Search

The preclinical time course of SARS-CoV-2 shedding is not well-described. Understanding this time course will help to inform risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. During an outbreak in a congregate setting, we collected paired mid-turbinate nasal swabs for antigen testing and reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) every other day from all consenting infected and exposed persons. Among 12 persons tested prospectively before and during SARS-CoV-2 infection, ten of 12 participants (83%) had completed a primary COVID-19 vaccination series prior to the outbreak. We recovered SARS-CoV-2 in viral culture from 9/12 (75%) of participants. All three persons from whom we did not recover SARS-CoV-2 in viral culture had completed their primary vaccination series. We recovered SARS-CoV-2 from viral culture in 6/9 vaccinated persons and before symptom onset in 3/6 symptomatic persons. These findings underscore the need for both non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination to mitigate transmission.

Background Performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests among children are limited despite the need for point-of-care testing in school and childcare settings. We describe children seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing at a community site and compare antigen test performance to real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture. Methods Two anterior nasal specimens were self-collected for BinaxNOW antigen and RT-PCR testing, along with demographics, symptoms, and exposure information from individuals ≥5 years at a community testing site. Viral culture was attempted on residual antigen or RT-PCR-positive specimens. Demographic and clinical characteristics, and the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests, were compared among children ( Results About 1 in 10 included specimens were from children (225/2110); 16.4% (37/225) were RT-PCR-positive. Cycle threshold values were similar among RT-PCR-positive specimens from children and adults (22.5 vs 21.3, P = .46) and among specimens from symptomatic and asymptomatic children (22.5 vs 23.2, P = .39). Sensitivity of antigen test compared to RT-PCR was 73.0% (27/37) among specimens from children and 80.8% (240/297) among specimens from adults; among specimens from children, specificity was 100% (188/188), positive and negative predictive values were 100% (27/27) and 94.9% (188/198), respectively. Virus was isolated from 51.4% (19/37) of RT-PCR-positive pediatric specimens; all 19 had positive antigen test results. Conclusions With lower sensitivity relative to RT-PCR, antigen tests may not diagnose all positive COVID-19 cases; however, antigen testing identified children with live SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Repeated antigen testing of 12 severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–positive nursing home residents using Abbott BinaxNOW identified 9 of 9 (100%) culture-positive specimens up to 6 days after initial positive test. Antigen positivity lasted 2–24 days. Antigen positivity might last beyond the infectious period, but it was reliable in residents with evidence of early infection.

Background Nasopharyngeal specimens (NPS) are commonly used for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing but can be uncomfortable for patients. Self-collected saliva specimens (SS) or anterior nasal specimens (ANS) for SARS-CoV-2 detection are less invasive, but the sensitivity of these specimen types has not been thoroughly evaluated. Methods During September–November 2020, 730 adults undergoing SARS-CoV-2 testing at community testing events and homeless shelters in Denver provided self-collected SS and ANS before NPS collection and answered a short survey about symptoms and specimen preference. Specimens were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by means of real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR); viral culture was performed on a subset of specimens positive by rRT-PCR. The sensitivity of SS and ANS for SARS-CoV-2 detection by rRT-PCR was measured against that of NPS. Subgroup analyses included test outcomes by symptom status and culture results. Results Sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection by rRT-PCR appeared higher for SS than for ANS (85% vs 80%) and higher among symptomatic participants than among those without symptoms (94% vs 29% for SS; 87% vs 50% for ANS). Among participants with culture-positive SARS-CoV-2 by any specimen type, the sensitivities of SS and ANS by rRT-PCR were 94% and 100%, respectively. SS and ANS were equally preferred by participants; most would undergo NPS collection again despite this method’s being the least preferred. Conclusions SS were slightly more sensitive than ANS for SARS-CoV-2 detection with rRT-PCR. With both SS and ANS, SARS-CoV-2 was reliably detected among participants with symptoms. Self-collected SS and ANS offer practical advantages, are preferred by patients, and might be most useful for testing people with coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms.

Replication-competent virus has not been detected in individuals with mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) more than 10 days after symptom onset. It is unknown whether these findings apply to nursing home residents. Of 273 specimens collected from nursing home residents >10 days from the initial positive test, none were culture positive.

Background Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and antigen tests are important diagnostics for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Sensitivity of antigen tests has been shown to be lower than that of rRT-PCR; however, data to evaluate epidemiologic characteristics that affect test performance are limited. Methods Paired mid-turbinate nasal swabs were collected from university students and staff and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using both Quidel Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA) and rRT-PCR assay. Specimens positive by either rRT-PCR or antigen FIA were placed in viral culture and tested for subgenomic RNA (sgRNA). Logistic regression models were used to evaluate characteristics associated with antigen results, rRT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values, sgRNA, and viral culture. Results Antigen FIA sensitivity was 78.9% and 43.8% among symptomatic and asymptomatic participants, respectively. Among rRT-PCR positive participants, negative antigen results were more likely among asymptomatic participants (odds ratio [OR] 4.6, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3–15.4) and less likely among participants reporting nasal congestion (OR 0.1, 95% CI: .03–.8). rRT-PCR-positive specimens with higher Ct values (OR 0.5, 95% CI: .4–.8) were less likely, and specimens positive for sgRNA (OR 10.2, 95% CI: 1.6–65.0) more likely, to yield positive virus isolation. Antigen testing was >90% positive in specimens with Ct values Conclusions SARS-CoV-2 antigen test advantages include low cost, wide availability and rapid turnaround time, making them important screening tests. The performance of antigen tests may vary with patient characteristics, so performance characteristics should be accounted for when designing testing strategies and interpreting results.

We aimed to characterize presence of culturable virus in clinical specimens during acute illness, and antibody kinetics up to 6 months after symptom onset, among 14 early patients with coronavirus disease 2019 in the United States. We isolated viable severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 from real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction–positive respiratory specimens collected during days 0–8 after onset, but not after. All 13 patients with 2 or more serum specimens developed anti-spike antibodies; 12 developed detectable neutralizing antibodies. We did not isolate virus after detection of neutralizing antibodies. Eight participants provided serum at 6 months after onset; all retained detectable anti-spike immunoglobulin G, and half had detectable neutralizing antibodies. Two participants reported not feeling fully recovered at 6 months.

Background We investigated patients with potential severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection in the United States during May–July 2020. Methods We conducted case finding for patients with potential SARS-CoV-2 reinfection through the Emerging Infections Network. Cases reported were screened for laboratory and clinical findings of potential reinfection followed by requests for medical records and laboratory specimens. Available medical records were abstracted to characterize patient demographics, comorbidities, clinical course, and laboratory test results. Submitted specimens underwent further testing, including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), viral culture, whole genome sequencing, subgenomic RNA PCR, and testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 total antibody. Results Among 73 potential reinfection patients with available records, 30 patients had recurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms explained by alternative diagnoses with concurrent SARS-CoV-2 positive RT-PCR, 24 patients remained asymptomatic after recovery but had recurrent or persistent RT-PCR, and 19 patients had recurrent COVID-19 symptoms with concurrent SARS-CoV-2 positive RT-PCR but no alternative diagnoses. These 19 patients had symptom recurrence a median of 57 days after initial symptom onset (interquartile range: 47–76). Six of these patients had paired specimens available for further testing, but none had laboratory findings confirming reinfections. Testing of an additional 3 patients with recurrent symptoms and alternative diagnoses also did not confirm reinfection. Conclusions We did not confirm SARS-CoV-2 reinfection within 90 days of the initial infection based on the clinical and laboratory characteristics of cases in this investigation. Our findings support current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance around quarantine and testing for patients who have recovered from COVID-19.

To assess transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a detention facility experiencing a coronavirus disease outbreak and evaluate testing strategies, we conducted a prospective cohort investigation in a facility in Louisiana, USA. We conducted SARS-CoV-2 testing for detained persons in 6 quarantined dormitories at various time points. Of 143 persons, 53 were positive at the initial test, and an additional 58 persons were positive at later time points (cumulative incidence 78%). In 1 dormitory, all 45 detained persons initially were negative; 18 days later, 40 (89%) were positive. Among persons who were SARS-CoV-2 positive, 47% (52/111) were asymptomatic at the time of specimen collection; 14 had replication-competent virus isolated. Serial SARS-CoV-2 testing might help interrupt transmission through medical isolation and quarantine. Testing in correctional and detention facilities will be most effective when initiated early in an outbreak, inclusive of all exposed persons, and paired with infection prevention and control.

Rapid antigen tests, such as the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW), offer results more rapidly (approximately 15-30 minutes) and at a lower cost than do highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) (1). Rapid antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in symptomatic persons (2), but data are lacking on test performance in asymptomatic persons to inform expanded screening testing to rapidly identify and isolate infected persons (3). To evaluate the performance of the BinaxNOW rapid antigen test, it was used along with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing to analyze 3,419 paired specimens collected from persons aged ≥10 years at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona, during November 3-17, 2020. Viral culture was performed on 274 of 303 residual real-time RT-PCR specimens with positive results by either test (29 were not available for culture). Compared with real-time RT-PCR testing, the BinaxNOW antigen test had a sensitivity of 64.2% for specimens from symptomatic persons and 35.8% for specimens from asymptomatic persons, with near 100% specificity in specimens from both groups. Virus was cultured from 96 of 274 (35.0%) specimens, including 85 (57.8%) of 147 with concordant antigen and real-time RT-PCR positive results, 11 (8.9%) of 124 with false-negative antigen test results, and none of three with false-positive antigen test results. Among specimens positive for viral culture, sensitivity was 92.6% for symptomatic and 78.6% for asymptomatic individuals. When the pretest probability for receiving positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 is elevated (e.g., in symptomatic persons or in persons with a known COVID-19 exposure), a negative antigen test result should be confirmed by NAAT (1). Despite a lower sensitivity to detect infection, rapid antigen tests can be an important tool for screening because of their quick turnaround time, lower costs and resource needs, high specificity, and high positive predictive value (PPV) in settings of high pretest probability. The faster turnaround time of the antigen test can help limit transmission by more rapidly identifying infectious persons for isolation, particularly when used as a component of serial testing strategies.

Virus shedding in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can occur before onset of symptoms; less is known about symptom progression or infectiousness associated with initiation of viral shedding. We investigated household transmission in 5 households with daily specimen collection for 5 consecutive days starting a median of 4 days after symptom onset in index patients. Seven contacts across 2 households implementing no precautionary measures were infected. Of these 7, 2 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription PCR on day 3 of 5. Both had mild, nonspecific symptoms for 1-3 days preceding the first positive test. SARS-CoV-2 was cultured from the fourth-day specimen in 1 patient and from the fourth- and fifth-day specimens in the other. We also describe infection control measures taken in the households that had no transmission. Persons exposed to SARS-CoV-2 should self-isolate, including from household contacts, wear a mask, practice hand hygiene, and seek testing promptly.

One in six nursing home residents and staff with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests ≥90 days after initial infection had specimen cycle thresholds (Ct)

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, with subsequent worldwide spread. The first US cases were identified in January 2020. Methods To determine if SARS-CoV-2–reactive antibodies were present in sera prior to the first identified case in the United States on 19 January 2020, residual archived samples from 7389 routine blood donations collected by the American Red Cross from 13 December 2019 to 17 January 2020 from donors resident in 9 states (California, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin) were tested at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for anti–SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Specimens reactive by pan-immunoglobulin (pan-Ig) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) against the full spike protein were tested by IgG and IgM ELISAs, microneutralization test, Ortho total Ig S1 ELISA, and receptor-binding domain/ACE2 blocking activity assay. Results Of the 7389 samples, 106 were reactive by pan-Ig. Of these 106 specimens, 90 were available for further testing. Eighty-four of 90 had neutralizing activity, 1 had S1 binding activity, and 1 had receptor-binding domain/ACE2 blocking activity >50%, suggesting the presence of anti–SARS-CoV-2–reactive antibodies. Donations with reactivity occurred in all 9 states. Conclusions These findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may have been introduced into the United States prior to 19 January 2020.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified as the etiologic agent associated with coronavirus disease, which emerged in late 2019. In response, we developed a diagnostic panel consisting of 3 real-time reverse transcription PCR assays targeting the nucleocapsid gene and evaluated use of these assays for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection. All assays demonstrated a linear dynamic range of 8 orders of magnitude and an analytical limit of detection of 5 copies/reaction of quantified RNA transcripts and 1 x 10-1.5 50% tissue culture infectious dose/mL of cell-cultured SARS-CoV-2. All assays performed comparably with nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal secretions, serum, and fecal specimens spiked with cultured virus. We obtained no false-positive amplifications with other human coronaviruses or common respiratory pathogens. Results from all 3 assays were highly correlated during clinical specimen testing. On February 4, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration issued an Emergency Use Authorization to enable emergency use of this panel.

The etiologic agent of an outbreak of pneumonia in Wuhan, China, was identified as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in January 2020. A patient in the United States was given a diagnosis of infection with this virus by the state of Washington and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on January 20, 2020. We isolated virus from nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal specimens from this patient and characterized the viral sequence, replication properties, and cell culture tropism. We found that the virus replicates to high titer in Vero-CCL81 cells and Vero E6 cells in the absence of trypsin. We also deposited the virus into 2 virus repositories, making it broadly available to the public health and research communities. We hope that open access to this reagent will expedite development of medical countermeasures.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can spread rapidly within skilled nursing facilities. After identification of a case of Covid-19 in a skilled nursing facility, we assessed transmission and evaluated the adequacy of symptom-based screening to identify infections in residents. Methods We conducted two serial point-prevalence surveys, 1 week apart, in which assenting residents of the facility underwent nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal testing for SARS-CoV-2, including real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), viral culture, and sequencing. Symptoms that had been present during the preceding 14 days were recorded. Asymptomatic residents who tested positive were reassessed 7 days later. Residents with SARS-CoV-2 infection were categorized as symptomatic with typical symptoms (fever, cough, or shortness of breath), symptomatic with only atypical symptoms, presymptomatic, or asymptomatic. Results Twenty-three days after the first positive test result in a resident at this skilled nursing facility, 57 of 89 residents (64%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among 76 residents who participated in point-prevalence surveys, 48 (63%) tested positive. Of these 48 residents, 27 (56%) were asymptomatic at the time of testing; 24 subsequently developed symptoms (median time to onset, 4 days). Samples from these 24 presymptomatic residents had a median rRT-PCR cycle threshold value of 23.1, and viable virus was recovered from 17 residents. As of April 3, of the 57 residents with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 11 had been hospitalized (3 in the intensive care unit) and 15 had died (mortality, 26%). Of the 34 residents whose specimens were sequenced, 27 (79%) had sequences that fit into two clusters with a difference of one nucleotide. Conclusions Rapid and widespread transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was demonstrated in this skilled nursing facility. More than half of residents with positive test results were asymptomatic at the time of testing and most likely contributed to transmission. Infection-control strategies focused solely on symptomatic residents were not sufficient to prevent transmission after SARS-CoV-2 introduction into this facility.

Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 In this research letter, investigators report on the stability of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1 under experimental conditions. The viability of the two virus...

To assess the household secondary infection risk (SIR) of B.1.1.7 (Alpha) and non-Alpha lineages of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among children.During January to April 2021, we prospectively followed households with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. We collected questionnaires, serial nasopharyngeal swabs for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing and whole genome sequencing, and serial blood samples for serology testing. We calculated SIRs by primary case age (pediatric vs adult), household contact age, and viral lineage. We evaluated risk factors associated with transmission and described symptom profiles among children.Among 36 households with pediatric primary cases, 21 (58%) had secondary infections. Among 91 households with adult primary cases, 51 (56%) had secondary infections. SIRs among pediatric and adult primary cases were 45% and 54%, respectively (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.41-1.54). SIRs among pediatric primary cases with Alpha and non-Alpha lineage were 55% and 46%, respectively (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.51-4.53). SIRs among pediatric and adult household contacts were 55% and 49%, respectively (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.68-1.50). Among pediatric contacts, no significant differences in the odds of acquiring infection by demographic or household characteristics were observed.Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from children and adult primary cases to household members was frequent. The risk of secondary infection was similar among child and adult household contacts. Among children, household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and the risk of secondary infection was not influenced by lineage. Continued mitigation strategies (eg, masking, physical distancing, vaccination) are needed to protect at-risk groups regardless of virus lineage circulating in communities.

We quantify antibody and memory B-cell responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 at 6 and 12 months postinfection among 7 unvaccinated US coronavirus disease 2019 cases. All had detectable S-specific memory B cells and immunoglobulin G at both time points, with geometric mean titers of 117.2 BAU/mL and 84.0 BAU/mL at 6 and 12 months, respectively.

IntroductoryThe evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in the emergence of many new variant lineages that have exacerbated the COVID-19 pandemic. Some of those variants were designated as variants of concern/interest (VOC/VOI) by national or international authorities based on many factors including their potential impact on vaccines. To ascertain and rank the risk of VOCs and VOIs, we analyzed their ability to escape from vaccine-induced antibodies. The variants showed differential reductions in neutralization and replication titers by post-vaccination sera. Although the Omicron variant showed the most escape from neutralization, sera collected after a third dose of vaccine (booster sera) retained moderate neutralizing activity against that variant. Therefore, vaccination remains the most effective strategy to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective:To characterize and compare severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–specific immune responses in plasma and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) from nursing home residents during and after natural infection.Design:Prospective cohort.Setting:Nursing home.Participants:SARS-CoV-2–infected nursing home residents.Methods:A convenience sample of 14 SARS-CoV-2–infected nursing home residents, enrolled 4–13 days after real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction diagnosis, were followed for 42 days. After diagnosis, plasma SARS-CoV-2–specific pan-Immunoglobulin (Ig), IgG, IgA, IgM, and neutralizing antibodies were measured at 5 time points, and GCF SARS-CoV-2–specific IgG and IgA were measured at 4 time points.Results:All participants demonstrated immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among 12 phlebotomized participants, plasma was positive for pan-Ig and IgG in all 12 participants. Neutralizing antibodies were positive in 11 participants; IgM was positive in 10 participants, and IgA was positive in 9 participants. Among 14 participants with GCF specimens, GCF was positive for IgG in 13 participants and for IgA in 12 participants. Immunoglobulin responses in plasma and GCF had similar kinetics; median times to peak antibody response were similar across specimen types (4 weeks for IgG; 3 weeks for IgA). Participants with pan-Ig, IgG, and IgA detected in plasma and GCF IgG remained positive throughout this evaluation, 46–55 days after diagnosis. All participants were viral-culture negative by the first detection of antibodies.Conclusions:Nursing home residents had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in plasma and GCF after infection. Kinetics of antibodies detected in GCF mirrored those from plasma. Noninvasive GCF may be useful for detecting and monitoring immunologic responses in populations unable or unwilling to be phlebotomized.

Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is a coronavirus that infects both humans and dromedary camels and is responsible for an ongoing outbreak of severe respiratory illness in humans in the Middle East. While some mutations found in camel-derived MERS-CoV strains have been characterized, the majority of natural variation found across MERS-CoV isolates remains unstudied. Here we report on the environmental stability, replication kinetics and pathogenicity of several diverse isolates of MERS-CoV as well as SARS-CoV-2 to serve as a basis of comparison with other stability studies. While most of the MERS-CoV isolates exhibited similar stability and pathogenicity in our experiments, the camel derived isolate, C/KSA/13, exhibited reduced surface stability while another camel isolate, C/BF/15, had reduced pathogenicity in a small animal model. These results suggest that while betacoronaviruses may have similar environmental stability profiles, individual variation can influence this phenotype, underscoring the importance of continual, global viral surveillance.

The extent to which vaccinated persons who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 contribute to transmission is unclear. During a SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant outbreak among incarcerated persons with high vaccination rates in a federal prison, we assessed markers of viral shedding in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons.Consenting incarcerated persons with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection provided mid-turbinate nasal specimens daily for 10 consecutive days and reported symptom data via questionnaire. Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), viral whole genome sequencing, and viral culture was performed on these nasal specimens. Duration of RT-PCR positivity and viral culture positivity was assessed using survival analysis.A total of 957 specimens were provided by 93 participants, of whom 78 (84 %) were vaccinated and 17 (16 %) were unvaccinated. No significant differences were detected in duration of RT-PCR positivity among vaccinated participants (median: 13 days) versus those unvaccinated (median: 13 days; p = 0.50), or in duration of culture positivity (medians: 5 days and 5 days; p = 0.29). Among vaccinated participants, overall duration of culture positivity was shorter among Moderna vaccine recipients versus Pfizer (p = 0.048) or Janssen (p = 0.003) vaccine recipients. In post-hoc analyses, Moderna vaccine recipients demonstrated significantly shorter duration of culture positivity compared to unvaccinated participants (p = 0.02). When restricted to participants without reported prior infection, the difference between Moderna vaccine recipients and unvaccinated participants was more pronounced (medians: 3 days and 6 days, p = 0.002).Infectious periods for vaccinated and unvaccinated persons who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 are similar and can be highly variable, though some vaccinated persons are likely infectious for shorter durations. These findings are critically important, especially in congregate settings where viral transmission can lead to large outbreaks. In such settings, clinicians and public health practitioners should consider vaccinated, infected persons to be no less infectious than unvaccinated, infected persons.

Point-of-care antigen tests are an important tool for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Antigen tests are less sensitive than real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR). Data on the performance of the BinaxNOW antigen test compared to rRT-PCR and viral culture by symptom and known exposure status, timing during disease or exposure period and demographic variables are limited. During November 3rd-17th, 2020, we collected paired upper respiratory swab specimens to test for SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR and Abbott BinaxNOW (BinaxNOW) antigen test at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona. We administered a questionnaire to capture symptoms, known exposure status and previous SARS-CoV-2 test results. Specimens positive by either test were analyzed by viral culture. Previously we showed overall BinaxNOW sensitivity was 52.5%. Here we showed BinaxNOW sensitivity increased to 65.7% among currently symptomatic individuals reporting a known exposure. BinaxNOW sensitivity was lower among participants with a known exposure and previously symptomatic (32.4%) or never symptomatic (47.1%) within 14 days of testing. Sensitivity was 71.1% in participants within a week of symptom onset. In participants with a known exposure, sensitivity was highest 8-10 days post-exposure (75%). The positive predictive value for recovery of virus in cell culture was 56.7% for BinaxNOW-positive and 35.4% for rRT-PCR-positive specimens. Result reporting time was 2.5 hours for BinaxNOW and 26 hours for rRT-PCR. Point-of-care antigen tests have a shorter turn-around time compared to laboratory-based nucleic acid amplification tests, which allows for more rapid identification of infected individuals. Antigen test sensitivity limitations are important to consider when developing a testing program.

The rapid worldwide spread of SARS-CoV-2 has accelerated research and development for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. A multi-coronavirus protein microarray was created containing full-length proteins, overlapping protein fragments of various lengths, and peptide libraries from SARS-CoV-2 and four other human coronaviruses. Sera from confirmed COVID-19 patients as well as unexposed individuals were applied to multicoronavirus arrays to identify specific antibody reactivity. High-level IgG, IgM, and IgA reactivity to structural proteins S, M, and N of SARS-CoV-2, as well as accessory proteins such as ORF3a and ORF7a, were observed that were specific to COVID-19 patients. Antibody reactivity against overlapping 100-, 50-, and 30-amino acid fragments of SARS-CoV-2 proteins was used to identify antigenic regions. Numerous proteins of SARS-CoV, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and the endemic human coronaviruses HCoV-NL63 and HCoV-OC43 were also more reactive with IgG, IgM, and IgA in COVID-19 patient sera than in unexposed control sera, providing further evidence of immunologic cross-reactivity between these viruses. Whereas unexposed individuals had minimal reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 proteins that poorly correlated with reactivity against HCoV-NL63 and HCoV-OC43 S2 and N proteins, COVID-19 patient sera had higher correlation between SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV responses, suggesting that de novo antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 cross-react with HCoV epitopes. Array responses were compared with validated spike protein-specific IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), showing agreement between orthologous methods. SARS-CoV-2 microneutralization titers were low in the COVID-19 patient sera but correlated with array responses against S and N proteins. The multi-coronavirus protein microarray is a useful tool for mapping antibody reactivity in COVID-19 patients. IMPORTANCE With novel mutant SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern on the rise, knowledge of immune specificities against SARS-CoV-2 proteins is increasingly important for understanding the impact of structural changes in antibody-reactive protein epitopes on naturally acquired and vaccine-induced immunity, as well as broader topics of cross-reactivity and viral evolution. A multi-coronavirus protein microarray used to map the binding of COVID-19 patient antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 proteins and protein fragments as well as to the proteins of four other coronaviruses that infect humans has shown specific regions of SARS-CoV-2 proteins that are highly reactive with patient antibodies and revealed cross-reactivity of these antibodies with other human coronaviruses. These data and the multi-coronavirus protein microarray tool will help guide further studies of the antibody response to COVID-19 and to vaccination against this worldwide pandemic.

Incarcerated populations have experienced disproportionately higher rates of COVID-19-related illness and death compared with the general U.S. population, due in part to congregate living environments that can facilitate rapid transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and the high prevalence of underlying medical conditions associated with severe COVID-19 (1,2). The SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant has caused outbreaks among vaccinated and unvaccinated persons in congregate settings and large public gatherings (3,4). During July 2021, a COVID-19 outbreak involving the Delta variant was identified in a federal prison in Texas, infecting 172 of 233 (74%) incarcerated persons in two housing units. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) partnered with CDC to investigate. CDC analyzed data on infection status, symptom onset date, hospitalizations, and deaths among incarcerated persons. The attack rate was higher among unvaccinated versus fully vaccinated persons (39 of 42, 93% versus 129 of 185, 70%; p = 0.002).† Four persons were hospitalized, three of whom were unvaccinated, and one person died, who was unvaccinated. Among a subset of 70 persons consenting to an embedded serial swabbing protocol, the median interval between symptom onset and last positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test result in fully vaccinated versus unvaccinated persons was similar (9 versus 11 days, p = 0.37). One or more specimens were culture-positive from five of 12 (42%) unvaccinated and 14 of 37 (38%) fully vaccinated persons for whom viral culture was attempted. In settings where physical distancing is challenging, including correctional and detention facilities, vaccination and implementation of multicomponent prevention strategies (e.g., testing, medical isolation, quarantine, and masking) are critical to limiting SARS-CoV-2 transmission (5).

We used the BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card to screen 1,540 asymptomatic college students for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in a low-prevalence setting. Compared with reverse transcription PCR, BinaxNOW showed 20% overall sensitivity; among participants with culturable virus, sensitivity was 60%. BinaxNOW provides point-of-care screening but misses many infections.

SARS-CoV-2 transmission from contaminated surfaces, or fomites, has been a concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. Households have been important sites of transmission throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, but there is limited information on SARS-CoV-2 contamination of surfaces in these settings. We describe environmental detection of SARS-CoV-2 in households of persons with COVID-19 to better characterize the potential risks of fomite transmission. Ten households with ≥1 person with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and with ≥2 members total were enrolled in Utah, U.S.A. Nasopharyngeal and anterior nasal swabs were collected from members and tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Fifteen surfaces were sampled in each household and tested for presence and viability of SARS-CoV-2. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 23 (15%) of 150 environmental swab samples, most frequently on nightstands (4/6, 67%), pillows (4/23, 17%), and light switches (3/21, 14%). Viable SARS-CoV-2 was cultured from one sample. All households with SARS-CoV-2-positive surfaces had ≥1 person who first tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 ≤ 6 days prior to environmental sampling. SARS-CoV-2 surface contamination occurred early in the course of infection when respiratory transmission is most likely, notably on surfaces in close, prolonged contact with persons with COVID-19. While fomite transmission might be possible, risk is low.

BackgroundPerformance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests among children are limited despite the need for point-of-care testing in school and childcare settings. We describe children seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing at a community site and compare antigen test performance to real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture.MethodsTwo anterior nasal specimens were self-collected for BinaxNOW antigen and RT-PCR testing, along with demographics, symptoms, and exposure information from individuals ≥5 years at a community testing site. Viral culture was attempted on residual antigen or RT-PCR positive specimens. Demographic and clinical characteristics, and the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests, were compared among children (ResultsAbout one in ten included specimens were from children (225/2110); 16.4% (37/225) were RT-PCR positive. Cycle threshold values were similar among RT-PCR positive specimens from children and adults (22.5 vs 21.3, p=0.46) and among specimens from symptomatic and asymptomatic children (22.5 vs 23.2, p=0.39). Sensitivity of antigen test compared to RT-PCR was 73.0% (27/37) among specimens from children and 80.8% (240/297) among specimens from adults; among specimens from children, specificity was 100% (188/188), positive and negative predictive value were 100% (27/27) and 94.9% (188/198) respectively. Virus was isolated from 51.4% (19/37) of RT-PCR positive pediatric specimens; all 19 had positive antigen test results.ConclusionsWith lower sensitivity relative to RT-PCR, antigen tests may not diagnose all positive COVID-19 cases; however, antigen testing identified children with live SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is a viral respiratory illness first reported in Saudi Arabia in September 2012 caused by the human coronavirus (CoV), MERS-CoV. Using full-genome sequencing and phylogenetic analysis, scientists have identified three clades and multiple lineages of MERS-CoV in humans and the zoonotic host, dromedary camels. In this study, we have characterized eight MERS-CoV isolates collected from patients in Saudi Arabia in 2015. We have performed full-genome sequencing on the viral isolates, and compared them to the corresponding clinical specimens. All isolates were clade B, lineages 4 and 5. Three of the isolates carry deletions located on three independent regions of the genome in the 5'UTR, ORF1a and ORF3. All novel MERS-CoV strains replicated efficiently in Vero and Huh7 cells. Viruses with deletions in the 5'UTR and ORF1a exhibited impaired viral release in Vero cells. These data emphasize the plasticity of the MERS-CoV genome during human infection.

Known human coronaviruses (hCoV) usually cause mild to moderate upper-respiratory tract illnesses, except SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, which, in addition to mild illness can also be associated with severe respiratory diseases and high mortality rates. Well-characterized multiplexed serologic assays are needed to aid in rapid detection and surveillance of hCoVs. The present study describes development and evaluation of a multiplexed magnetic microsphere immunoassay (MMIA) to simultaneously detect immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies specific for recombinant nucleocapsid proteins (recN) from hCoVs 229E, NL63, OC43, HKU1, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV. We used paired human sera to screen for IgG with reactivity against six hCoVs to determine assay sensitivity, specificity and reproducibility. We found no signal interference between monoplex and multiplex assay formats (R2 range = 0.87–0.97). Screening of paired human sera using MMIA, resulted in 92 of 106 (sensitivity: 86%) as positive and 68 of 80 (specificity: 84%) as negative. This study serves as a proof of concept that it is feasible to develop and use a multiplexed microsphere immunoassay as a next generation screening tool for use in large scale seroprevalence studies of hCoVs.