudotyped lentiviruses expressing the SARS‐CoV‐2 S protein of either the D614 or G614 variant tagged with a luciferase reporter were performed on plasma samples from COVID‐19 patients with known D614G status (n = 44 infected with D614, n = 6 infected with G614, n = 7 containing all other clades: O, S, L, V, G, GH or GR). Results Profiling of the anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 humoral immunity reveals similar neutralisation profiles against both S protein variants, albeit waning neutralising antibody capacity at the later phase of infection. Of clinical importance, patients infected with either the D614 or G614 clade elicited a similar degree of neutralisation against both pseudoviruses, suggesting that the D614G mutation does not impact the neutralisation capacity of the elicited antibodies. Conclusions Cross‐reactivity occurs at the functional level of the humoral response on both the S protein variants, which suggests that existing serological assays will be able to detect both D614 and G614 clades of SARS‐CoV‐2. More importantly, there should be negligible impact towards the efficacy of antibody‐based therapies and vaccines that are currently being developed., A single point mutation from aspartic acid (D) to glycine (G) at position 614 of the SARS‐CoV‐2 spike (S) protein, termed D614G, has garnered global attention due to the observed increase in transmissibility and infection rate. Given that a majority of the developing antibody‐mediated therapies and serological assays are based on the S antigen of the original Wuhan reference sequence, it is crucial to determine whether humoral immunity acquired from the original SARS‐CoV‐2 isolate is able to induce cross‐detection and cross‐protection against the novel prevailing D614G variant. In this study, we demonstrated an overall equivalent neutralising capacity against both the D614 and G614 pseudoviruses, suggesting negligible impact towards the efficacy of antibody‐based therapies and vaccines that are currently being developed.

Objective: Migrant workers, a marginalized and under-resourced population, are vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to limited healthcare access. Moreover, metabolic diseases-such as diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, and hyperlipidemia-predispose to severe complications and mortality from COVID-19. We investigate the prevalence and consequences of undiagnosed metabolic illnesses, particularly DM and pre-diabetes, in international migrant workers with COVID-19. Methods: In this retrospective analysis, we analyzed the medical records of international migrant workers with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized at a tertiary hospital in Singapore from April 21 to June 1, 2020. We determined the prevalence of DM and pre-diabetes, and analyzed the risk of developing complications, such as pneumonia and electrolyte abnormalities, based on age and diagnosis of DM, and pre-diabetes. Results: Two hundred and fouty male migrant workers, with mean age of 44.2 years [standard deviation (SD), 8.5years], were included. Twenty one patients (8.8%) were diagnosed with pre-diabetes, and 19 (7.9%) with DM. DM was poorly controlled with a mean HbA1c of 9.9% (SD, 2.4%). 73.7% of the patients with DM and all the patients with pre-diabetes were previously undiagnosed. Pre-diabetes was associated with higher risk of pneumonia [odds ratio (OR), 10.8, 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.65-32.1; P < 0.0001], hyponatremia (OR, 8.83; 95% CI, 1.17-66.6; P = 0.0342), and hypokalemia (OR, 4.58; 95% CI, 1.52-13.82; P = 0.0069). Moreover, patients with DM or pre-diabetes developed COVID-19 infection with lower viral RNA levels. Conclusions: The high prevalence of undiagnosed pre-diabetes among international migrant workers increases their risk of pneumonia and electrolyte abnormalities from COVID-19.

Introduction Chest radiographs (CXR) are widely used for the screening and management of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This paper determinates the radiographic features of COVID-19 based on an initial national cohort of patients. Methods This is a retrospective review of swab-positive COVID-19 patients admitted to four different hospitals in Singapore between 22 January and 9 March 2020. Initial and follow-up CXR were reviewed by three experienced radiologists to identify the predominant pattern and distribution of lung parenchymal abnormalities. Results In total, 347 CXR of 96 patients were reviewed. Initial CXR were abnormal in 41 out of 96 patients (42.7%). The mean time from onset of symptoms to CXR abnormality was 5.3 (range 1-21) days. The predominant pattern of lung abnormality was ground-glass opacity on initial CXR (51.2%) and consolidation on follow-up CXR (51.0%). Multifocal bilateral abnormalities in mixed central and peripheral distribution were seen in 63.4% and 59.2% of abnormal initial and follow-up CXR, respectively. The lower zones were involved in 90.2% of the initial CXR and 93.9% of the follow-up CXR. Conclusion In a cohort of swab-positive patients, including those identified from contact tracing, we found the incidence of CXR abnormality to be lower than previously reported. The most common pattern was ground-glass opacity or consolidation, but mixed central and peripheral involvement was more common than peripheral involvement alone.

During the SARS epidemic in 2003/2004, a number of deletions were observed in ORF8 of SARS-CoV, and eventually deletion variants became predominant, leading to the hypothesis that ORF8 was an evolutionary hot spot for adaptation of SARS-CoV to humans. However, due to the successful control of the SARS epidemic, the importance of these deletions for the epidemiological fitness of SARS-CoV in humans could not be established. The emergence of multiple SARS-CoV-2 strains with ORF8 deletions, combined with evidence of a robust immune response to ORF8, suggests that the lack of ORF8 may assist with host immune evasion. In addition to providing a key insight into the evolutionary behavior of SARS-CoV-2 as the virus adapts to its new human hosts, the emergence of ORF8 deletion variants may also impact vaccination strategies., To date, limited genetic changes in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) genome have been described. Here, we report a 382-nucleotide (nt) deletion in SARS-CoV-2 that truncates open reading frame 7b (ORF7b) and ORF8, removing the ORF8 transcription regulatory sequence (TRS) and eliminating ORF8 transcription. The earliest 382-nt deletion variant was detected in Singapore on 29 January 2020, with the deletion viruses circulating in the country and accounting for 23.6% (45/191) of SARS-CoV-2 samples screened in this study. SARS-CoV-2 with the same deletion has since been detected in Taiwan, and other ORF7b/8 deletions of various lengths, ranging from 62 nt to 345 nt, have been observed in other geographic locations, including Australia, Bangladesh, and Spain. Mutations or deletions in ORF8 of SARS-CoV have been associated with reduced replicative fitness and virus attenuation. In contrast, the SARS-CoV-2 382-nt deletion viruses showed significantly higher replicative fitness in vitro than the wild type, while no difference was observed in patient viral load, indicating that the deletion variant viruses retained their replicative fitness. A robust antibody response to ORF8 has been observed in SARS-CoV-2 infection, suggesting that the emergence of ORF8 deletions may be due to immune-driven selection and that further deletion variants may emerge during the sustained transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in humans.

Summary Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants with a 382-nucleotide deletion (∆382) in the open reading frame 8 (ORF8) region of the genome have been detected in Singapore and other countries. We investigated the effect of this deletion on the clinical features of infection. Methods We retrospectively identified patients who had been screened for the ∆382 variant and recruited to the PROTECT study—a prospective observational cohort study conducted at seven public hospitals in Singapore. We collected clinical, laboratory, and radiological data from patients' electronic medical records and serial blood and respiratory samples taken during hospitalisation and after discharge. Individuals infected with the ∆382 variant were compared with those infected with wild-type SARS-CoV-2. Exact logistic regression was used to examine the association between the infection groups and the development of hypoxia requiring supplemental oxygen (an indicator of severe COVID-19, the primary endpoint). Follow-up for the study's primary endpoint is completed. Findings Between Jan 22 and March 21, 2020, 278 patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were screened for the ∆382 deletion and 131 were enrolled onto the study, of whom 92 (70%) were infected with the wild-type virus, ten (8%) had a mix of wild-type and ∆382-variant viruses, and 29 (22%) had only the ∆382 variant. Development of hypoxia requiring supplemental oxygen was less frequent in the ∆382 variant group (0 [0%] of 29 patients) than in the wild-type only group (26 [28%] of 92; absolute difference 28% [95% CI 14–28]). After adjusting for age and presence of comorbidities, infection with the ∆382 variant only was associated with lower odds of developing hypoxia requiring supplemental oxygen (adjusted odds ratio 0·07 [95% CI 0·00–0·48]) compared with infection with wild-type virus only. Interpretation The ∆382 variant of SARS-CoV-2 seems to be associated with a milder infection. The observed clinical effects of deletions in ORF8 could have implications for the development of treatments and vaccines. Funding National Medical Research Council Singapore.

Background: Given the unceasing worldwide surge in COVID-19 cases, there is an imperative need to develop highly specific and sensitive serology assays to define exposure to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods: Pooled plasma samples from PCR positive COVID-19 patients were used to identify linear B-cell epitopes from a SARS-CoV-2 peptide library of spike (S), envelope (E), membrane (M), and nucleocapsid (N) structural proteins by peptide-based ELISA. Hit epitopes were further validated with 79 COVID-19 patients with different disease severity status, 13 seasonal human CoV, 20 recovered SARS patients and 22 healthy donors. Findings: Four immunodominant epitopes, S14P5, S20P2, S21P2 and N4P5, were identified on the S and N viral proteins. IgG responses to all identified epitopes displayed a strong detection profile, with N4P5 achieving the highest level of specificity (100%) and sensitivity (>96%) against SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, the magnitude of IgG responses to S14P5, S21P2 and N4P5 were strongly associated with disease severity. Interpretation: IgG responses to the peptide epitopes can serve as useful indicators for the degree of immunopathology in COVID-19 patients, and function as higly specific and sensitive sero-immunosurveillance tools for recent or past SARS-CoV-2 infections. The flexibility of these epitopes to be used alone or in combination will allow for the development of improved point-of-care-tests (POCTs). Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) National Medical Research Council (NMRC) Published version Biomedical Research Council (BMRC), the A*ccelerate GAP-funded project (ACCL/19-GAP064-R20H-H) from Agency of Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), and National Medical Research Council (NMRC) COVID-19 Research fund (COVID19RF-001) and CCGSFPOR20002. ATR is supported by the Singapore International Graduate Award (SINGA), A*STAR.

Given the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, identification of immunogenic targets against the coronavirus spike glycoprotein will provide crucial advances towards the development of sensitive diagnostic tools and potential vaccine candidate targets. In this study, using pools of overlapping linear B-cell peptides, we report two IgG immunodominant regions on SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein that are recognised by sera from COVID-19 convalescent patients. Notably, one is specific to SARS-CoV-2, which is located in close proximity to the receptor binding domain. The other region, which is localised at the fusion peptide, could potentially function as a pan-SARS target. Functionally, antibody depletion assays demonstrate that antibodies targeting these immunodominant regions significantly alter virus neutralisation capacities. Taken together, identification and validation of these neutralising B-cell epitopes will provide insights towards the design of diagnostics and vaccine candidates against this high priority coronavirus., Characterisation of the human antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 can help the design of serological tests and vaccines. Here, the authors identify two linear epitopes in SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that elicit neutralising antibodies in several patients and could thus be useful for serology and vaccine development.

Background Self-sampling for SARS-CoV-2 would significantly raise testing capacity and reduce healthcare worker (HCW) exposure to infectious droplets personal, and protective equipment (PPE) use. Methods We conducted a diagnostic accuracy study where subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (n = 401) and healthy volunteers (n = 100) were asked to self-swab from their oropharynx and mid-turbinate (OPMT), and self-collect saliva. The results of these samples were compared to an OPMT performed by a HCW in the same patient at the same session. Results In subjects confirmed to have COVID-19, the sensitivities of the HCW-swab, self-swab, saliva, and combined self-swab plus saliva samples were 82.8%, 75.1%, 74.3% and 86.5% respectively. All samples obtained from healthy volunteers were tested negative. Compared to HCW-swab, the sensitivities of a self-swab sample and saliva sample were inferior by 8.7% (95%CI: 2.4% to 15.0%, p = 0.006) and 9.5% (95%CI: 3.1% to 15.8%, p = 0.003) respectively. The combined detection rate of self-swab and saliva had a sensitivity of 2.7% (95%CI: -2.6% to 8.0%, p = 0.321). The sensitivity of both the self-collection methods are higher when the Ct value of the HCW swab is less than 30. The specificity of both the self-swab and saliva testing was 100% (95% CI 96.4% to 100%). Conclusion Our study provides evidence that sensitivities of self-collected OPMT swab and saliva samples were inferior to a HCW swab, but they could still be useful testing tools in the appropriate clinical settings.