Systematic review and meta-analysis of factors associated with re-positive viral RNA after recovery from COVID-19

Predicting COVID-19 Re-Positive Cases in Malnourished Older Adults: A Clinical Model Development and Validation

Purpose

Building and validating a clinical prediction model for novel coronavirus (COVID-19) re-positive cases in malnourished older adults.

Patients and Methods

Malnourished older adults from January to May 2023 were retrospectively collected from the Department of Geriatrics of the Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. They were divided into a "non-re-positive" group and a "re-positive" group based on the number of COVID-19 infections, and into a training set and a validation set at a 7:3 ratio. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression analysis was used to identify predictive factors for COVID-19 re-positivity in malnourished older adults, and a nomogram was constructed. Independent influencing factors were screened by multivariate logistic regression. The model's goodness-of-fit, discrimination, calibration, and clinical impact were assessed by Hosmer-Lemeshow test, area under the curve (AUC), calibration curve, decision curve analysis (DCA), and clinical impact curve analysis (CIC), respectively.

Results

We included 347 cases, 243 in the training set, and 104 in the validation set. We screened 10 variables as factors influencing the outcome. By multivariate logistic regression analysis, preliminary identified protective factors, risk factors, and independent influencing factors that affect the re-positive outcome. We constructed a clinical prediction model for COVID-19 re-positivity in malnourished older adults. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test yielded χ2 =5.916, P =0.657; the AUC was 0.881; when the threshold probability was >8%, using this model to predict whether malnourished older adults were re-positive for COVID-19 was more beneficial than implementing intervention programs for all patients; when the threshold was >80%, the positive estimated value was closer to the actual number of cases.

Conclusion

This model can help identify the risk of COVID-19 re-positivity in malnourished older adults early, facilitate early clinical decision-making and intervention, and have important implications for improving patient outcomes. We also expect more large-scale, multicenter studies to further validate, refine, and update this model.

Reinfection rates among patients previously infected by SARS-CoV-2: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Asymptomatic or symptomatic infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can be followed by reinfection. The protection conferred by prior infection among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients is unclear. We assessed the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and the protection effect of previous infection against reinfection.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for publications up until the end date of May 1, 2021. The reinfection rate of recovered patients and the protection against reinfection were analyzed using meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 studies of 1096 reinfection patients were included. The pooled reinfection rate was 0.65% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.98%). The symptomatic reinfection rate was a bit lower (0.37% [95% CI 0.11-0.78%], I2 = 99%). The reinfection rate was much higher in high-risk populations (1.59% [95% CI 0.30-3.88%], I2 = 90%). The protection against reinfection and symptomatic reinfection was similar (87.02% [95% CI 83.22-89.96%] and 87.17% [95% CI 83.09-90.26%], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 is relatively low. The protection against SARS-CoV-2 after natural infection is comparable to that estimated for vaccine efficacy. These data may help guide public health measures and vaccination strategies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. High-quality clinical studies are needed to establish the relevant risk factors in recovered patients.

Recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infections and their potential risk to public health - a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To inform quarantine and contact-tracing policies concerning re-positive cases-cases testing positive among those recovered.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically reviewed and appraised relevant literature from PubMed and Embase for the extent of re-positive cases and their epidemiological characteristics.

RESULTS

In 90 case reports/series, a total of 276 re-positive cases were found. Among confirmed reinfections, 50% occurred within 90 days from recovery. Four reports related onward transmission. In thirty-five observational studies, rate of re-positives ranged from zero to 50% with no onward transmissions reported. In eight reviews, pooled recurrence rate ranged from 12% to 17.7%. Probability of re-positive increased with several factors.

CONCLUSION

Recurrence of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test is commonly reported within the first weeks following recovery from a first infection.

The mystery of COVID-19 reinfections: A global systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic rages on, reports on disparities in vaccine roll out alongside COVID-19 reinfection have been emerging. We conducted a systematic review to assess the determinants and disease spectrum of COVID-19 reinfection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search covering relevant databases was conducted for observational studies reporting Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) confirmed infection and reinfection cases. A quality assessment tool developed by the National Institute of Health (NIH) for the assessment of case series was utilized. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 for pooled proportions of findings in first infection and reinfection with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies reporting 577 cases were included from 22 countries. The mean age of patients was 46.2 ± 18.9 years and 179 (31.0%) cases of comorbidities were reported. The average time duration between first infection and reinfection was 63.6 ± 48.9 days. During first infection and reinfection, fever was the most common symptom (41.4% and 36.4%, respectively) whilst anti-viral therapy was the most common treatment regimen administered (44.5% and 43.0%, respectively). Comparable odds of symptomatic presentation and management were reported for the two infections. However, a higher Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission rate was observed in reinfection compared to first infection (10 vs 3). Ten deaths were reported with respiratory failure being the most common cause of death (7/10 deaths).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support immunization practices given increased ICU admissions and mortality in reinfections. Our cohort serves as a guide for clinicians and authorities in devising an optimal strategy for controlling the pandemic. (249 words).

Recurrence, Reactivation, or Inflammatory Rebound of SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Acute Vestibular Symptoms: A Case Report and Revision of Literature

A case of recurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with neurovestibular symptoms was reported. In March 2020, a physician working in an Italian pediatric hospital had flu-like symptoms with anosmia and dysgeusia, and following a reverse transcription PCR (RT/PCR) test with a nasopharyngeal swab tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. After home quarantine, 21 days from the beginning of the symptoms, the patient tested negative in two subsequent swabs and was declared healed and readmitted to work. Serological testing showed a low level of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody title and absence of immunoglobulin M (IgM). However, 2 weeks later, before resuming work, the patient complained of acute vestibular syndrome, and the RT/PCR test with mucosal swab turned positive. On the basis of the literature examined and reviewed for recurrence cases and vestibular symptoms during COVID-19, to our knowledge this case is the first case of recurrence with vestibular impairment as a neurological symptom, and we defined it as probably a viral reactivation. The PCR retest positivity cannot differentiate re-infectivity, relapse, and dead-viral RNA detection. Serological antibody testing and viral genome sequencing could be always performed in recurrence cases.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of discharged COVID-19 patients retesting positive for RT-PCR

BACKGROUND

With the increased number of patients discharged after having COVID-19, more and more studies have reported cases whose retesting was positive (RP) during the convalescent period, which brings a new public health challenge to the world.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang and VIP from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2020. The included studies were assessed using JBI critical appraisal tools and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The RP rate of discharge patients was analyzed by a meta-analysis. We adhered to PRISMA reporting guideline.

FINDINGS

We have included 117 studies with 2669 RP participants after discharge. The methodological quality of 66 case reports were low to high, 42 case series and 3 cohort study were moderate to high, 3 case-control studies were moderate and 3 cross-sectional studies were low to moderate. The clinical manifestations of most RP patients were mild or asymptomatic, and CT imaging and laboratory examinations were usually normal. The existing risk factors suggest that more attention should be paid to sever patients, elderly patients, and patients with co-morbidities. The summary RP rate was 12·2% (95% CI 10·6-13·7) with high heterogeneity (I²  = 85%).

INTERPRETATION

To date, the causes and risk factors of RP result in discharged patients are not fully understood. High-quality etiological and clinical studies are needed to investigate these issues to further help us to make strategies to control and prevent its occurrence.