This study was designed to test the efficacy of an air treatment using ozone and relative humidity (RH) for the inactivation of airborne viruses. Four phages (φX174, PR772, MS2 and φ6) and one eukaryotic virus (murine norovirus MNV-1) were exposed to low ozone concentrations (1.23 ppm for phages and 0.23 ppm for MNV-1) and various levels of RH for 10 to 70 minutes. The inactivation of these viruses was then assessed to determine which of the tested conditions provided the greatest reduction in virus infectivity. An inactivation of at least two orders of magnitude for φX174, MS2 and MNV-1 was achieved with an ozone exposure of 40 minutes at 85% RH. For PR772 and φ6, exposure to the reference condition at 20% RH for 10 minutes yielded the same results. These findings suggest that ozone used at a low concentration is a powerful disinfectant for airborne viruses when combined with a high RH.Air treatment could therefore be implemented inside hospital rooms ventilated naturally.

The worldwide repercussions of COVID-19 sparked important research efforts, yet the detailed contribution of aerosols in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has not been elucidated. In an attempt to quantify viral aerosols in the environment of infected patients, we collected 100 air samples in acute care hospital rooms hosting 22 patients over the course of nearly two months using three different air sampling protocols. Quantification by RT-qPCR (ORF1b) led to 11 positive samples from 6 patient rooms ( C t < 40). Viral cultures were negative. No correlation was observed between particular symptoms, length of hospital stay, clinical parameters, and time since symptom onset and the detection of airborne viral RNA. Low detection rates in the hospital rooms may be attributable to the appropriate application of mitigation methods according to the risk control hierarchy, such as increased ventilation to 4.85 air changes per hour to create negative pressure rooms. Our work estimates the mean emission rate of patients and potential airborne concentration in the absence of ventilation. Additional research is needed understand aerosolization events occur, contributing factors, and how best to prevent them.

Background Long-term care facilities (LTCF) are environments particularly favourable to coronavirus disease (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic outbreaks, due to the at-risk population they welcome and the close proximity of residents. Yet, the transmission dynamics of the disease in these establishments remain unclear. Methods Air and no-touch surfaces of 31 rooms from 7 LTCFs were sampled and SARS-CoV-2 was quantified by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Results Air samples were negative but viral genomes were recovered from 20 of 62 surface samples at concentrations ranging from 13 to 36,612 genomes/surface. Virus isolation (culture) from surface samples (n=7) was negative. Conclusions The presence of viral RNA on non-touch surfaces is evidence of viral dissemination through air, but the lack of airborne viral particles in air samples suggests that they were not aerosolized in a significant manner during air sampling sessions. The air samples were collected 8 to 30 days after the residents’ symptom onset, which could indicate that viruses are aerosolized early in the infection process. Additional research is needed to evaluate viral viability conservation and the potential role of direct contact and aerosols in SARS-CoV-2 transmission in these institutions.

Following recent findings linking the human gut microbiota to gastrointestinal cancer and its treatment, the plausible relationship between lung microbiota and pulmonary cancer is explored. This study aims at characterizing the intratumoral and adjacent healthy tissue microbiota by applying a 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing protocol to tissue samples of 29 non-small cancer patients. Emphasis was put on contaminant management and a comprehensive comparison of bacterial composition between cancerous and healthy adjacent tissues of lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma is provided. A variable degree of similarity between the two tissues of a same patient was observed. Each patient seems to possess its own bacterial signature. The two types of cancer tissue do not have a distinct bacterial profile that is shared by every patient. In addition, enteric, potentially pathogenic and pro-inflammatory bacteria were more frequently found in cancer than healthy tissue. This work brings insights into the dynamic of bacterial communities in lung cancer and provides prospective data for more targeted studies.