The New Normal: Delayed Peak SARS-CoV-2 Viral Loads Relative to Symptom Onset and Implications for COVID-19 Testing Programs

Assessing the Potential of an Enzymatically Liberated Salmon Oil to Support Immune Health Recovery from Acute SARS-CoV-2 Infection via Change in the Expression of Cytokine, Chemokine and Interferon-Related Genes

Cytokines, chemokines, and interferons are released in response to viral infection with the ultimate aim of viral clearance. However, in SARS-CoV-2 infection, there is an imbalanced immune response, with raised cytokine levels but only a limited interferon response with inefficient viral clearance. Furthermore, the inflammatory response can be exaggerated, which risks both acute and chronic sequelae. Several observational studies have suggested a reduced risk of progression to severe COVID-19 in subjects with a higher omega-3 index. However, randomized studies of omega-3 supplementation have failed to replicate this benefit. Omega-3 fats provide important anti-inflammatory effects; however, fatty fish contains many other fatty acids that provide health benefits distinct from omega-3. Therefore, the immune health benefit of whole salmon oil (SO) was assessed in adults with mild to moderate COVID-19. Eleven subjects were randomized to best supportive care (BSC) with or without a full spectrum, enzymatically liberated SO, dosed at 4g daily, for twenty-eight days. Nasal swabs were taken to measure the change in gene expression of markers of immune response and showed that the SO provided both broad inflammation-resolving effects and improved interferon response. The results also suggest improved lung barrier function and enhanced immune memory, although the clinical relevance needs to be assessed in longer-duration studies. In conclusion, the salmon oil was well tolerated and provided broad inflammation-resolving effects, indicating a potential to enhance immune health.

Testing for SARS-CoV-2: lessons learned and current use cases

SUMMARYThe emergence and worldwide dissemination of SARS-CoV-2 required both urgent development of new diagnostic tests and expansion of diagnostic testing capacity on an unprecedented scale. The rapid evolution of technologies that allowed testing to move out of traditional laboratories and into point-of-care testing centers and the home transformed the diagnostic landscape. Four years later, with the end of the formal public health emergency but continued global circulation of the virus, it is important to take a fresh look at available SARS-CoV-2 testing technologies and consider how they should be used going forward. This review considers current use case scenarios for SARS-CoV-2 antigen, nucleic acid amplification, and immunologic tests, incorporating the latest evidence for analytical/clinical performance characteristics and advantages/limitations for each test type to inform current debates about how tests should or should not be used.

Performance of and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Diagnostics Based on Symptom Onset and Close Contact Exposure: An Analysis From the Test Us at Home Prospective Cohort Study

Background

Understanding changes in diagnostic performance after symptom onset and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exposure within different populations is crucial to guide the use of diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2.

Methods

The Test Us at Home study was a longitudinal cohort study that enrolled individuals across the United States between October 2021 and February 2022. Participants performed paired antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) and reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests at home every 48 hours for 15 days and self-reported symptoms and known coronavirus disease 2019 exposures immediately before testing. The percent positivity for Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR tests was calculated each day after symptom onset and exposure and stratified by vaccination status, variant, age category, and sex.

Results

The highest percent positivity occurred 2 days after symptom onset (RT-PCR, 91.2%; Ag-RDT, 71.1%) and 6 days after exposure (RT-PCR, 91.8%; Ag-RDT, 86.2%). RT-PCR and Ag-RDT performance did not differ by vaccination status, variant, age category, or sex. The percent positivity for Ag-RDTs was lower among exposed, asymptomatic than among symptomatic individuals (37.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.7%-69.4%) vs 90.3% (75.1%-96.7%). Cumulatively, Ag-RDTs detected 84.9% (95% CI, 78.2%-89.8%) of infections within 4 days of symptom onset. For exposed participants, Ag-RDTs detected 94.0% (95% CI, 86.7%-97.4%) of RT-PCR-confirmed infections within 6 days of exposure.

Conclusions

The percent positivity for Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR tests was highest 2 days after symptom onset and 6 days after exposure, and performance increased with serial testing. The percent positivity of Ag-RDTs was lowest among asymptomatic individuals but did not differ by sex, variant, vaccination status, or age category.

Screening Strategies to Reduce COVID-19 Mortality in Nursing Homes

Importance

Nursing home residents continue to bear a disproportionate share of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, accounting for 9% of all US COVID-19 deaths in 2023, despite comprising only 0.4% of the population.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies in reducing COVID-19 mortality in nursing homes.

Design and Setting

An agent-based model was developed to simulate SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the nursing home setting. Parameters were determined using SARS-CoV-2 virus data and COVID-19 data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that were published between 2020 and 2023, as well as data on nursing homes published between 2010 and 2023. The model used in this study simulated interactions and SARS-CoV-2 transmission between residents, staff, and visitors in a nursing home setting. The population used in the simulation model was based on the size of the average US nursing home and recommended staffing levels, with 90 residents, 90 visitors (1 per resident), and 83 nursing staff members.

Exposure

Screening frequency (none, weekly, and twice weekly) was varied over 30 days against varying levels of COVID-19 community incidence, booster uptake, and antiviral use.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were SARS-CoV-2 infections, detected cases per 1000 tests, and incremental cost of screening per life-year gained.

Results

Nursing home interactions were modeled between 90 residents, 90 visitors, and 83 nursing staff over 30 days, completing 4000 to 8000 simulations per parameter combination. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of weekly and twice-weekly screening were less than $150 000 per resident life-year with moderate (50 cases per 100 000) and high (100 cases per 100 000) COVID-19 community incidence across low-booster uptake and high-booster uptake levels. When COVID-19 antiviral use reached 100%, screening incremental cost-effectiveness ratios increased to more than $150 000 per life-year when booster uptake was low and community incidence was high.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this cost-effectiveness analysis suggest that screening may be effective for reducing COVID-19 mortality in nursing homes when COVID-19 community incidence is high and/or booster uptake is low. Nursing home administrators can use these findings to guide planning in the context of widely varying levels of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and intervention measures across the US.

COVID-19 prophylaxis, diagnostics, and treatment in patients with rheumatic diseases. The Polish experts panel opinion

As severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) evolves, infection management in vulnerable populations requires formalized guidance. Although low-virulence variants of SARS-CoV-2 remain predominant, they pose an increased risk of severe illness in adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Several disease-specific (chronic long-grade inflammation, concomitant immunosuppression) and individual (advanced age, multimorbidity, pregnancy, vaccination status) factors contribute to excess risk in RMD populations. Various post-COVID-19 manifestations are also increasingly reported and appear more commonly than in the general population. At a pathogenetic level, complex interplay involving innate and acquired immune dysregulation, viral persistence, and genetic predisposition shapes a unique susceptibility profile. Moreover, incident cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection as a trigger factor for the development of autoimmune conditions have been reported. Vaccination remains a key preventive strategy, and encouraging active education and awareness will be crucial for rheumatologists in the upcoming years. In patients with RMDs, COVID-19 vaccines' benefits outweigh the risks. Derivation of specialized diagnostic and therapeutic protocols within a comprehensive COVID-19 care plan represents an ideal scenario for healthcare system organization. Vigilance for symptoms of infection and rapid diagnosis are key for introducing antiviral treatment in patients with RMDs in a timely manner. This review provides updated guidance on optimal immunization, diagnosis, and antiviral treatment strategies.

Is It Possible to Test for Viral Infectiousness?: The Use Case of (SARS-CoV-2)

Identifying and managing individuals with active or chronic disease, implementing appropriate infection control measures, and mitigating the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for tests of infectiousness. The gold standard for assessing infectiousness has been the recovery of infectious virus in cell culture. Using cycle threshold values, antigen testing, and SARS-CoV-2, replication intermediate strands were used to assess infectiousness, with many limitations. Infectiousness can be influenced by host factors (eg, preexisting immune responses) and virus factors (eg, evolution).