The SARS-CoV-2 epidemic has rapidly spread outside China with major outbreaks occurring in Italy, South Korea, and Iran. Phylogenetic analyses of whole-genome sequencing data identified a distinct SARS-CoV-2 clade linked to travellers returning from Iran to Australia and New Zealand. This study highlights potential viral diversity driving the epidemic in Iran, and underscores the power of rapid genome sequencing and public data sharing to improve the detection and management of emerging infectious diseases.

The detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in respiratory samples collected from persons recovered from COVID-19 does not necessarily indicate shedding of infective virions. By contrast, the isolation of SARS-CoV-2 using cell-based culture likely indicates infectivity, but there are limited data on the correlation between SARS-CoV-2 culture and PCR. One hundred and ninety-five patients with varying severity of COVID-19 were tested (outpatients [n=178]), inpatients [n=12] and critically unwell patients admitted to the intensive care unit [ICU; n=5]). SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive samples were cultured in Vero C1008 cells and inspected daily for cytopathic effect (CPE). SARS-CoV-2-induced CPE was confirmed by PCR of culture supernatant. Where no CPE was observed, PCR was performed on day four to confirm absence of virus replication. Cycle threshold (Ct) of the day four PCR (Ct_culture) and the PCR of the original clinical sample (Ct_sample) were compared, and positive cultures were defined where Ct_sample - Ct_culture was ≥3. Of 234 samples collected, 228 (97%) were from the upper respiratory tract. SARS-CoV-2 was only successfully isolated from samples with Ct_sample ≤32, including in 28/181 (15%), 19/42 (45%) and 9/11 samples (82%) collected from outpatients, inpatients, and ICU patients, respectively. The mean duration from symptom onset to culture positivity was 4.5 days (range 0-18). SARS-CoV-2 was significantly more likely to be isolated from samples collected from inpatients (p<0∙001) and ICU patients (p<0∙0001) compared with outpatients respectively, and in samples with lower Ct_sample. SARS-CoV-2 culture may be used as a surrogate marker for infectivity and inform de-isolation protocols.

Introduction: Successful treatment outcomes for viral respiratory tract infections presenting from primary health care to quaternary hospitals will only be achieved with rapid, sensitive and specific identification of pathogens to allow effective pathogen-specific antiviral therapy and infection control measures. Areas covered: This review aims to explore the different point-of-care tests currently available to diagnose viral respiratory tract infections, discuss the advantages and limitations of point-of-care testing, and provide insights into the future of point-of-care tests. The following databases were searched: Medline (January 1996 to 30 September 2017) and Embase (1988 to 30 September 2017), using the following keywords: ‘point of care’, ‘respiratory virus’, ‘influenza’, ‘RSV’, ‘diagnostics’, ‘nucleic acid test’ and ‘PCR’. Expert commentary: Viral respiratory tract infections cause significant morbidity and mortality worldwide, and point-of-care tests are facilitating the rapid identification of the pathogen responsible given the similarities in clinical presentation.

Data from previous seasonal epidemics and pandemics have confirmed that pregnant women are at increased risk for severe influenza virus infection. Complications including fetal loss, higher rates of hospitalization and maternal death are most notable during the late gestational period. Antiviral therapy and influenza vaccination are recommended in pregnant women as both are effective and safe. This review discusses the epidemiology, pathophysiology, treatment and prevention of influenza virus infection in pregnancy, with a focus on recent developments.

Background: Testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–specific antibodies has become an important tool, complementing nucleic acid tests (NATs) for diagnosis and for determining the prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in population serosurveys. The magnitude and persistence of antibody responses are critical for assessing the duration of immunity.Methods: A SARS-CoV-2-specific immunofluorescent antibody (IFA) assay for immunoglobulin G (IgG), immunoglobulin A (IgA), and immunoglobulin M (IgM) was developed and prospectively evaluated by comparison to the reference standard of NAT on respiratory tract samples from individuals with suspected COVID-19. Neutralizing antibody responses were measured in a subset of samples using a standard microneutralization assay.Results: A total of 2753 individuals were eligible for the study (126 NAT-positive; prevalence, 4.6%). The median “window period” from illness onset to appearance of antibodies (range) was 10.2 (5.8–14.4) days. The sensitivity and specificity of either SARS-CoV-2 IgG, IgA, or IgM when collected ≥14 days after symptom onset were 91.3% (95% CI, 84.9%–95.6%) and 98.9% (95% CI, 98.4%–99.3%), respectively. The negative predictive value was 99.6% (95% CI, 99.3%–99.8%). The positive predictive value of detecting any antibody class was 79.9% (95% CI, 73.3%–85.1%); this increased to 96.8% (95% CI, 90.7%–99.0%) for the combination of IgG and IgA.Conclusions: Measurement of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody by IFA is an accurate method to diagnose COVID-19. Serological testing should be incorporated into diagnostic algorithms for SARS-CoV-2 infection to identify additional cases where NAT was not performed and resolve cases where false-negative and false-positive NATs are suspected. The majority of individuals develop robust antibody responses following infection, but the duration of these responses and implications for immunity remain to be established.