Biosafety and Biosecurity Approaches to Counter SARS-CoV-2: From Detection to Best Practices and Risk Assessments

Tremendous advances in the field of synthetic biology have been witnessed in multiple areas including life sciences, industrial development, and environmental bio-remediation. However, due to the limitations of human understanding in the code of life, any possible intended or unintended uses of synthetic biology, and other unknown reasons, the development and application of this technology has raised concerns over biosafety, biosecurity, and even cyberbiosecurity that they may expose public health and the environment to unknown hazards. Over the past decades, some countries in Europe, America, and Asia have enacted laws and regulations to control the application of synthetic biology techniques in basic and applied research and this has resulted in some benefits. The outbreak of the COVID-19 caused by novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and various speculations about the origin of this virus have attracted more attention on bio-risk concerns of synthetic biology because of its potential power and uncertainty in the synthesis and engineering of living organisms. Therefore, it is crucial to scrutinize the control measures put in place to ensure appropriate use, promote the development of synthetic biology, and strengthen the governance of pathogen-related research, although the true origin of coronavirus remains hotly debated and unresolved. This article reviews the recent progress made in the field of synthetic biology and combs laws and regulations in governing bio-risk issues. We emphasize the urgent need for legislative and regulatory constraints and oversight to address the biological risks of synthetic biology.

Macrolides (e.g., erythromycin, fidaxomicin, clarithromycin, and azithromycin) are a class of bacteriostatic antibiotics commonly employed in medicine against various gram-positive and atypical bacterial species mostly related to respiratory tract infections, besides they possess anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome of coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It was first detected in Wuhan, Hubei, China, in December 2019 and resulted in a continuing pandemic. Macrolides have been extensively researched as broad adjunctive therapy for COVID-19 due to its immunostimulant abilities. Among such class of drugs, azithromycin is described as azalide and is well-known for its ability to decrease the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, including matrix metalloproteinases, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin (IL)-6, and IL-8. In fact, a report recently published highlighted the effectiveness of combining azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 treatment. Indeed, it has been underlined that azithromycin quickly prevents SARS-CoV-2 infection by raising the levels of both interferons and interferon-stimulated proteins at the same time which reduces the virus replication and release. In this sense, the current review aims to evaluate the applications of macrolides for the treatment of COVID-19.

The world continues to grapple with the devastating effects of the current COVID-19 pandemic. The highly contagious nature of this respiratory disease challenges advanced viral diagnostic technologies for rapid, scalable, affordable, and high accuracy testing. Molecular assays have been the gold standard for direct detection of the presence of the viral RNA in suspected individuals, while immunoassays have been used in the surveillance of individuals by detecting antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Unlike molecular testing, immunoassays are indirect testing of the viral infection. More than 140 diagnostic assays have been developed as of this date and have received the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA). Given the differences in assasy format and/or design as well as the lack of rigorous verification studies, the performance and accuracy of these testing modalities remain unclear. In this review, we aim to carefully examine commercialized and FDA approved molecular-based and serology-based diagnostic assays, analyze their performance characteristics and shed the light on their utility and limitations in dealing with the COVID-19 global public health crisis.