a severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and real-time reverse transcription-PCR is currently the most reliable diagnostic method for COVID-19 around the world. Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine and the Korea Centers for Disease Prevention and Control propose guidelines for diagnosing COVID-19 in clinical laboratories in Korea. These guidelines are based on other related domestic and international guidelines, as well as expert opinions and include the selection of test subjects, selection of specimens, diagnostic methods, interpretation of test results, and biosafety.

Along with positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs, viral RNA was detectable at high concentration for >3 weeks in fecal samples from 12 mildly symptomatic and asymptomatic children with COVID-19 in Seoul, South Korea. Saliva also tested positive during the early phase of infection. If proven infectious, feces and saliva could serve as transmission sources.

We recently observed the emergence of fluconazole-resistant Candida parapsilosis bloodstream isolates harboring a Y132F substitution in Erg11p in South Korea. These Y132F isolates had a higher propensity to cause clonal transmission than other fluconazole-resistant isolates and persisted within hospitals for several years, as revealed by microsatellite typing.

Background Positive results from real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) in recovered patients raise concern that patients who recover from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be at risk of reinfection. Currently, however, evidence that supports reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has not been reported. Methods We conducted whole-genome sequencing of the viral RNA from clinical specimens at the initial infection and at the positive retest from 6 patients who recovered from COVID-19 and retested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via rRT-PCR after recovery. A total of 13 viral RNAs from the patients’ respiratory specimens were consecutively obtained, which enabled us to characterize the difference in viral genomes between initial infection and positive retest. Results At the time of the positive retest, we were able to acquire a complete genome sequence from patient 1, a 21-year-old previously healthy woman. In this patient, through the phylogenetic analysis, we confirmed that the viral RNA of positive retest was clustered into a subgroup distinct from that of the initial infection, suggesting that there was a reinfection of SARS-CoV-2 with a subtype that was different from that of the primary strain. The spike protein D614G substitution that defines the clade “G” emerged in reinfection, while mutations that characterize the clade “V” (ie, nsp6 L37F and ORF3a G251V) were present at initial infection. Conclusions Reinfection with a genetically distinct SARS-CoV-2 strain may occur in an immunocompetent patient shortly after recovery from mild COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 infection may not confer immunity against a different SARS-CoV-2 strain.

Considering the high incidence of plasma mSEPT9 in intestinal or mixed type GCs similar to CRCs, GC should be examined through the plasma mSEPT9 screening test. In addition, plasma mSEPT9 is proposed as a follow-up marker in CRC patients, but further validation is required.