Non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory viral detection and whole genome sequencing from COVID-19 rapid antigen test devices: a laboratory evaluation study.

There has been high uptake of rapid antigen test device use for point-of-care COVID-19 diagnosis. Individuals who are symptomatic but test negative on COVID-19 rapid antigen test devices might have a different respiratory viral infection. We aimed to detect and sequence non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory viruses from rapid antigen test devices, which could assist in the characterisation and surveillance of circulating respiratory viruses in the community. We applied archival clinical nose and throat swabs collected between Jan 1, 2015, and Dec 31, 2022, that previously tested positive for a common respiratory virus (adenovirus, influenza, metapneumovirus, parainfluenza, rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus [RSV], or seasonal coronavirus; 132 swabs and 140 viral targets) on PCR to two commercially available COVID-19 rapid antigen test devices, the Panbio COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device and Roche SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Self-Test. In addition, we collected 31 COVID-19 rapid antigen test devices used to test patients who were symptomatic at The Royal Melbourne Hospital emergency department in Melbourne, Australia. We extracted total nucleic acid from the device paper test strips and assessed viral recovery using multiplex real-time PCR (rtPCR) and capture-based whole genome sequencing. Sequence and genome data were analysed through custom computational pipelines, including subtyping. Of the 140 respiratory viral targets from archival samples, 89 (64%) and 88 (63%) were positive on rtPCR for the relevant taxa following extraction from Panbio or Roche rapid antigen test devices, respectively. Recovery was variable across taxa: we detected influenza A in nine of 18 samples from Panbio and seven of 18 from Roche devices; parainfluenza in 11 of 20 samples from Panbio and 12 of 20 from Roche devices; human metapneumovirus in 11 of 16 from Panbio and 14 of 16 from Roche devices; seasonal coronavirus in eight of 19 from Panbio and two of 19 from Roche devices; rhinovirus in 24 of 28 from Panbio and 27 of 28 from Roche devices; influenza B in four of 15 in both devices; and RSV in 16 of 18 in both devices. Of the 31 COVID-19 devices collected from The Royal Melbourne Hospital emergency department, 11 tested positive for a respiratory virus on rtPCR, including one device positive for influenza A virus, one positive for RSV, four positive for rhinovirus, and five positive for SARS-CoV-2. Sequences of target respiratory viruses from archival samples were detected in 55 (98·2%) of 56 samples from Panbio and 48 (85·7%) of 56 from Roche rapid antigen test devices. 98 (87·5%) of 112 viral genomes were completely assembled from these data, enabling subtyping for RSV and influenza viruses. All 11 samples collected from the emergency department had viral sequences detected, with near-complete genomes assembled for influenza A and RSV. Non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory viruses can be detected and sequenced from COVID-19 rapid antigen devices. Recovery of near full-length viral sequences from these devices provides a valuable opportunity to expand genomic surveillance programmes for public health monitoring of circulating respiratory viruses. Australian Government Medical Research Future Fund and Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Moso MA ，Taiaroa G ，Steinig E ，Zhanduisenov M ，Butel-Simoes G ，Savic I ，Taouk ML ，Chea S ，Moselen J ，O'Keefe J ，Prestedge J ，Pollock GL ，Khan M ，Soloczynskyj K ，Fernando J ，Martin GE ，Caly L ，Barr IG ，Tran T ，Druce J ，Lim CK ，Williamson DA ... -  《Lancet Microbe》

Wastewater concentrations of human influenza, metapneumovirus, parainfluenza, respiratory syncytial virus, rhinovirus, and seasonal coronavirus nucleic-acids during the COVID-19 pandemic: a surveillance study.

Respiratory disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality; however, surveillance for circulating respiratory viruses is passive and biased. Wastewater-based epidemiology has been used to understand SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection rates at a community level but has not been used to investigate other respiratory viruses. We aimed to use wastewater-based epidemiology to understand community viral respiratory infection occurrence. A retrospective wastewater-based epidemiology surveillance study was carried out at a large wastewater treatment plant located in California, USA. Using droplet digital RT-PCR, we measured RNA concentrations of influenza A and influenza B viruses, RSV A and RSV B, parainfluenza (1-4) viruses, rhinovirus, seasonal coronaviruses, and metapneumovirus in wastewater solids three times per week for 17 months (216 samples) between Feb 1, 2021, and June 21, 2022. Novel probe-based RT-PCR assays for non-influenza viral targets were developed and validated. We compared viral RNA concentrations to positivity rates for viral infections from clinical specimens submitted to California Sentinel Clinical Laboratories (sentinel laboratories) to assess concordance between the two datasets. We detected RNA from all tested viruses in wastewater solids. Human rhinovirus (median concentration 4300 [0-9500] copies per gram dry weight) and seasonal human coronaviruses (35 000 [17 000-56 000]) were found at the highest concentrations. Concentrations of viral RNA correlated significantly and positively with positivity rates of associated viral diseases from sentinel laboratories (tau 0·32-0·57, p<0·0009); the only exceptions were influenza B and RSV A, which were rarely detected in wastewater solids. Measurements from wastewater indicated coronavirus OC43 dominated the seasonal human coronavirus infections whereas parainfluenza 3 dominated among parainfluenza infections during the study period. Concentrations of all tested viral RNA decreased noticeably after the omicron BA.1 surge suggesting a connection between changes in human behaviour during the surge and transmission of all respiratory viruses. Wastewater-based epidemiology can be used to obtain information on circulation of respiratory viruses at a localised, community level without the need to test many individuals because a single sample of wastewater represents the entire contributing community. Results from wastewater can be available within 24 h of sample collection, generating real time information to inform public health responses, clinical decision making, and individual behaviour modifications. CDC Foundation.

Boehm AB ，Hughes B ，Duong D ，Chan-Herur V ，Buchman A ，Wolfe MK ，White BJ ... -  《Lancet Microbe》

Comparative performance of SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow antigen tests and association with detection of infectious virus in clinical specimens: a single-centre laboratory evaluation study.

Lateral flow devices (LFDs) for rapid antigen testing are set to become a cornerstone of SARS-CoV-2 mass community testing, although their reduced sensitivity compared with PCR has raised questions of how well they identify infectious cases. Understanding their capabilities and limitations is, therefore, essential for successful implementation. We evaluated six commercial LFDs and assessed their correlation with infectious virus culture and PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values. In a single-centre, laboratory evaluation study, we did a head-to-head comparison of six LFDs commercially available in the UK: Innova Rapid SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test, Spring Healthcare SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Test Cassette, E25Bio Rapid Diagnostic Test, Encode SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Test Device, SureScreen COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test Cassette, and SureScreen COVID-19 Rapid Fluorescence Antigen Test. We estimated the specificities and sensitivities of the LFDs using stored naso-oropharyngeal swabs collected at St Thomas' Hospital (London, UK) for routine diagnostic SARS-CoV-2 testing by real-time RT-PCR (RT-rtPCR). Swabs were from inpatients and outpatients from all departments of St Thomas' Hospital, and from health-care staff (all departments) and their household contacts. SARS-CoV-2-negative swabs from the same population (confirmed by RT-rtPCR) were used for comparative specificity determinations. All samples were collected between March 23 and Oct 27, 2020. We determined the limit of detection (LOD) for each test using viral plaque-forming units (PFUs) and viral RNA copy numbers of laboratory-grown SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, LFDs were selected to assess the correlation of antigen test result with RT-rtPCR Ct values and positive viral culture in Vero E6 cells. This analysis included longitudinal swabs from five infected inpatients with varying disease severities. Furthermore, the sensitivities of available LFDs were assessed in swabs (n=23; collected from Dec 4, 2020, to Jan 12, 2021) confirmed to be positive (RT-rtPCR and whole-genome sequencing) for the B.1.1.7 variant, which was the dominant genotype in the UK at the time of study completion. All LFDs showed high specificity (≥98·0%), except for the E25Bio test (86·0% [95% CI 77·9-99·9]), and most tests reliably detected 50 PFU/test (equivalent SARS-CoV-2 N gene Ct value of 23·7, or RNA copy number of 3 × 106/mL). Sensitivities of the LFDs on clinical samples ranged from 65·0% (55·2-73·6) to 89·0% (81·4-93·8). These sensitivities increased to greater than 90% for samples with Ct values of lower than 25 for all tests except the SureScreen fluorescence (SureScreen-F) test. Positive virus culture was identified in 57 (40·4%) of 141 samples; 54 (94·7%) of the positive cultures were from swabs with Ct values lower than 25. Among the three LFDs selected for detailed comparisons (the tests with highest sensitivity [Innova], highest specificity [Encode], and alternative technology [SureScreen-F]), sensitivity of the LFDs increased to at least 94·7% when only including samples with detected viral growth. Longitudinal studies of RT-rtPCR-positive samples (tested with Innova, Encode, and both SureScreen-F and the SureScreen visual [SureScreen-V] test) showed that most of the tests identified all infectious samples as positive. Test performance (assessed for Innova and SureScreen-V) was not affected when reassessed on swabs positive for the UK variant B.1.1.7. In this comprehensive comparison of antigen LFDs and virus infectivity, we found a clear relationship between Ct values, quantitative culture of infectious virus, and antigen LFD positivity in clinical samples. Our data support regular testing of target groups with LFDs to supplement the current PCR testing capacity, which would help to rapidly identify infected individuals in situations in which they would otherwise go undetected. King's Together Rapid COVID-19, Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Huo Family Foundation, UK Department of Health, National Institute for Health Research Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre.

Pickering S ，Batra R ，Merrick B ，Snell LB ，Nebbia G ，Douthwaite S ，Reid F ，Patel A ，Kia Ik MT ，Patel B ，Charalampous T ，Alcolea-Medina A ，Lista MJ ，Cliff PR ，Cunningham E ，Mullen J ，Doores KJ ，Edgeworth JD ，Malim MH ，Neil SJD ，Galão RP ... -  《Lancet Microbe》

Evaluation of Three Multiplex Real-time Reverse Transcription PCR Assays for Simultaneous Detection of SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A/B, and Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Nasopharyngeal Swabs.

In the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic era, the simultaneous detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), influenza virus (Flu), and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is important in the rapid differential diagnosis in patients with respiratory symptoms. Three multiplex real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assays have been recently developed commercially in Korea: PowerChek™ SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A&B Multiplex Real-time PCR Kit (PowerChek; KogeneBiotech); STANDARD™ M Flu/SARS-CoV-2 Real-time Detection Kit (STANDARD M; SD BioSensor); and Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2/FluA/FluB/RSV Assay (Allplex; Seegene). We evaluated the analytical and clinical performances of these kits. A limit of detection tests were performed and cross-reactivity analysis was executed using clinical respiratory samples. Ninety-seven SARS-CoV-2-positive, 201 SARS-CoV-2-negative, 71 influenza A-positive, 50 influenza B-positive, 78 RSV-positive, and 207 other respiratory virus-positive nasopharyngeal swabs were tested using the three assays. The AdvanSure™ respiratory viruses rRT-PCR assay (AdvanSure; LG Life Sciences) was used as a comparator assay for RSV. Except in influenza B, in SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A, there were no significant differences in detecting specific genes of the viruses among the three assays. All three kits did not cross-react with common respiratory viruses. All three kits had greater than 92% positive percent agreement and negative percent agreement and ≥ 0.95 kappa value in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 and flu A/B. Allplex detected RSV more sensitively than AdvanSure. The overall performance of three multiplex rRT-PCR assays for the concurrent detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B, and RSV was comparable. These kits will promote prompt differential diagnosis of COVID-19, influenza, and RSV infection in the COVID-19 pandemic era.

Yun J ，Park JH ，Kim N ，Roh EY ，Shin S ，Yoon JH ，Kim TS ，Park H ... -  《-》

Diagnostic accuracy of Savanna RVP4 (QuidelOrtho) for the detection of Influenza A virus, RSV, and SARS-CoV-2.

Köse B ，Schaumburg F 《Microbiology Spectrum》