Background: We aimed to compare the clinical severity in patients who were coinfected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and rhinovirus or monoinfected with a single one of these viruses. Methods: The study period ranged from 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 (one year). SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses were identified by real-time reverse-transcription-PCR as part of the routine work at Marseille University hospitals. Bacterial and fungal infections were detected by standard methods. Clinical data were retrospectively collected from medical files. This study was approved by the ethical committee of our institute. Results: A total of 6034/15,157 (40%) tested patients were positive for at least one respiratory virus. Ninety-three (4.3%) SARS-CoV-2-infected patients were coinfected with another respiratory virus, with rhinovirus being the most frequent (62/93, 67%). Patients coinfected with SARS-CoV-2 and rhinovirus were significantly more likely to report a cough than those with SARS-CoV-2 monoinfection (62% vs. 31%; p = 0.0008). In addition, they were also significantly more likely to report dyspnea than patients with rhinovirus monoinfection (45% vs. 36%; p = 0.02). They were also more likely to be transferred to an intensive care unit and to die than patients with rhinovirus monoinfection (16% vs. 5% and 7% vs. 2%, respectively) but these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions: A close surveillance and investigation of the co-incidence and interactions of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses is needed. The possible higher risk of increased clinical severity in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients coinfected with rhinovirus warrants further large scale studies.

Experimental findings for SARS-CoV-2 related to the glycan biochemistry of coronaviruses indicate that attachments from spike protein to glycoconjugates on the surfaces of red blood cells (RBCs), other blood cells and endothelial cells are key to the infectivity and morbidity of COVID-19. To provide further insight into these glycan attachments and their potential clinical relevance, the classic hemagglutination (HA) assay was applied using spike protein from the Wuhan, Alpha, Delta and Omicron B.1.1.529 lineages of SARS-CoV-2 mixed with human RBCs. The electrostatic potential of the central region of spike protein from these four lineages was studied through molecular modeling simulations. Inhibition of spike protein-induced HA was tested using the macrocyclic lactone ivermectin (IVM), which is indicated to bind strongly to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein glycan sites. The results of these experiments were, first, that spike protein from these four lineages of SARS-CoV-2 induced HA. Omicron induced HA at a significantly lower threshold concentration of spike protein than the three prior lineages and was much more electropositive on its central spike protein region. IVM blocked HA when added to RBCs prior to spike protein and reversed HA when added afterward. These results validate and extend prior findings on the role of glycan bindings of viral spike protein in COVID-19. They furthermore suggest therapeutic options using competitive glycan-binding agents such as IVM and may help elucidate rare serious adverse effects (AEs) associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, which use spike protein as the generated antigen.

Background: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, several SARS-CoV-2 variants have sequentially emerged. In France, most cases were due to spike D641G-harbouring viruses that descended initially from the Wuhan strain, then by the variant of B.1.160 lineage we called Marseille-4 since the summer of 2020, which was followed by the Alpha and Beta variants in early 2021, then the Delta variant currently. Methods: We determined the neutralising antibody (nAb) titres in sera from convalescent individuals previously infected by these four major local variants and from vaccine recipients to the original Wuhan strain and nine variants, including two recent circulating Delta isolates. Results: The results show high inter-individual heterogeneity in nAbs, especially according to the variant tested. The major variations among nAbs are based on the genotype responsible for the infection. Patients previously infected with the beta and B.1.160 variants had the lowest nAb titres. We show that this heterogeneity is well explained by spike protein mutants modelling using in silico approaches. The highest titres were observed in individuals vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, even against the delta variant. Conclusions: Immunity acquired naturally after infection is highly dependent on the infecting variant, and, unexpectedly, mRNA-based vaccine efficacy was shown to be often better than natural immunity in eliciting neutralising antibodies.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) quickly spread worldwide following its emergence in Wuhan, China, and hit pandemic levels. Its tremendous incidence favoured the emergence of viral variants. The current genome diversity of SARS-CoV-2 has a clear impact on epidemiology and clinical practice, especially regarding transmission rates and the effectiveness of vaccines. In this study, we evaluated the replication of different SARS-CoV-2 isolates representing different virus genotypes which have been isolated throughout the pandemic. We used three distinct cell lines, including Vero E6 cells originating from monkeys; Caco-2 cells, an intestinal epithelium cell line originating from humans; and Calu-3 cells, a pulmonary epithelium cell line also originating from humans. We used RT-qPCR to replicate different SARS-CoV-2 genotypes by quantifying the virus released in the culture supernatant of infected cells. We found that the different viral isolates replicate similarly in Caco-2 cells, but show very different replicative capacities in Calu-3 cells. This was especially highlighted for the lineages B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P.1, which are considered to be variants of concern. These results underscore the importance of the evaluation and characterisation of each SARS-CoV-2 isolate in order to establish the replication patterns before performing tests, and of the consideration of the ideal SARS-CoV-2 genotype–cell type pair for each assay.

Over the past two years, several variants of SARS-CoV-2 have emerged and spread all over the world. However, infectivity, clinical severity, re-infection, virulence, transmissibility, vaccine responses and escape, and epidemiological aspects have differed between SARS-CoV-2 variants. Currently, very few treatments are recommended against SARS-CoV-2. Identification of effective drugs among repurposing FDA-approved drugs is a rapid, efficient and low-cost strategy against SARS-CoV-2. One of those drugs is ivermectin. Ivermectin is an antihelminthic agent that previously showed in vitro effects against a SARS-CoV-2 isolate (Australia/VI01/2020 isolate) with an IC₅₀ of around 2 µM. We evaluated the in vitro activity of ivermectin on Vero E6 cells infected with 30 clinically isolated SARS-CoV-2 strains belonging to 14 different variants, and particularly 17 strains belonging to six variants of concern (VOC) (variants related to Wuhan, alpha, beta, gamma, delta and omicron). The in vitro activity of ivermectin was compared to those of chloroquine and remdesivir. Unlike chloroquine (EC₅₀ from 4.3 ± 2.5 to 29.3 ± 5.2 µM) or remdesivir (EC₅₀ from 0.4 ± 0.3 to 25.2 ± 9.4 µM), ivermectin showed a relatively homogeneous in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 regardless of the strains or variants (EC₅₀ from 5.1 ± 0.5 to 6.7 ± 0.4 µM), except for one omicron strain (EC₅₀ = 1.3 ± 0.5 µM). Ivermectin (No. EC₅₀ = 219, mean EC₅₀ = 5.7 ± 1.0 µM) was, overall, more potent in vitro than chloroquine (No. EC₅₀ = 214, mean EC₅₀ = 16.1 ± 9.0 µM) (p = 1.3 × 10⁻³⁴) and remdesivir (No. EC₅₀ = 201, mean EC₅₀ = 11.9 ± 10.0 µM) (p = 1.6 × 10⁻¹³). These results should be interpreted with caution regarding the potential use of ivermectin in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients: it is difficult to translate in vitro study results into actual clinical treatment in patients.

Wastewater-based epidemiology is a robust, scalable, cost-effective, and high-performing tool to monitor and predict SARS-CoV-2 trends. We aimed to investigate whether this approach could be applied to influenza A/B viruses and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in Marseille, southern France. Wastewater concentrations of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B viruses, and RSV in Marseille were monitored by qPCR between January 2021 and October 2024. These concentrations were compared with the diagnosis numbers for the three viruses collected at public hospitals in Marseille, using cross-correlation analyses. The Granger causality test was used to determine whether wastewater concentrations can predict the number of clinical cases. SARS-CoV-2 and influenza virus concentrations in wastewater preceded the rise in the incidence of patient diagnoses by a lag of five days and nine/ten days, respectively. In contrast, for RSV, the rise in incidence of clinical cases preceded that of wastewater concentrations. We conclude that wastewater-based epidemiology is a powerful tool to monitor the level of circulation of these viruses independently of tests carried out on people. It enables earlier alerts than monitoring patients for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza symptoms. However, for RSV, it does not provide an early warning, and clinical data-based surveillance appears to be more suitable.