TY - JOUR T1 - A new SARS-CoV-2 variant poorly detected by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples, with high lethality JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.05.05.21256690 SP - 2021.05.05.21256690 AU - Pierre Fillatre AU - Marie-José Dufour AU - Sylvie Behillil AU - Remi Vatan AU - Pascale Reusse AU - Alice Gabellec AU - Nicolas Velmans AU - Catherine Montagne AU - Sophie Geffroy AU - Edith Droumaguet AU - Véronique Merour AU - Vincent Enouf AU - Rodolphe Buzele AU - Marion Valence AU - Elena Guillotel AU - Bertrand Gagniere AU - Artem Baidaluk AU - Anna Zhukova AU - Mathieu Tourdjman AU - Vincent Thibault AU - Claire Grolhier AU - Charlotte Pronier AU - Xavier Lescure AU - Etienne Simon-Loriere AU - Dominique Costagliola AU - Sylvie Van Der Werf AU - Pierre Tattevin AU - Nicolas Massart Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/05/10/2021.05.05.21256690.abstract N2 - Background In early January 2021, an outbreak of nosocomial cases of COVID-19 emerged in Western France, with RT-PCR tests repeatedly negative on nasopharyngeal samples but positive on lower respiratory tract samples. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) revealed a new variant, currently defining a novel SARS-CoV-2 lineage: B.1.616. In March, WHO classified this variant as ‘under investigation’ (VUI). We analyzed the characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 cases related to this new variant.Methods Clinical, virological, and radiological data were retrospectively collected from medical charts in the two hospitals involved. We enrolled patients with at least one of the following: i) positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on a respiratory sample; ii) seroconversion with anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM; iii) suggestive symptoms and typical features of COVID-19 on chest CT scan. Cases were categorized as either: i) B.1.616; ii) variant of concern (VOC); iii) unknown.Findings From January 1st to March 24th, 2021, 114 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria: B.1.616 (n=34), VOC (n=32), and unknown (n=48). B.1.616-related cases were older than VOC-related cases (81 years [73-88], vs 73 years [67-82], P<0.05) and their first RT-PCR tests were less often positive (5/34, 15% vs 31/32, 97%, P<0.05). The B.1.616 variant was independently associated with severe disease (multivariable Cox model HR 4.2 [1.3– 13.5], P=0.018), and increased lethality (logrank test P=0.01): 28-day mortality 15/34 (44%) with B.1.616, vs. 5/32 (16%) for VOC, P=0.036.Interpretation We report a nosocomial outbreak of COVID-19 cases related to a new variant, B.1.616, poorly detected by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples, with high lethality.Evidence before this study Among the numerous SARS-CoV-2 variants described worldwide, only 3 are currently classified as Variant of Concern (VOC) by the WHO, since they are associated with either an increased risk in transmissibility, severity, or significant reduction in neutralization by antibodies: B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P.1 (Pango lineage nomenclature). With the ongoing circulation of SARS-CoV-2 in many places worldwide, the emergence of new variants may reduce the efficacy of vaccines and jeopardize our prospects to control the pandemic. In early January 2021, an outbreak of cases highly suggestive of COVID-19 despite negative RT-PCR tests on repeated nasopharyngeal (NP) samples was reported in Western France, leading to several nosocomial clusters. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) from lower respiratory tract samples identified a new lineage of SARS-CoV-2 virus, classified as B1.616. Consequently, the French public health agency (Santé publique France) and the WHO classified B.1.616 as ‘variant under investigation’ (VUI).Added value of this study Our observational study, conducted from January 1st to March 24th 2021 in the B.1.616 identified area, provides the first clinical and virological description of B.1.616-associated COVID-19. The 34 cases had clinical, biological and radiological findings in line with classical features of COVID-19, while RT-PCR tests on nasopharyngeal (NP) samples failed to detect SARS-CoV-2 in most patients. Indeed, this gold-standard test was positive in only 15% of the first tests in B.1.616-related COVID-19 patients. Of note, the diagnostic performance of RT-PCR tests was satisfactory on lower respiratory tract samples, suggesting that failure to detect B.1.616 on NP samples would be due to a viral load below the limit of detection in the upper respiratory tract, rather than to genomic mismatches between routine RT-PCR targets and this variant. In our cohort, B.1.616 was independently associated with worse clinical outcome, with high 28-day mortality (44%).Implications of all the available evidence Diagnosis of B.1.616-related COVID-19 cases should not rely on RT-PCR tests on NP samples. In the epidemic area, strict infection control measures must be maintained as long as COVID-19 diagnosis is not ruled out, in order to limit nosocomial clusters and case fatality. Further studies are needed to confirm and investigate the association between genomic characteristics of B.1.616, and i) poor detection by RT-PCR tests on NP samples; ii) prognosis.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The French infectious diseases society ethics committee (Comite d Ethique de la Recherche en Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales, CER-MIT) approved the study (N COVID 2021-06).Institutional Review Board N IRB00011642All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesA complete de-identified patient dataset, accompanied by the original study protocol will be available to European researchers on request. Individuals wishing to access the data should send a request to pierre.fillatre{at}armorsante.bzh. ER -