METHODS: Specimens were further studied with universal and species-specific CoV and CCoV 1-step RT-PCR assays, and viral isolation was performed in A72 canine cells. Complete genome sequencing was conducted using the Sanger method.
RESULTS: Two of 8 specimens contained sufficient amounts of CCoVs as confirmed by less-sensitive single-step RT-PCR assays, and 1 specimen demonstrated cytopathic effects in A72 cells. Complete genome sequencing of the virus causing cytopathic effects identified it as a novel canine-feline recombinant alphacoronavirus (genotype II) that we named CCoV-human pneumonia (HuPn)-2018. Most of the CCoV-HuPn-2018 genome is more closely related to a CCoV TN-449, while its S gene shared significantly higher sequence identity with CCoV-UCD-1 (S1 domain) and a feline CoV WSU 79-1683 (S2 domain). CCoV-HuPn-2018 is unique for a 36-nucleotide (12-amino acid) deletion in the N protein and the presence of full-length and truncated 7b nonstructural protein, which may have clinical relevance.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of a novel canine-feline recombinant alphacoronavirus isolated from a human patient with pneumonia. If confirmed as a pathogen, it may represent the eighth unique coronavirus known to cause disease in humans. Our findings underscore the public health threat of animal CoVs and a need to conduct better surveillance for them.
OBJECTIVE: To design and evaluate a molecular diagnostic tool for detection and identification of all currently recognized and potentially future emergent CoVs from the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily.
STUDY DESIGN AND RESULTS: We designed a semi-nested, reverse transcription RT-PCR assay based upon 38 published genome sequences of human and animal CoVs. We evaluated this assay with 14 human and animal CoVs and 11 other non-CoV respiratory viruses. Through sequencing the assay's target amplicon, the assay correctly identified each of the CoVs; no cross-reactivity with 11 common respiratory viruses was observed. The limits of detection ranged from 4 to 4 × 102 copies/reaction, depending on the CoV species tested. To assess the assay's clinical performance, we tested a large panel of previously studied specimens: 192 human respiratory specimens from pneumonia patients, 5 clinical specimens from COVID-19 patients, 81 poultry oral secretion specimens, 109 pig slurry specimens, and 31 aerosol samples from a live bird market. The amplicons of all RT-PCR-positive samples were confirmed by Sanger sequencing. Our assay performed well with all tested specimens across all sample types.
CONCLUSIONS: This assay can be used for detection and identification of all previously recognized CoVs, including SARS-CoV-2, and potentially any emergent CoVs in the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and risk factors for RSV subtypes A and B and PIV types 1-4 among patients hospitalized with pneumonia.
METHODS: In a cross-sectional, pilot study nasopharyngeal swabs were studied with real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assays. Concurrently, we helped Sibu and Kapit Hospitals adapt their first molecular diagnostics for RSV and PIV.
RESULTS: Of 129 specimens collected (June to July 2017), 39 tested positive for RSV-A (30.2%), two were positive for RSV B (1.6%), one was positive for PIV-3 (0.8%) and one was positive for PIV-4 (0.8%). No samples were positive for PIV-1 or PIV-2. Of the 39 RSV-A positive specimens, 46.2% were collected from children under one year of age and only 5.1% were from patients over the age of 18. A multivariable analysis found the odds of children <1 year of age testing positive for RSV-A were 32.7 (95% CI: 3.9, 276.2) times larger than >18 years of age, and the odds of patients hospitalized at Kapit Hospital testing positive for RSV-A were 3.2 (95% CI: 1.3, 7.8) times larger than patients hospitalized at Sibu Hospital.
CONCLUSION: This study found an unusually high prevalence of RSV-A among pneumonia patients admitted to the two hospitals. Subsequently, Sibu Hospital adapted the molecular assays with the goal of providing more directed care for such pneumonia patients.
METHODS: To better understand the burden of disease and associated risk factors, we evaluated 147 patients presenting with clinical leptospirosis to local hospitals in Sarawak, Malaysia for the presence of Leptospira and associated antibodies. Sera and urine specimens collected during the acute illness phase were assessed via a commercially available rapid diagnostic test (Leptorapide, Linnodee Ltd., Antrim, Northern Ireland), an ELISA IgM assay (Leptospira IgM ELISA, PanBio, Queensland, Australia) and a pan-Leptospira real-time PCR (qPCR) assay to estimate disease prevalence and diagnostic accuracy of each method. Microagglutination testing was performed on a subset of samples.
RESULTS: Overall, 45 out of 147 patients (30.6%) showed evidence of leptospires through qPCR in either one or both sera (20 patients) or urine (33 patients), and an additional ten (6.8%) were considered positive through serological testing, for an overall prevalence of 37.4% within the study population. However, each diagnostic method individually yielded disparate prevalence estimates: rapid test 42.2% for sera and 30.5% for urine, ELISA 15.0% for sera, qPCR 13.8% for sera and 23.4% for urine. Molecular characterization of a subset of positive samples by conventional PCR identified the bacterial species as Leptospira interrogans in 4 specimens. A multivariate risk factor analysis for the outcome of leptospirosis identified having completed primary school (OR = 2.5; 95 CI% 1.0-6.4) and weekly clothes-washing in local rivers (OR = 10.6; 95 CI% 1.4-214.8) with increased likelihood of leptospirosis when compared with those who had not.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the data suggest a relatively high prevalence of leptospirosis in the study population. The low sensitivities of the rapid diagnostic test and ELISA assay against qPCR highlight a need for better screening tools.
Methods: From June 15, 2017 to May 14, 2018, we collected nasopharyngeal swabs from 600 patients of all ages older than 1 month hospitalized with pneumonia at Sibu and Kapit Hospitals. Specimens were examined at our collaborating institutions with a panel of molecular assays for viral pathogens including influenza A (IAV), IBV, ICV, and IDV, human adenovirus (AdV), human enterovirus (EV), human coronavirus (CoV), respiratory syncytial virus subtype A (RSV-A) or RSV-B, and parainfluenza virus (PIV) types 1-4.
Results: Of 599 samples examined, 288 (48%) had molecular evidence of 1 or more respiratory viruses. Overall, the most prevalent virus detected was RSV-A (14.2%) followed by AdV (10.4%) and IAV (10.4%), then RSV-B (6.2%), EV (4.2%), IBV (2.2%), PIV-3 (1.7%), CoV (1.0%), PIV-1 (1.0%), PIV-4 (0.7%), and PIV-2 (0.2%). No specimens were confirmed positive for ICV or IDV.
Conclusions: The high prevalence of viruses detected in this study suggest that respiratory viruses may be responsible for considerable morbidity in equatorial regions such as Sarawak. Access to viral diagnostics are very necessary for medical staff to determine appropriate pneumonia treatments.
Methods: Specimens were studied for evidence of adenovirus (AdV), enterovirus (EV) and coronavirus (CoV) with panspecies gel-based nested PCR/RT-PCR assays. Gene sequences of specimens positive by panspecies assays were sequenced and studied with the NCBI Basic Local Alignment Search Tool software.
Results: There was considerable discordance between real-time and conventional molecular methods. The real-time AdV assay found a positivity of 10.4%; however, the AdV panspecies assay detected a positivity of 12.4% and the conventional AdV-Hexon assay detected a positivity of 19.6%. The CoV and EV panspecies assays similarly detected more positive specimens than the real-time assays, with a positivity of 7.8% by the CoV panspecies assay versus 4.2% by rRT-PCR, and 8.0% by the EV panspecies assay versus 1.0% by rRT-PCR. We were not able to ascertain virus viability in this setting. While most discordance was likely due to assay sensitivity for previously described human viruses, two novel, possible zoonotic AdV were detected.
Conclusions: The observed differences in the two modes of amplification suggest that where a problem with sensitivity is suspected, real-time assay results might be supplemented with panspecies conventional PCR/RT-PCR assays.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if the pathogens adenovirus (ADV), coronavirus (CoV), encephalomyocarditis virus (EMCV), enterovirus (EV), influenza A-D (IAV, IBV, ICV, and IDV), porcine circovirus 2 (PCV2), and porcine rotaviruses A and C (RVA and RVC), are aerosolized at the animal-interface, and if humans working in these environments are carrying these viruses in their nasal airways.
STUDY: This cross-sectional study took place in Sarawak, Malaysia among 11 pig farms, 2 abattoirs, and 3 animal markets in June and July of 2017. Pig feces, pig oral secretions, bioaerosols, and worker nasal wash samples were collected and analyzed via rPCR and rRT-PCR for respiratory and diarrheal viruses.
RESULTS: In all, 55 pig fecal, 49 pig oral or water, 45 bioaerosol, and 78 worker nasal wash samples were collected across 16 sites. PCV2 was detected in 21 pig fecal, 43 pig oral or water, 3 bioaerosol, and 4 worker nasal wash samples. In addition, one or more bioaerosol or pig samples were positive for EV, IAV, and RVC, and one or more worker samples were positive for ADV, CoV, IBV, and IDV.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that nucleic acids from a number of targeted viruses were present in pig oral secretions and pig fecal samples, and that several viruses were detected in bioaerosol samples or in the nasal passages of humans with occupational exposure to pigs. These results demonstrate the need for future research in strengthening viral surveillance at the human-animal interface, specifically through expanded bioaerosol sampling efforts and a seroepidemiological study of individuals with exposure to pigs in this region for PCV2 infection.