Open Access

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can spread from symptomatic patients with COVID-19, but also from asymptomatic individuals. Therefore, robust surveillance and timely interventions are essential for the control of virus spread within the community. In this regard the frequency of testing and speed of reporting, but not the test sensitivity alone, play a crucial role. In order to reduce the costs and meet the expanding demands in real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2, complementary assays, such as rapid antigen tests, have been developed. Rigorous analysis under varying conditions is required to assess the clinical performance of these tests and to ensure reproducible results. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of a recently licensed rapid antigen test using 137 clinical samples in two institutions. Test sensitivity was between 88.2-89.6% when applied to samples with viral loads typically seen in infectious patients. Of 32 rRT-PCR positive samples, 19 demonstrated infectivity in cell culture, and 84% of these samples were reactive with the antigen test. Seven full-genome sequenced SARS-CoV-2 isolates and SARS-CoV-1 were detected with this antigen test, with no cross-reactivity against other common respiratory viruses. Numerous antigen tests are available for SARS-CoV-2 testing and their performance to detect infectious individuals may vary. Head-to-head comparison along with cell culture testing for infectivity may prove useful to identify better performing antigen tests. The antigen test analyzed in this study is easy-to-use, inexpensive, and scalable. It can be helpful in monitoring infection trends and thus has potential to reduce transmission.

Background: International travel is a major driver of the introduction and spread of SARS- CoV-2. Aim: To investigate SARS-CoV-2 genetic diversity in the region of a major transport hub in Germany, we characterized the viral sequence diversity of the SARS-CoV-2 variants circulating in Frankfurt am Main, the city with the largest airport in Germany, from the end of October to the end of December 2020. Methods: In total, we recovered 136 SARS-CoV-2 genomes from nasopharyngeal swab samples. We isolated 104 isolates that were grown in cell culture and RNA from the recovered viruses and subjected them to full-genome sequence analysis. In addition, 32 nasopharyngeal swab samples were directly sequenced. Results and conclusion: We found 28 different lineages of SARS- CoV-2 circulating during the study period, including the variant of concern B.1.1.7 (∆69/70, N501Y). Six of the lineages had not previously been observed in Germany. We detected the spike protein (S) deletion ∆69/∆70 in 15% of all sequences, a four base pair (bp) deletion (in 2.9% of sequences) and a single bp deletion (in 0.7% of sequences) in ORF3a, leading to ORF3a truncations. In four sequences (2.9%), an amino acid deletion at position 210 in S was identified. In a single sample (0.7%), both a 9 bp deletion in ORF1ab and a 7 bp deletion in ORF7a were identified. One sequence in lineage B.1.1.70 had an N501Y substitution while lacking the ∆69/70 in S. The high diversity of sequences observed over two months in Frankfurt am Main highlights the persisting need for continuous SARS-CoV-2 surveillance using full-genome sequencing, particularly in cities with international airport connections.

Background The detection of the new Coranavirus (CoV) causing agent of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) for diagnostic purposes is still a critical step in prevention of secondary hospital infections. In this respect the PCR for SARS diagnostic is the fastest and most sensitive method and was published very early after the description of the new pathogen by different groups. To evaluate the quality and sensitivity of the SARS PCR performed in diagnostic laboratories all over the world an external quality assurance (EQA) for SARS PCR was initiated by the WHO, the European Network for Diagnostics of "Imported" Viral Diseases (ENIVD) and the Robert Koch-Institut. Methods Therefore 10 samples of inactivated SARS CoV strains isolated in Frankfurt and Hong Kong in different dilutions and negative controls were prepared. The freeze dried samples were send by mail to 62 different laboratories, in 37 countries in Europe and Israel (35), Asia (11), The Americas (11), Australia and New Zealand (4) and Africa (1). The results were returned by email or fax 1 week (13), 2 weeks (14), 3 weeks (6) and later (29) after receiving the material which does not mimic at all the possible speed of this fast method. But this was not considered in the evaluation of these first SARS EQA. Results 44 laboratories showed good or excellent results (26 = 100%, 18 = 90%) and even the 14 laboratories which archived only 80% (10) or 70% (4) correct results are mostly lacking sensitivity. The results of the other 4 laboratories show basic problems in regard to sensitivity, specificity and consistency of results and must be overcome as soon as possible. 4 laboratories seem to have problems with the specificity finding a positive signal in negative samples. The different methods used for preparation of the SARS CoV genome and diagnostic PCR test procedure used by the participating laboratories will be discussed in more detail in the presentation. Conclusion However, in contrast to previous EQAs for Ebola, Lassa and Orthopoxviruses the quality of PCR results was rather good which might be caused by the early publication and distribution of well developed PCR methods. An EQA for evaluation of SARS specific serology is still ongoing, first results will be available beginning of April 2004.

Das erstmals Ende 2002 im Süden Chinas aufgetretene schwere akute respiratorische Syndrom (SARS) führte bis zum August 2003 zu insgesamt über 8000 Erkrankungen und über 700 Todesfällen. Eine von der Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) ins Leben gerufene Kooperation verschiedener Laboratorien weltweit ermöglichte innerhalb von nur vier Wochen die Identifizierung des kausalen Agens, eines bislang unbekannten Coronavirus (vorläufig bezeichnet als SARS-assoziiertes Coronavirus oder SARS-CoV), welches die Koch’schen Postulate erfüllt. Der Erreger lässt sich (unter Hochsicherheitsbedingungen) gut in Zellkulturen vermehren, was weitere Studien zur Stabilität sowie die Entwicklung von antiviral wirksamen Substanzen und Impfstoffen erleichtert. Obwohl schon rasch diagnostische Labortests, insbesondere zum Nachweis der viralen Nukleinsäure und virusspezifischer Antikörper, zur Verfügung standen, basiert die Falldefinition von SARS weiterhin auf klinisch-epidemiologischen Kriterien. In Hinblick auf die Gefahr eines (saisonalen) Wiederauftretens der Infektion müssen die verfügbaren Labormethoden dringend überprüft und weiter verbessert werden. SARS ist ein gutes Beispiel dafür, wie schnell sich eine Infektionskrankheit über den internationalen Reiseverkehr ausbreiten kann, aber auch dafür, wie wichtig in einem solchen Falle eine gut koordinierte internationale Kooperation ist; durch Einsatz neuester, aber auch bewährter konventioneller Labormethoden und ständigen Austausch aktueller (Zwischen-)Ergebnisse sowie von Patientenproben und Reagenzien führte eine bisher einmalige Zusammenarbeit schnell zu einem Durchbruch. Dies lässt auf ähnliche Fortschritte beim Kampf gegen weitere neuartige Infektionserreger hoffen.