Many countries in the world are experiencing a recent surge in COVID‐19 cases. This is mainly attributed to the emergence of new SARS‐CoV‐2 variants. Genome sequencing is the only means to detect the evolving virus mutants and emerging variants. Cycle threshold values have an inverse relationship with viral load and lower Ct values are also found to be associated with increased infectivity. In this study, we propose to use Ct values as an early indicator for upcoming COVID‐19 waves. A retrospective cross‐sectional study was carried out to analyze the Ct values of positive samples reported during the first wave and second wave (April 2020–May 2021). Median Ct values of confirmatory genes were taken into consideration for comparison. Ct values below 25, >25–30, and >30 were categorized as high, moderate, and low viral load respectively. Our study found a significantly higher proportion of positive samples with a low Ct value (<25) across age groups and gender during the second wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic. A higher proportion of positive samples with a low Ct value (high viral load) may act as an early indicator of an upcoming surge.

Objective Challenges in susceptibility testing of colistin along with increase in the prevalence of colistin-resistant carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) pathogens needs addressal. Evaluation of user-friendly methods is necessary as an alternative to broth microdilution (BMD), the reference susceptibility testing method, for routine implementation in diagnostic clinical microbiology laboratories. Genotypic detection of the plasmid-mediated colistin resistance is also needed for infection control purposes. Materials and Methods Colistin susceptibility of 200 nonduplicate clinical CRE isolates from December 2017 to June 2019 was determined by BMD, agar dilution (AD), E test, and rapid polymyxin NP test and interpreted as per the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. The results of AD, E test, and NP test were compared with that of BMD, considering minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) ≤ 2 µg/mL as susceptible and > 2 µg/mL as resistant. Presence of any plasmid-mediated colistin resistance (mcr-1 and 2) was evaluated in 27 colistin-resistant CRE isolates by polymerase chain reaction. Statistical Analysis Performance of different phenotypic methods was analyzed by comparing MIC results of AD and E test with that of reference BMD method. Agreement between BMD and the other two methods was expressed in terms of categorical agreement and essential agreement. Errors were expressed as very major error (VME: false-susceptible) and major error (ME: false-resistance) by AD/E test. VME and ME of 3% disagreement were considered unacceptable. Results Colistin resistance was found in 27 (13.5%) isolates by BMD method. The VME rates of both AD (11%) and E test (37%) could not meet the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute recommendation (< 3% VME rate is acceptable) as alternative tests to the reference BMD. Colistin NP test showed sensitivity and specificity of 85% and 98%, respectively. The percentage discordant result in NP test was highest in Enterobacter spp. (17%). None of the 27 colistin resistant isolates showed presence of mcr-1 and mcr-2 genes. Conclusion High VME rate in AD and E tests precludes their use as alternatives to BMD for colistin susceptibility testing. NP test with moderate sensitivity but excellent specificity can be a good alternative for testing colistin susceptibility in CRE isolates, except in Enterobacter spp. Absence of mcr-1 and mcr-2 gene necessitates the exploration of other mechanisms of colistin resistance.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a dramatic impact on the provision of acute inpatient care with specialists from all disciplines having to manage patients outside of their usual speciality areas. In many UK hospitals diabetes consultants and diabetes inpatient specialist nurses have been redeployed to the wards to care for COVID-19 positive or suspected cases. Consequently, clinicians relatively unfamiliar with managing hyperglycaemia have been required to do so as the usual input from diabetes specialist teams has not been possible in many areas.The National Diabetes Inpatient COVID-19 Response Group was formed to provide guidance to those involved in the care of inpatients with diabetes during this crisis. We have published in a previous issue of This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has shaken the entire world ever since its emergence in March 2020. The disease manifestation of COVID-19 has been more severe, with a high degree of mortality in the elderly than in the young population. The cycle threshold (Ct ) value obtained in the real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been used as the surrogate marker of viral load. Therefore, assessing Ct value and clinical status among different age groups with SARS-CoV-2 infection is required to understand the viral kinetics and to assess the transmission potential of that particular age group. Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the viral load and clinical status among different age groups with COVID-19 infection. Methods and materials A retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out to analyze the Ct values of SARS-CoV-2 positive samples reported from April 2020 till May 2021. The results of 13,820 RT-PCR (reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction) positive samples were included for analysis of Ct values. Ct values of confirmatory genes were taken into consideration, and Ct values below 25, >25 to 30, and >30 were categorized as high, moderate, and low viral load, respectively. Age group was stratified into ≤18 years (young), 18-60 years (adult), and >60 years (elderly). The data were analyzed using SPSS Windows Version 25.0. Results The mean Ct values were 27.9, 26, and 26.2 in the young, adult, and elderly age groups, respectively. The mean Ct values of young patients were significantly higher as compared to adult and elderly patients (p<0.05). The percentage of high viral load (Ct<25) was found to be significantly higher in adults and elderly (44.6% & 43.7%) as compared to young (32.2%) (p<0.001). Majority of the COVID-19 positive cases younger than 18 years (75.9%) were asymptomatic as compared to 64.5% and 59.7% in the adult and elderly age groups, respectively. Conclusion This study observed a significantly high proportion of viral load in the adult and elderly population, which plays a substantial contribution to SARS-CoV-2 transmission, whereas the majority of the young population being asymptomatic plays a major role as silent transmitters. The study reemphasizes the need for strict adherence to COVID-appropriate behaviors.

The rapidly mutating Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant has replaced the previous dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants like alpha, and delta resulting in the amplification of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. The present study was conducted to compare the clinical profile and vaccination status in patients infected with Omicron and non-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants. MethodsAll patients who tested positive for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the study period (January 2022 to February 2022) were further tested for detection of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant by using Omisure kit (TATA MD CHECK RT-PCR, TATA MEDICAL AND DIAGNOSTICS LIMITED, Tamil Nadu, INDIA). Clinicodemographic factors and vaccination status were compared between both Omicron and non-Omicron groups. ResultsA total of 1,722 patients who tested positive for COVID-19 were included in the study, of which 656 (38.1%) were Omicron and 1,066 (61.9%) were non-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants. Blood group and vaccination status were the major predictors for Omicron. The proportion of male patients was 58.4% in the Omicron group and 57.9% in the non-Omicron group. Maximum cases (86.2%) belonged to >18-60 years age group, 7.3% to >60 years age group, and least to 0-18 years (6.5%). The average age of the study participants was 35.4 ± 14.5 years. Vaccinated participants had less chance of having Omicron than the unvaccinated participants (p-value -0.003). Fever and loss of smell were found to be significantly associated with the non-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant. (p-value < 0.05). ConclusionThe present study reflects that the clinical course of the disease is milder in Omicron as compared to the non-Omicron variant. However rapid rise in cases can badly affect the healthcare system demanding good preparedness to tackle all the predicaments. Good Vaccination coverage should be of utmost priority irrespective of the variant type.