Olfactory and taste dysfunctions have emerged as symptoms of COVID-19. Among individuals with COVID-19 enrolled in a household study, loss of taste and/or smell was the fourth most commonly reported symptom (26/42; 62%), and among household contacts, it had the highest positive predictive value (83%; 95% CI: 55–95%) for COVID-19. These findings support consideration of loss of taste and/or smell in possible case identification and testing prioritization for COVID-19.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding was received.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as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.YesData presented in the current study may be available from the corresponding author on request.

Antibiotics are important for the treatment and prevention of invasive Haemophilus influenzae disease. Reduced susceptibility to clinically relevant drugs, except ampicillin, has been uncommon in the United States. Susceptibility of 700 invasive H. influenzae isolates, collected through population-based surveillance during 2016, was assessed for 15 antibiotics using broth microdilution, according to the CLSI guidelines; a subset of 104 isolates were also assessed for rifampin susceptibility using Etest. Genomes were sequenced to identify genes and mutations known to be associated with reduced susceptibility to clinically relevant drugs. A total of 508 (72.6%) had reduced susceptibility to at least one antibiotic and more than half of the isolates exhibited reduced susceptibility to only one (33.6%) or two (21.6%) antibiotic classes. All tested isolates were susceptible to rifampin, a chemoprophylaxis agent, and <1% (n=3) of isolates had reduced susceptibility to third generation cephalosporins, which are recommended for invasive disease treatment. In contrast, ampicillin resistance was more common (28.1%) and predominantly associated with the detection of a -lactamase gene; 26.2% of isolates in the collection contained either a TEM-1 or ROB-1 -lactamase gene, including 88.8% of ampicillin-resistant isolates. -lactamase negative ampicillin-resistant (BLNAR) isolates were less common and associated with ftsI mutations; resistance to amoxicillin-clavulanate was detected in <2% (n=13) of isolates. The proportion of reduced susceptibility observed was higher among nontypeable H. influenzae and serotype e than other serotypes. US invasive H. influenzae isolates remain predominantly susceptible to clinically relevant antibiotics except ampicillin, and BLNAR isolates remain uncommon. IMPORTANCE Antibiotics play an important role for the treatment and prevention of invasive Haemophilus influenzae disease. Antimicrobial resistance survey of invasive H. influenzae isolates collected in 2016 showed that the US H. influenzae population remained susceptible to clinically relevant antibiotics, except for ampicillin. Detection of approximately a quarter ampicillin-resistant and -lactamase containing strains demonstrates that resistance mechanisms can be acquired and sustained within the H. influenzae population, highlighting the continued importance of antimicrobial resistance surveillance for H. influenzae to monitor susceptibility trends and mechanisms of resistance.

Point-of-care antigen tests are an important tool for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Antigen tests are less sensitive than real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR). Data on the performance of the BinaxNOW antigen test compared to rRT-PCR and viral culture by symptom and known exposure status, timing during disease or exposure period and demographic variables are limited. During November 3(rd)-17(th), 2020, we collected paired upper respiratory swab specimens to test for SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR and Abbott BinaxNOW (BinaxNOW) antigen test at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona. We administered a questionnaire to capture symptoms, known exposure status and previous SARS-CoV-2 test results. Specimens positive by either test were analyzed by viral culture. Previously we showed overall BinaxNOW sensitivity was 52.5%. Here we showed BinaxNOW sensitivity increased to 65.7% among currently symptomatic individuals reporting a known exposure. BinaxNOW sensitivity was lower among participants with a known exposure and previously symptomatic (32.4%) or never symptomatic (47.1%) within 14 days of testing. Sensitivity was 71.1% in participants within a week of symptom onset. In participants with a known exposure, sensitivity was highest 8-10 days post-exposure (75%). The positive predictive value for recovery of virus in cell culture was 56.7% for BinaxNOW-positive and 35.4% for rRT-PCR-positive specimens. Result reporting time was 2.5 hours for BinaxNOW and 26 hours for rRT-PCR. Point-of-care antigen tests have a shorter turn-around time compared to laboratory-based nucleic acid amplification tests, which allows for more rapid identification of infected individuals. Antigen test sensitivity limitations are important to consider when developing a testing program.

Serologic assays developed for SARS-CoV-2 detect different antibody subtypes and are based on different target antigens. Comparison of the performance of a SARS-CoV-2 Spike-Protein ELISA and the nucleocapsid-based Abbott ArchitectTM SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay indicated that the assays had high concordance, with rare paired discordant tests results.

Rapid antigen tests, such as the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW), offer results more rapidly (approximately 15-30 minutes) and at a lower cost than do highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) (1). Rapid antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in symptomatic persons (2), but data are lacking on test performance in asymptomatic persons to inform expanded screening testing to rapidly identify and isolate infected persons (3). To evaluate the performance of the BinaxNOW rapid antigen test, it was used along with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing to analyze 3,419 paired specimens collected from persons aged ≥10 years at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona, during November 3-17, 2020. Viral culture was performed on 274 of 303 residual real-time RT-PCR specimens with positive results by either test (29 were not available for culture). Compared with real-time RT-PCR testing, the BinaxNOW antigen test had a sensitivity of 64.2% for specimens from symptomatic persons and 35.8% for specimens from asymptomatic persons, with near 100% specificity in specimens from both groups. Virus was cultured from 96 of 274 (35.0%) specimens, including 85 (57.8%) of 147 with concordant antigen and real-time RT-PCR positive results, 11 (8.9%) of 124 with false-negative antigen test results, and none of three with false-positive antigen test results. Among specimens positive for viral culture, sensitivity was 92.6% for symptomatic and 78.6% for asymptomatic individuals. When the pretest probability for receiving positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 is elevated (e.g., in symptomatic persons or in persons with a known COVID-19 exposure), a negative antigen test result should be confirmed by NAAT (1). Despite a lower sensitivity to detect infection, rapid antigen tests can be an important tool for screening because of their quick turnaround time, lower costs and resource needs, high specificity, and high positive predictive value (PPV) in settings of high pretest probability. The faster turnaround time of the antigen test can help limit transmission by more rapidly identifying infectious persons for isolation, particularly when used as a component of serial testing strategies.

Effective laboratory-based surveillance and public health response to bacterial meningitis depends on timely characterization of bacterial meningitis pathogens. Traditionally, characterizing bacterial meningitis pathogens such as Neisseria meningitidis (Nm) and Haemophilus influenzae (Hi) required several biochemical and molecular tests. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) has enabled the development of pipelines capable of characterizing the given pathogen with equivalent results to many of the traditional tests. Here, we present the Bacterial Meningitis Genomic Analysis Platform (BMGAP): a secure, web-accessible informatics platform that facilitates automated analysis of WGS data in public health laboratories. BMGAP is a pipeline comprised of several components, including both widely used, open-source third-party software and customized analysis modules for the specific target pathogens. BMGAP performs de novo draft genome assembly and identifies the bacterial species by whole-genome comparisons against a curated reference collection of 17 focal species including Nm, Hi, and other closely related species. Genomes identified as Nm or Hi undergo multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) and capsule characterization. Further typing information is captured from Nm genomes, such as peptides for the vaccine antigens FHbp, NadA, and NhbA. Assembled genomes are retained in the BMGAP database, serving as a repository for genomic comparisons. BMGAP's species identification and capsule characterization modules were validated using PCR and slide agglutination from 446 bacterial invasive isolates (273 Nm from nine different serogroups, 150 Hi from seven different serotypes, and 23 from nine other species) collected from 2017 to 2019 through surveillance programs. Among the validation isolates, BMGAP correctly identified the species for all 440 isolates (100% sensitivity and specificity) and accurately characterized all Nm serogroups (99% sensitivity and 98% specificity) and Hi serotypes (100% sensitivity and specificity). BMGAP provides an automated, multi-species analysis pipeline that can be extended to include additional analysis modules as needed. This provides easy-to-interpret and validated Nm and Hi genome analysis capacity to public health laboratories and collaborators. As the BMGAP database accumulates more genomic data, it grows as a valuable resource for rapid comparative genomic analyses during outbreak investigations.

In a household study, loss of taste and/or smell was the fourth most reported symptom (26/42; 62%) among COVID-19 case-patients and had the highest positive predictive value (83%; 95% CI: 55-95%) among household contacts. Olfactory and taste dysfunctions should be considered for COVID-19 case identification and testing prioritization.