4.2 Article

SARS-CoV-2 isolation from the first reported patients in Brazil and establishment of a coordinated task network

Journal

MEMORIAS DO INSTITUTO OSWALDO CRUZ
Volume 115, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FUNDACO OSWALDO CRUZ
DOI: 10.1590/0074-02760200342

Keywords

SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; virus isolation; cell culture; virus network

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was confirmed in Brazil in February 2020, the first cases were followed by an increase in the number of cases throughout the country, resulting in an important public health crisis that requires fast and coordinated responses. OBJECTIVES The objective of this work is to describe the isolation and propagation properties of SARS-CoV-2 isolates from the first confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Brazil. METHODS After diagnosis in patients that returned from Italy to the Sao Paulo city in late February by RT-PCR, SARS-CoV-2 isolates were obtained in cell cultures and characterised by full genome sequencing, electron microscopy and in vitro replication properties. FINDINGS The virus isolate was recovered from nasopharyngeal specimen, propagated in Vero cells (E6, CCL-81 and hSLAM), with clear cytopathic effects, and characterised by full genome sequencing, electron microscopy and in vitro replication properties. Virus stocks - viable (titre 2.11 x 10(6) TCID50/mL, titre 1.5 x 10(6) PFUs/mL) and inactivated from isolate SARS.CoV2/SP02.2020. HIAE.Br were prepared and set available to the public health authorities and the scientific community in Brazil and abroad. MAIN CONCLUSION We believe that the protocols for virus growth and studies here described and the distribution initiative may constitute a viable model for other developing countries, not only to help a rapid effective pandemic response, but also to facilitate and support basic scientific research.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available