Objectives Molecular assays on nasopharyngeal swabs remain the cornerstone of COVID-19 diagnostic. The high technicalities of nasopharyngeal sampling and molecular assays, as well as scarce resources of reagents, limit our testing capabilities. Several strategies failed, to date, to fully alleviate this testing process (e.g. saliva sampling or antigen testing on nasopharyngeal samples). We assessed the clinical performances of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen (N-antigen) ELISA detection in serum or plasma using the COVID-19 Quantigene® (AAZ, France) assay. Methods Performances were determined on 63 sera from 63 non-COVID patients and 227 serum samples (165 patients) from the French COVID and CoV-CONTACT cohorts with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, including 142 serum (114 patients) obtained within 14 days after symptoms’ onset. Results Specificity was 98.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.3 to 100). Sensitivity was 79.3% overall (180/227, 95% CI, 74.0 to 84.6) and 93.0% (132/142, 95% CI, 88.7 to 97.2) within 14 days after symptoms onset. 91 included patients had a sera and nasopharyngeal swabs collected in the same 24 hours. Among those with high nasopharyngeal viral loads, i.e. Ct value below 30 and 33, only 1/50 and 4/67 tested negative for N-antigenemia, respectively. Among those with a negative nasopharyngeal RT-PCR, 8/12 presented positive N-antigenemia; the lower respiratory tract was explored for 6 of these 8 patients, showing positive RT-PCR in 5 cases. Conclusion This is the first evaluation of a commercially available serum N-antigen detection assay. It presents a robust specificity and sensitivity within the first 14 days after symptoms onset. This approach provides a valuable new option for COVID-19 diagnosis, only requiring a blood draw and easily scalable in all clinical laboratories.

Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre-including this research content-immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

We studied the penetration of raltegravir and HIV shedding in the genital tract among 14 HIV-1-infected women receiving a raltegravir-containing regimen who had <40 copies/ml blood plasma (BP) HIV RNA. None of the cervicovaginal fluid (CVF) samples showed detectable HIV RNA. Median raltegravir concentrations were 235 ng/ml in BP and 93 ng/ml in CVF, with a CVF/BP ratio of approximately 2.3. This good penetration of raltegravir may contribute to the control of viral replication in the female genital tract.

BackgroundTo date, only influenza and RSV testing are recommended for respiratory viruses’ detection in paediatric units. In this study, we described, according to seasons, ages and clinical units, the results obtained in children (<15 years old) by multiplex-PCR (mPCR) tests allowing a quick and wide range detection of all respiratory viruses. These results were also compared with RSV specific detection.MethodsAll nasopharyngeal mPCR and RSV tests requested by clinicians in our French teaching hospitals group between 2011 and 2014 were retrospectively included. All repeated samples for the same children in the same month were discarded.ResultsOf the 381 mPCR tests (344 children) performed, 51.4% were positive. Positivity and viral co-infection rates were higher in the 6–36 months old strata (81% and 25%, p<0.0001 and p = 0.04, respectively). Viral distribution showed strong variations across ages. During specific influenza epidemic periods, only 1/39 (2.5%) mPCR tests were positive for influenza and 19/39 (48.7%) for other viruses. During specific RSV epidemic periods, only 8/46 (17.4%) mPCR tests were positive for RSV and 14/46 (30.4%) for other viruses. 477/1529 (31.2%) of RSV immunochromatography-tests were positive. Among the negatives immunochromatography-test also explored by mPCR, 28/62 (31%) were positive for other respiratory viruses.ConclusionThis study provides a wide description of respiratory viruses’ distribution among children in hospital settings using mPCR over 3 years. It emphasizes the number of undiagnosed respiratory viruses according to the current diagnosis practice in France and gives a better picture of respiratory viruses identified in hospital settings by mPCR all over the year in France.

The aim of this study was to assess the analytical performances, sensitivity and specificity, of two rapid tests (Covid- Presto® test rapid Covid-19 IgG/IgM and NG-Test® IgM-IgG COVID-19) and one automated immunoassay (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG) for detecting anti- SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. This study was performed with: (i) a positive panel constituted of 88 SARS-CoV-2 specimens collected from patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR, and (ii) a negative panel of 120 serum samples, all collected before November 2019, including 64 samples with a cross-reactivity panel. Sensitivity of Covid-Presto® test for IgM and IgG was 78.4% and 92.0%, respectively. Sensitivity of NG-Test® for IgM and IgG was 96.6% and 94.9%, respectively. Sensitivity of Abbott IgG assay was 96.5% showing an excellent agreement with the two rapid tests (κ = 0.947 and κ = 0.936 for NGTest ® and Covid-Presto® test, respectively). An excellent agreement was also observed between the two rapid tests (κ = 0.937). Specificity for IgM was 100% and 86.5% for Covid-Presto® test and NG-Test®, respectively. Specificity for IgG was 92.0%, 94.9% and 96.5% for Covid-Presto®, NGTest ®, and Abbott, respectively. Most of the false positive results observed with NG-Test® resulted from samples containing malarial antibodies. In conclusion, performances of these 2 rapid tests are very good and comparable to those obtained with automated immunoassay, except for IgM specificity with the NG-Test®. Thus, isolated IgM should be cautiously interpreted due to the possible false-positive reactions with this test. Finally, before their large use, the rapid tests must be reliably evaluated with adequate and large panel including early seroconversion and possible cross-reactive samples.

The worldwide demand for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing resulted in a shortage of diagnostic kits. RNA extraction step constitutes a major bottleneck to perform diagnostic. The aim of this study was to assess performances of different extraction-free SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assays compared to a reference RT-PCR assay. The panel of evaluation consisted of 94 samples: 69 positive and 25 negative for SARS-CoV-2 by reference RT-PCR. Three extraction-free RT-PCR assays were assessed: (i) PrimeDirect® Probe RT-qPCR Mix (Takara), (ii) PrimeScript®RT-PCR (Takara), and (iii) SARS-CoV-2 SANSURE®BIOTECH Novel Coronavirus (Sansure). The overall sensitivity of PrimeDirect, PrimeScript and Sansure assays was 55.1%, 69.6% and 69.6%, respectively. The sensitivity increased among samples with Ct < 30: 91.9% (n = 34/37), 89.2% (n = 33/37) and 94.6% (n = 35/37) for PrimeDirect, PrimeScript and Sansure assays, respectively. The specificity was 88%, 100% and 100% for PrimeDirect, PrimeScript and Sansure assays, respectively. In the present study, we showed a good sensitivity of extraction-free PCR assays, especially for high viral loads (Ct < 30), except PrimeDirect that displayed imperfect sensitivity and specificity. Despite a lower sensitivity for low viral loads, extraction-free reagents can provide a valuable option, cheaper, easier and less reagent consuming for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic, especially in laboratory with lower experience and equipment for molecular assays.

Clinical Microbiology and Infection xxx (xxxx) xxx Please cite this article as: Le Hingrat Q et al., Corrigendum to 'detection of SARS-CoV-2 N-antigen in blood during acute COVID-19 provides a sensitive new marker and new testing alternatives', Clinical Microbiology and Infection,

No abstract