5 research outputs found

    SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 Delta variant replication and immune evasion

    Get PDF
    Abstract: The B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first identified in the state of Maharashtra in late 2020 and spread throughout India, outcompeting pre-existing lineages including B.1.617.1 (Kappa) and B.1.1.7 (Alpha)1. In vitro, B.1.617.2 is sixfold less sensitive to serum neutralizing antibodies from recovered individuals, and eightfold less sensitive to vaccine-elicited antibodies, compared with wild-type Wuhan-1 bearing D614G. Serum neutralizing titres against B.1.617.2 were lower in ChAdOx1 vaccinees than in BNT162b2 vaccinees. B.1.617.2 spike pseudotyped viruses exhibited compromised sensitivity to monoclonal antibodies to the receptor-binding domain and the amino-terminal domain. B.1.617.2 demonstrated higher replication efficiency than B.1.1.7 in both airway organoid and human airway epithelial systems, associated with B.1.617.2 spike being in a predominantly cleaved state compared with B.1.1.7 spike. The B.1.617.2 spike protein was able to mediate highly efficient syncytium formation that was less sensitive to inhibition by neutralizing antibody, compared with that of wild-type spike. We also observed that B.1.617.2 had higher replication and spike-mediated entry than B.1.617.1, potentially explaining the B.1.617.2 dominance. In an analysis of more than 130 SARS-CoV-2-infected health care workers across three centres in India during a period of mixed lineage circulation, we observed reduced ChAdOx1 vaccine effectiveness against B.1.617.2 relative to non-B.1.617.2, with the caveat of possible residual confounding. Compromised vaccine efficacy against the highly fit and immune-evasive B.1.617.2 Delta variant warrants continued infection control measures in the post-vaccination era

    Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension is an uncommon complication of COVID-19: UK national surveillance and observational screening cohort studies.

    Full text link
    BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a well-recognised complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary disease with and without pulmonary hypertension (CTEPD/CTEPH) are potential life-limiting consequences. At present the burden of CTEPD/CTEPH is unclear and optimal and cost-effective screening strategies yet to be established. METHODS: We evaluated the CTEPD/CTEPH referral rate to the UK national multidisciplinary team (MDT) during the 2017-2022 period to establish the national incidence of CTEPD/CTEPH potentially attributable to COVID-19-associated PE with historical comparator years. All individual cases of suspected CTEPH were reviewed by the MDT for evidence of associated COVID-19. In a separate multicentre cohort, the risk of developing CTEPH following hospitalisation with COVID-19 was calculated using simple clinical parameters at a median of 5 months post-hospital discharge according to existing risk scores using symptoms, ECG and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide. RESULTS: By the second year of the pandemic, CTEPH diagnoses had returned to the pre-pandemic baseline (23.1 versus 27.8 cases per month; p=0.252). Of 334 confirmed CTEPD/CTEPH cases, four (1.2%) patients were identified to have CTEPH potentially associated with COVID-19 PE, and a further three (0.9%) CTEPD without PH. Of 1094 patients (mean age 58 years, 60.4% male) hospitalised with COVID-19 screened across the UK, 11 (1.0%) were at high risk of CTEPH at follow-up, none of whom had a diagnosis of CTEPH made at the national MDT. CONCLUSION: A priori risk of developing CTEPH following COVID-19-related hospitalisation is low. Simple risk scoring is a potentially effective way of screening patients for further investigation

    Pneumomediastinum in COVID-19: a phenotype of severe COVID-19 pneumonitis? The results of the United Kingdom (POETIC) survey.

    Full text link
    BACKGROUND: There is an emerging understanding that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with increased incidence of pneumomediastinum. We aimed to determine its incidence among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the United Kingdom and describe factors associated with outcome. METHODS: A structured survey of pneumomediastinum and its incidence was conducted from September 2020 to February 2021. United Kingdom-wide participation was solicited via respiratory research networks. Identified patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection and radiologically proven pneumomediastinum. The primary outcomes were to determine incidence of pneumomediastinum in COVID-19 and to investigate risk factors associated with patient mortality. RESULTS: 377 cases of pneumomediastinum in COVID-19 were identified from 58 484 inpatients with COVID-19 at 53 hospitals during the study period, giving an incidence of 0.64%. Overall 120-day mortality in COVID-19 pneumomediastinum was 195/377 (51.7%). Pneumomediastinum in COVID-19 was associated with high rates of mechanical ventilation. 172/377 patients (45.6%) were mechanically ventilated at the point of diagnosis. Mechanical ventilation was the most important predictor of mortality in COVID-19 pneumomediastinum at the time of diagnosis and thereafter (p<0.001) along with increasing age (p<0.01) and diabetes mellitus (p=0.08). Switching patients from continuous positive airways pressure support to oxygen or high flow nasal oxygen after the diagnosis of pneumomediastinum was not associated with difference in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Pneumomediastinum appears to be a marker of severe COVID-19 pneumonitis. The majority of patients in whom pneumomediastinum was identified had not been mechanically ventilated at the point of diagnosis
    corecore