Longitudinal Assessment of Diagnostic Test Performance Over the Course of Acute SARS-CoV-2 Infection

A comprehensive validation study on the influencing factors of cough-based COVID-19 detection through multi-center data with abundant metadata

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, COVID-19 has placed enormous burdens on healthcare systems. Currently, hundreds of thousands of new cases are reported monthly. World Health Organization is managing COVID-19 as a long-term disease, indicating that an efficient and low-cost detection method remains necessary. Previous studies have shown competitive results on cough-based COVID-19 detection combined with deep learning methods. However, most studies have focused only on improving classification performance on single-source data while neglecting the impact of various factors in real-world applications.

METHODS

To this end, we collected clinical and large-scale crowdsourced cough audios with abundant metadata to comprehensively validate the performance differences among different groups. Specifically, we leveraged self-supervised learning for pre-training and fine-tuned the model with data from different sources. Then based on the metadata, we compared the effects of factors such as cough types, symptoms, and infection stages on detection performance. Moreover, we recorded clinical indicators of viral load and antibody levels and observed the correlation between predicted probabilities and indicator values for the first time. Several open-source datasets were tested to verify the model generalizability.

RESULTS

The area under receiver operating characteristic curve is 0.79 for clinical data and 0.69 for crowdsourced data, indicating differences between clinical validation and real-world application. The performance in detecting symptomatic COVID-19 subjects is usually better than detecting asymptomatic COVID-19 subjects. The prediction results show weak correlation with clinical indicators on a small number of clinical data. Poor detection performance in recovery individuals and open-source datasets shows a limitation of existing cough-based detection models.

CONCLUSION

Our study validated the model performance and limitations using multi-source data with abundant metadata, which helped researchers evaluate the feasibility of cough-based COVID-19 detection model in practical applications.

Role of admission rapid antigen testing (RATs) for COVID-19 on patients transferred from acute hospitals to a postacute rehabilitation setting

BACKGROUND

Rapid antigen tests (RATs) are suitable for point-of-care testing, require no laboratory time, and give immediate results. However, are RATs useful for detecting asymptomatic COVID-19 infection when compared with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in health care settings?

METHODS

RAT testing was carried out on all new admissions without a history of confirmed COVID-19 infection within 3 months of admission. PCR testing was carried out on all patients with a positive RAT for confirmation purposes. The cycle threshold values of COVID-19-detected results on PCR testing were examined to determine the utility of the RATs.

RESULTS

A total of 1,403 patients were transferred to the postacute rehabilitation unit from January to December 2023. The results of the study revealed an 85% accuracy of RATs with a 15% rate of false-negative results at the time of admission. All patients who had a positive RAT at the time of admission also had a positive PCR test.

CONCLUSIONS

This testing algorithm resulted in early detection and prompt isolation of positive cases reducing the likely spread of COVID-19 infection, hospital outbreaks, and bed/ward closures.

The ratio between SARS-CoV-2 RNA viral load and culturable viral titre differs depending on the stage of infection: a case study of household transmission in an adult male

Effective public health measures for communicable diseases rely on the ability to identify infectious individuals and prevent transmission from those individuals. For severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the presence of replication-competent virus in specimens from an individual is the gold standard for confirming infectiousness. However, viral culture from clinical specimens is difficult and infrequently performed. Instead, infectiousness may be inferred based on the abundance of viral RNA (or viral load) in a specimen, which is more easily assessed. For this reason, understanding the relationship between RNA viral load and infectious viral titre has important implications for public health strategy. In this case report, we quantified incident, longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 viral loads collected from saliva and nasal-swab specimens, and viral titre from nasal-swab specimens. We observed that the relationship between viral load and viral titre decreases by over five orders of magnitude throughout the course of the infection. Our work demonstrates the potential for infectious virus even in specimens with low viral loads collected during the early phases of infection.

Reflections on COVID-19: A Literature Review of SARS-CoV-2 Testing

Although the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has ended, there are still many important lessons we can learn, as the pandemic profoundly affected every area of laboratory practice. During the pandemic, extensive changes to laboratory staffing had to be implemented, as many healthcare institutions required regular screening of all healthcare staff. Several studies examined the effectiveness of different screening regimens and concluded that repeated testing, even with lower sensitivity tests, could rival the performance of gold-standard RT-PCR testing in the detection of new cases. Many assay evaluations were performed both in the earlier and later periods of the pandemic. They included both nucleocapsid/spike antibodies and automated antigen assays. Early in the pandemic, it was generally agreed that the initial nucleocapsid antibody assays had poor sensitivity when used before 14 days of disease onset, with total or IgG antibodies being preferred over the use of IgM. Spike antibody assays gradually replaced nucleocapsid antibody assays, as most people were vaccinated. Spike antibodies tracked the rise in antibodies after vaccination with mRNA vaccines and became invaluable in the assessment of vaccine response. Studies demonstrated robust antibody secretion with each vaccine dose and could last for several months post-vaccination. When antigen testing was introduced, they became effective tools to identify affected patients when used serially or in an orthogonal fashion with RT-PCR testing. Despite the numerous findings during the pandemic period, research in COVID-19 has slowed. To this day it is difficult to identify a true neutralizing antibody test for the virus. An appropriate antibody level that would confer protective immunity against the plethora of new variants remains elusive. We hope that a summary of events during the pandemic could provide important insights to consider in planning for the next viral pandemic.

Comparative Diagnostic Utility of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen and Molecular Testing in a Community Setting

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) have become widely utilized but longitudinal characterization of their community-based performance remains incompletely understood.

METHODS

This prospective longitudinal study at a large public university in Seattle, WA utilized remote enrollment, online surveys, and self-collected nasal swab specimens to evaluate Ag-RDT performance against real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) in the context of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron. Ag-RDT sensitivity and specificity within 1 day of rRT-PCR were evaluated by symptom status throughout the illness episode and Orf1b cycle threshold (Ct).

RESULTS

From February to December 2022, 5757 participants reported 17 572 Ag-RDT results and completed 12 674 rRT-PCR tests, of which 995 (7.9%) were rRT-PCR positive. Overall sensitivity and specificity were 53.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.6%-56.4%) and 98.8% (95% CI, 98.5%-99.0%), respectively. Sensitivity was comparatively higher for Ag-RDTs used 1 day after rRT-PCR (69.0%), 4-7 days after symptom onset (70.1%), and Orf1b Ct ≤20 (82.7%). Serial Ag-RDT sensitivity increased with repeat testing ≥2 (68.5%) and ≥4 (75.8%) days after an initial Ag-RDT-negative result.

CONCLUSIONS

Ag-RDT performance varied by clinical characteristics and temporal testing patterns. Our findings support recommendations for serial testing following an initial Ag-RDT-negative result, especially among recently symptomatic persons or those at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Test accuracy of rapid diagnostic tests and reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction against virus isolation in cell culture for assessing SARS-CoV-2 infectivity: Systematic review and meta-analysis

We aimed to assess the performance of Ag-RDT and RT-qPCR with regard to detecting infectious SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures, as their diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) compared to virus isolation remains largely unknown. We searched three databases up to 15 December 2021 for DTA studies. The bivariate model was used to synthesise the estimates. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2/C. Twenty studies (2605 respiratory samples) using cell culture and at least one molecular test were identified. All studies were at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. Three comparative DTA studies reported results on Ag-RDT and RT-qPCR against cell culture. Two studies evaluated RT-qPCR against cell culture only. Fifteen studies evaluated Ag-RDT against cell culture as reference standard in RT-qPCR-positive samples. For Ag-RDT, summary sensitivity was 93% (95% CI 78; 98%) and specificity 87% (95% CI 70; 95%). For RT-qPCR, summary sensitivity (continuity-corrected) was 98% (95% CI 95; 99%) and specificity 45% (95% CI 28; 63%). In studies relying on RT-qPCR-positive subsamples (n = 15), the summary sensitivity of Ag-RDT was 93% (95% CI 92; 93%) and specificity 63% (95% CI 63; 63%). Ag-RDT show moderately high sensitivity, detecting most but not all samples demonstrated to be infectious based on virus isolation. Although RT-qPCR exhibits high sensitivity across studies, its low specificity to indicate infectivity raises the question of its general superiority in all clinical settings. Study findings should be interpreted with caution due to the risk of bias, heterogeneity and the imperfect reference standard for infectivity.

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Antigen Card Test, Puerto Rico

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need for rapid and accurate diagnostic tools. In August 2020, the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Antigen Card test became available as a timely and affordable alternative for SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing, but its performance may vary due to factors including timing and symptomatology. This study evaluates BinaxNOW diagnostic performance in diverse epidemiological contexts.

METHODS

Using RT-PCR as reference, we assessed performance of the BinaxNOW COVID-19 test for SARS-CoV-2 detection in anterior nasal swabs from participants of two studies in Puerto Rico from December 2020 to May 2023. Test performance was assessed by days post symptom onset, collection strategy, vaccination status, symptomatology, repeated testing, and RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values.

RESULTS

BinaxNOW demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 84.1% and specificity of 98.8%. Sensitivity peaked within 1-6 days after symptom onset (93.2%) and was higher for symptomatic (86.3%) than asymptomatic (67.3%) participants. Sensitivity declined over the course of infection, dropping from 96.3% in the initial test to 48.4% in testing performed 7-14 days later. BinaxNOW showed 99.5% sensitivity in participants with low Ct values (≤ 25) but lower sensitivity (18.2%) for participants with higher Cts (36-40).

CONCLUSIONS

BinaxNOW demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity, particularly in early-stage infections and symptomatic participants. In situations where test sensitivity is crucial for clinical decision-making, nucleic acid amplification tests are preferred. These findings highlight the importance of considering clinical and epidemiological context when interpreting test results and emphasize the need for ongoing research to adapt testing strategies to emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Modeling the transmission mitigation impact of testing for infectious diseases

A fundamental question of any program focused on the testing and timely diagnosis of a communicable disease is its effectiveness in reducing transmission. Here, we introduce testing effectiveness (TE)-the fraction by which testing and post-diagnosis isolation reduce transmission at the population scale-and a model that incorporates test specifications and usage, within-host pathogen dynamics, and human behaviors to estimate TE. Using TE to guide recommendations, we show that today's rapid diagnostics should be used immediately upon symptom onset to control influenza A and respiratory syncytial virus but delayed by up to two days to control omicron-era severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Furthermore, while rapid tests are superior to reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) to control founder-strain SARS-CoV-2, omicron-era changes in viral kinetics and rapid test sensitivity cause a reversal, with higher TE for RT-qPCR despite longer turnaround times. Last, we illustrate the model's flexibility by quantifying trade-offs in the use of post-diagnosis testing to shorten isolation times.

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.

Differential Viral Dynamics by Sex and Body Mass Index During Acute SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Results From a Longitudinal Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

There is evidence of an association of severe coroanavirus disease (COVID-19) outcomes with increased body mass index (BMI) and male sex. However, few studies have examined the interaction between sex and BMI on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral dynamics.

METHODS

Participants conducted RT-PCR testing every 24-48 hours over a 15-day period. Sex and BMI were self-reported, and Ct values from E-gene were used to quantify viral load. Three distinct outcomes were examined using mixed-effects generalized linear models, linear models, and logistic models, respectively: all Ct values (model 1), nadir Ct value (model 2), and strongly detectable infection (at least 1 Ct value ≤28 during their infection) (model 3). An interaction term between BMI and sex was included, and inverse logit transformations were applied to quantify the differences by BMI and sex using marginal predictions.

RESULTS

In total, 7988 participants enrolled in this study and 439 participants (model 1) and 309 (models 2 and 3) were eligible for these analyses. Among males, increasing BMI was associated with lower Ct values in a dose-response fashion. For participants with BMIs greater than 29 kg/m2, males had significantly lower Ct values and nadir Ct values than females. In total, 67.8% of males and 55.3% of females recorded a strongly detectable infection; increasing proportions of men had Ct values <28 with BMIs of 35 and 40 kg/m2.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed sex-based dimorphism in relation to BMI and COVID-19 viral load. Further investigation is needed to determine the cause, clinical impact, and transmission implications of this sex-differential effect of BMI on viral load.

Robust Combination Testing: Methods and Application to COVID-19 Detection

Simple and affordable testing tools are often not accurate enough to be operationally relevant. For coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) detection, rapid point-of-care tests are cheap and provide results in minutes, but they largely fail policy makers’ accuracy requirements. We propose an analytical methodology, based on robust optimization, that identifies optimal combinations of results from cheap tests for increased predictive accuracy. This methodological tool allows policy makers to credibly quantify the benefits from combination testing and thus, break the trade-off between cost and accuracy. Our methodology is robust to noisy and partially missing input data and incorporates operational constraints—relevant considerations in practice. We apply our methodology to two data sets containing individual-level results of multiple COVID-19 rapid antibody and antigen tests, respectively, to generate Pareto-dominating receiver operating characteristic curves. We find that combining only three rapid tests increases out-of-sample area under the curve by 4% (6%) compared with the best-performing individual test for antibody (antigen) detection. We also find that a policy maker who requires a specificity of at least 0.95 can improve sensitivity by 8% and 2% for antibody and antigen testing, respectively, relative to available combination testing heuristics. Our numerical analysis demonstrates that robust optimization is a powerful tool to avoid overfitting, accommodate missing data, and improve out-of-sample performance. Based on our analytical and empirical results, policy makers should consider approving and deploying a curated combination of cheap point-of-care tests in settings where “gold standard” tests are too expensive or too slow.

This paper was accepted by Stefan Scholtes, healthcare management.

Supplemental Material: The data files and electronic companion are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4826 .

Within-host evolutionary dynamics and tissue compartmentalization during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection

The global evolution of SARS-CoV-2 depends in part upon the evolutionary dynamics within individual hosts with varying immune histories. To characterize the within-host evolution of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, we sequenced saliva and nasal samples collected daily from vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals early during infection. We show that longitudinal sampling facilitates high-confidence genetic variant detection and reveals evolutionary dynamics missed by less-frequent sampling strategies. Within-host dynamics in both unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals appeared largely stochastic; however, in rare cases, minor genetic variants emerged to frequencies sufficient for forward transmission. Finally, we detected significant genetic compartmentalization of viral variants between saliva and nasal swab sample sites in many individuals. Altogether, these data provide a high-resolution profile of within-host SARS-CoV-2 evolutionary dynamics.IMPORTANCEWe detail the within-host evolutionary dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 during acute infection in 31 individuals using daily longitudinal sampling. We characterized patterns of mutational accumulation for unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals, and observed that temporal variant dynamics in both groups were largely stochastic. Comparison of paired nasal and saliva samples also revealed significant genetic compartmentalization between tissue environments in multiple individuals. Our results demonstrate how selection, genetic drift, and spatial compartmentalization all play important roles in shaping the within-host evolution of SARS-CoV-2 populations during acute infection.

The evaluation of a rapid microfluidic immunofluorescence antigen test in detecting the infectiousness of COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

A test-based strategy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is one of the measures to assess the need for isolation and prevention of infection. However, testing with high sensitivity methods, such as quantitative RT-PCR, leads to unnecessary isolation, whereas the lateral flow antigen test shows low sensitivity and false negative results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2 Ag test (Lumira Ag), a rapid microfluidic immunofluorescence method, in assessing infectivity.

METHODS

This study was performed from March 2022 to July 2022. A pair of nasopharyngeal swab samples were obtained from each patient with mild COVID-19. One swab was used for Lumira Ag testing, and the other for quantitative RT-PCR testing and virus culture.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were included in the study. Among them, PCR, Lumira Ag test, and virus culture indicated positivity for 82, 66, and 24 patients, respectively. When comparing the Lumira Ag test to virus culture, its sensitivity was 100.0% (24/24), specificity, 30.0% (18/60); positive predictive value, 36.3% (24/66); and negative predictive value (NPV), 100.0% (18/18). The positive sample for virus culture was observed until the ninth day from the onset of symptoms, while the Lumira Ag test was observed until day 11.

CONCLUSIONS

The Lumira Ag test showed high sensitivity and NPV (100% each) compared to virus culture. A test-based strategy using the Lumira Ag test can effectively exclude COVID-19 infectiousness.

[Diagnostic performance of two antigen-tests compared to one PCR-Test to detect SARS-CoV-2 in an emergency department and emergency service]

BACKGROUND

In the German hospital landscape and emergency care the COVID-19 pandemic was a stress test. Emergency medical health care in Germany is ensured by the supply chain between prehospital emergency rescue and clinical emergency care in the emergency rooms. In hospitals and emergency care settings a rapid, simple, accurate, and cost-effective test is needed to identify SARS-CoV‑2. In the central emergency department it is important to strictly separate patients with suspected COVID-19 from non-infected emergency persons.

METHODS

Given the background mentioned above, the performance of antigen tests in the ambulance service of the city Jena and the central emergency department of the university hospital Jena was analysed and in addition verified by using the RT-PCR gold standard. Several multiple testing procedures were performed by using antigen tests in the ambulance service and the central emergency department, and by using one or both of these antigen tests followed by the RT-PCR test. A total of 980 patients were included in the study over a two-month period (October/November 2022).

RESULTS

The average age of all patients was 65 years. More than half of the actively treated patients came from the city of Jena. The sensitivity and specificity of the antigen tests were 66.7% and 99.2% in the clinical setting (the central emergency department) and 68.8% and 96.7% in the prehospital setting (in the ambulance service) compared to RT-PCR. In the prehospital setting the sensitivity of the antigen testing was slightly higher (2%) than the clinical antigen testing. Regarding the parallel testing, 6% of antigen tests had a false negative SARS-CoV‑2 antigen test result in the ambulance service and 4.6% of antigen tests had a false negative SARS-CoV‑2 antigen test result in the central emergency department. The false-negative antigen tests, and thus the potentially unrecognized individuals, were further reviewed by considering the Ct-value.

CONCLUSION

The use of antigen testing in the ambulance service and the emergency department can lead to a quick classification of COVID and non-COVID areas of an emergency department. The measurement accuracy of antigen testing in the ambulance service and central emergency department is not equivalent to the RT-PCR. Nevertheless, antigen testing is a useful initial screening tool for early detection of SARS-CoV‑2 in prehospital and clinical settings. Dual antigen testing may be useful for more accurate diagnosis of the SARS-CoV‑2 pathogen.

Performance of different rapid antigen testing strategies for SARS-CoV-2: A living rapid review

BACKGROUND

Rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) for SARS-CoV-2 testing offer several advantages over molecular tests, but there is little evidence supporting an ideal testing algorithm. We aimed to examine the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) and the effectiveness of different RADT SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies.

METHODS

Following PRISMA DTA guidance, we carried out a living rapid review and meta-analysis. Searches were conducted in Ovid MEDLINE® ALL, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL electronic databases until February 2022. Results were visualized using forest plots and included in random-effects univariate meta-analyses, where eligible.

RESULTS

After screening 8010 records, 18 studies were included. Only one study provided data on incidence outcomes. Seventeen studies were DTA reports with direct comparisons of RADT strategies, using RT-PCR as the reference standard. Testing settings varied, corresponding to original SARS-CoV-2 or early variants. Strategies included differences in serial testing, the individual collecting swabs and swab sample locations. Overall, specificity remained high (>98%) across strategies. Although results were heterogeneous, the sensitivity for healthcare worker-collected samples was greater than for self-collected samples. Nasal samples had comparable sensitivity when compared to paired RADTs with nasopharyngeal samples, but sensitivity was much lower for saliva samples. The limited evidence for serial testing suggested higher sensitivity if RADTs were administered every 3 days compared to less frequent testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional high-quality research is needed to confirm our findings; all studies were judged to be at risk of bias, with significant heterogeneity in sensitivity estimates. Evaluations of testing algorithms in real-world settings are recommended, especially for transmission and incidence outcomes.

Cardiac changes in collegiate athletes following SARS-CoV-2 infection and quarantine: a prospective Case-Control study

OBJECTIVE

Athletes are susceptible to acute respiratory tract infections, including SARS-CoV-2, which can affect cardiovascular function. We aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 infection and quarantine on cardiac function in male and female collegiate athletes.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, prospective, case-control study and performed transthoracic echocardiography in a diverse group of convalescent SARS-CoV-2-positive athletes following a 10-14-day quarantine, matched to non-SARS-CoV-2 athletes. Data collection occurred from August 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021.

RESULTS

We evaluated 61 SARS-CoV-2-positive athletes (20 ± 1 years, 39% female) and 61 controls (age 20 ± 2 years, 39% female). Echocardiography in SARS-CoV-2-positive athletes was performed on average 40 ± 38 days after infection diagnosis. All SARS-CoV-2-positive athletes had clinically normal systolic left ventricular function (LVEF > 50%). However, SARS-CoV-2-positive athletes exhibited mildly lower LVEF compared to controls (65 ± 6% vs. 72 ± 8%, respectively, p < 0.001), which remained significant when evaluated separately for female and male athletes. Sub-analysis revealed these differences occurred only when imaging occurred within a mean average of 27 days of infection, with a longer recovery period (≥27 days) resulting in no differences. SARS-CoV-2-positive male athletes exhibited higher left ventricular end-diastolic volume and mitral filling velocities compared to male controls.

CONCLUSION

Our study reveals unique sex-specific cardiac changes in collegiate athletes following SARS-CoV-2 infection and quarantine compared to controls. Despite a mild reduction in LVEF, which was only observed in the first weeks following infection, no clinically significant cardiac abnormalities were observed. Further research is required to understand if the changes in LVEF are directly attributed to the infection or indirectly through exercise restrictions resulting from quarantine.

The Impact of Repeating COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Tests on Prevalence Boundary Performance and Missed Diagnoses

A prevalence boundary (PB) marks the point in prevalence in which the false omission rate, RFO = FN/(TN + FN), exceeds the tolerance limit for missed diagnoses. The objectives were to mathematically analyze rapid antigen test (RAgT) performance, determine why PBs are breeched, and evaluate the merits of testing three times over five days, now required by the US Food and Drug Administration for asymptomatic persons. Equations were derived to compare test performance patterns, calculate PBs, and perform recursive computations. An independent July 2023 FDA-NIH-university-commercial evaluation of RAgTs provided performance data used in theoretical calculations. Tiered sensitivity/specificity comprise the following: tier (1) 90%, 95%; tier (2) 95%, 97.5%; and tier (3) 100%, ≥99%. Repeating a T2 test improves the PB from 44.6% to 95.2% (RFO 5%). In the FDA-NIH-university-commercial evaluation, RAgTs generated a sensitivity of 34.4%, which improved to 55.3% when repeated, and then improved to 68.5% with the third test. With RFO = 5%, PBs are 7.37/10.46/14.22%, respectively. PB analysis suggests that RAgTs should achieve a clinically proven sensitivity of 91.0-91.4%. When prevalence exceeds PBs, missed diagnoses can perpetuate virus transmission. Repeating low-sensitivity RAgTs delays diagnosis. In homes, high-risk settings, and hotspots, PB breaches may prolong contagion, defeat mitigation, facilitate new variants, and transform outbreaks into endemic disease. Molecular diagnostics can help avoid these potential vicious cycles.

Index cases first identified by nasal-swab rapid COVID-19 tests had more transmission to household contacts than cases identified by other test types

At-home rapid COVID-19 tests in the U.S. utilize nasal-swab specimens and require high viral loads to reliably give positive results. Longitudinal studies from the onset of infection have found infectious virus can present in oral specimens days before nasal. Detection and initiation of infection-control practices may therefore be delayed when nasal-swab rapid tests are used, resulting in greater transmission to contacts. We assessed whether index cases first identified by rapid nasal-swab COVID-19 tests had more transmission to household contacts than index cases who used other test types (tests with higher analytical sensitivity and/or non-nasal specimen types). In this observational cohort study, 370 individuals from 85 households with a recent COVID-19 case were screened at least daily by RT-qPCR on one or more self-collected upper-respiratory specimen types. A two-level random intercept model was used to assess the association between the infection outcome of household contacts and each covariable (household size, race/ethnicity, age, vaccination status, viral variant, infection-control practices, and whether a rapid nasal-swab test was used to initially identify the household index case). Transmission was quantified by adjusted secondary attack rates (aSAR) and adjusted odds ratios (aOR). An aSAR of 53.6% (95% CI 38.8-68.3%) was observed among households where the index case first tested positive by a rapid nasal-swab COVID-19 test, which was significantly higher than the aSAR for households where the index case utilized another test type (27.2% 95% CI 19.5-35.0%, P = 0.003 pairwise comparisons of predictive margins). We observed an aOR of 4.90 (95% CI 1.65-14.56) for transmission to household contacts when a nasal-swab rapid test was used to identify the index case, compared to other test types. Use of nasal-swab rapid COVID-19 tests for initial detection of infection and initiation of infection control may be less effective at limiting transmission to household contacts than other test types.

Daily SARS-CoV-2 Nasal Antigen Tests Miss Infected and Presumably Infectious People Due to Viral Load Differences among Specimen Types

In a recent household transmission study of SARS-CoV-2, we found extreme differences in SARS-CoV-2 viral loads among paired saliva, anterior nares swab (ANS), and oropharyngeal swab specimens collected from the same time point. We hypothesized these differences may hinder low-analytical-sensitivity assays (including antigen rapid diagnostic tests [Ag-RDTs]) by using a single specimen type (e.g., ANS) from reliably detecting infected and infectious individuals. We evaluated daily at-home ANS Ag-RDTs (Quidel QuickVue) in a cross-sectional analysis of 228 individuals and a longitudinal analysis (throughout infection) of 17 individuals enrolled early in the course of infection. Ag-RDT results were compared to reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) results and high, presumably infectious viral loads (in each, or any, specimen type). The ANS Ag-RDT correctly detected only 44% of time points from infected individuals on cross-sectional analysis, and this population had an inferred limit of detection of 7.6 × 106 copies/mL. From the longitudinal cohort, daily Ag-RDT clinical sensitivity was very low (<3%) during the early, preinfectious period of the infection. Further, the Ag-RDT detected ≤63% of presumably infectious time points. The poor observed clinical sensitivity of the Ag-RDT was similar to what was predicted based on quantitative ANS viral loads and the inferred limit of detection of the ANS Ag-RDT being evaluated, indicating high-quality self-sampling. Nasal Ag-RDTs, even when used daily, can miss individuals infected with the Omicron variant and even those presumably infectious. Evaluations of Ag-RDTs for detection of infected or infectious individuals should be compared with a composite (multispecimen) infection status to correctly assess performance. IMPORTANCE We reveal three findings from a longitudinal study of daily nasal antigen rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) evaluated against SARS-CoV-2 viral load quantification in three specimen types (saliva, nasal swab, and throat swab) in participants enrolled at the incidence of infection. First, the evaluated Ag-RDT showed low (44%) clinical sensitivity for detecting infected persons at all infection stages. Second, the Ag-RDT poorly detected (≤63%) time points that participants had high and presumably infectious viral loads in at least one specimen type. This poor clinical sensitivity to detect infectious individuals is inconsistent with the commonly held view that daily Ag-RDTs have near-perfect detection of infectious individuals. Third, use of a combination nasal-throat specimen type was inferred by viral loads to significantly improve Ag-RDT performance to detect infectious individuals.

Clinical evaluation of anterior nasal cavity swab specimens by a rapid antigen test using a GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag Kit to diagnose COVID-19

The promising diagnostic performance of rapid antigen tests (RATs) using non-invasive anterior nasal (AN) swab specimens to diagnose COVID-19 has been reported. A large number of RATs are commercially available; however, the careful assessment of RATs is essential prior to their implementation in clinical practice. We evaluated the clinical performance of the GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag kit as a RAT using AN swabs in a prospective, blinded study. Adult patients who visited outpatient departments and received SARS-CoV-2 tests between August 16 and September 8, 2022, were eligible for this study. Patients who were aged under 18 years and patients without appropriate specimens were excluded. Two sets of AN and nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs were collected from all patients. Each set of specimens was tested by the RAT and quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Of the 138 recruited patients, 84 were positive and 54 were negative by RT-qPCR using NP swabs. The positive agreement rate between RT-qPCR using NP swabs and RAT using AN swabs was 78.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 68.3%-86.8%), the negative agreement rate was 98.1% (95% CI, 90.1%-99.9%), and the overall agreement rate was 86.2% (95% CI, 79.3%-91.5%), with a κ coefficient of 0.73. The positive agreement rate in the early phase (≤3 days from symptom onset) was >80%, but this fell to 50% in the late phase (≥4 days). This study demonstrates that the GLINE-2019-nCoV Ag Kit using AN swabs has good clinical performance and might be a reliable alternative method for diagnosing COVID-19.

Design and implementation of a digital site-less clinical study of serial rapid antigen testing to identify asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection

Background

Rapid antigen detection tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 with emergency use authorization generally include a condition of authorization to evaluate the test's performance in asymptomatic individuals when used serially. We aim to describe a novel study design that was used to generate regulatory-quality data to evaluate the serial use of Ag-RDT in detecting SARS-CoV-2 virus among asymptomatic individuals.

Methods

This prospective cohort study used a siteless, digital approach to assess longitudinal performance of Ag-RDT. Individuals over 2 years old from across the USA with no reported COVID-19 symptoms in the 14 days prior to study enrollment were eligible to enroll in this study. Participants throughout the mainland USA were enrolled through a digital platform between October 18, 2021 and February 15, 2022. Participants were asked to test using Ag-RDT and molecular comparators every 48 hours for 15 days. Enrollment demographics, geographic distribution, and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates are reported.

Key Results

A total of 7361 participants enrolled in the study, and 492 participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, including 154 who were asymptomatic and tested negative to start the study. This exceeded the initial enrollment goals of 60 positive participants. We enrolled participants from 44 US states, and geographic distribution of participants shifted in accordance with the changing COVID-19 prevalence nationwide.

Conclusions

The digital site-less approach employed in the "Test Us At Home" study enabled rapid, efficient, and rigorous evaluation of rapid diagnostics for COVID-19 and can be adapted across research disciplines to optimize study enrollment and accessibility.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 screening strategy under China's dynamic zero-case policy

This study aims to optimize the COVID-19 screening strategies under China's dynamic zero-case policy through cost-effectiveness analysis. A total of 9 screening strategies with different screening frequencies and combinations of detection methods were designed. A stochastic agent-based model was used to simulate the progress of the COVID-19 outbreak in scenario I (close contacts were promptly quarantined) and scenario II (close contacts were not promptly quarantined). The primary outcomes included the number of infections, number of close contacts, number of deaths, the duration of the epidemic, and duration of movement restriction. Net monetary benefit (NMB) and the incremental cost-benefit ratio were used to compare the cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies. The results indicated that under China's COVID-19 dynamic zero-case policy, high-frequency screening can help contain the spread of the epidemic, reduce the size and burden of the epidemic, and is cost-effective. Mass antigen testing is not cost-effective compared with mass nucleic acid testing in the same screening frequency. It would be more cost-effective to use AT as a supplemental screening tool when NAT capacity is insufficient or when outbreaks are spreading very rapidly.

SARS-CoV-2 self-test uptake and factors associated with self-testing during Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 waves in France, January to May 2022

BackgroundFollowing the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant spread, the use of unsupervised antigenic rapid diagnostic tests (self-tests) increased.AimThis study aimed to measure self-test uptake and factors associated with self-testing.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study from 20 January to 2 May 2022, the case series from a case-control study on factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection were used to analyse self-testing habits in France. A multivariable quasi-Poisson regression was used to explore the variables associated with self-testing among symptomatic cases who were not contacts of another infected individual. The control series from the same study was used as a proxy for the self-test background rate in the non-infected population of France.ResultsDuring the study period, 179,165 cases who tested positive through supervised tests were recruited. Of these, 64.7% had performed a self-test in the 3 days preceding this supervised test, of which 79,038 (68.2%) were positive. The most frequently reported reason for self-testing was the presence of symptoms (64.6%). Among symptomatic cases who were not aware of being contacts of another case, self-testing was positively associated with being female, higher education, household size, being a teacher and negatively associated with older age, not French by birth, healthcare-related work and immunosuppression. Among the control series, 12% self-tested during the 8 days preceding questionnaire filling, with temporal heterogeneity.ConclusionThe analysis showed high self-test uptake in France with some inequalities which must be addressed through education and facilitated access (cost and availability) for making it a more efficient epidemic control tool.

Characterizing SARS-CoV-2 Transcription of Subgenomic and Genomic RNAs During Early Human Infection Using Multiplexed Droplet Digital Polymerase Chain Reaction

BACKGROUND

Control of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission requires understanding SARS-CoV-2 replication dynamics.

METHODS

We developed a multiplexed droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) assay to quantify SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNAs (sgRNAs), which are only produced during active viral replication, and discriminate them from genomic RNAs (gRNAs). We applied the assay to specimens from 144 people with single nasopharyngeal samples and 27 people with >1 sample. Results were compared to quantitative PCR (qPCR) and viral culture.

RESULTS

sgRNAs were quantifiable across a range of qPCR cycle threshold (Ct) values and correlated with Ct values. The ratio sgRNA:gRNA was stable across a wide range of Ct values, whereas adjusted amounts of N sgRNA to a human housekeeping gene declined with higher Ct values. Adjusted sgRNA and gRNA amounts were quantifiable in culture-negative samples, although levels were significantly lower than in culture-positive samples. Daily testing of 6 persons revealed that sgRNA is concordant with culture results during the first week of infection but may be discordant with culture later in infection. sgRNA:gRNA is constant during infection despite changes in viral culture.

CONCLUSIONS

Ct values from qPCR correlate with active viral replication. More work is needed to understand why some cultures are negative despite presence of sgRNA.

Border Control for Infectious Respiratory Disease Pandemics: A Modelling Study for H1N1 and Four Strains of SARS-CoV-2

Post-pandemic economic recovery relies on border control for safe cross-border movement. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, we investigate whether effective strategies generalize across diseases and variants. For four SARS-CoV-2 variants and influenza A-H1N1, we simulated 21 strategy families of varying test types and frequencies, quantifying expected transmission risk, relative to no control, by strategy family and quarantine length. We also determined minimum quarantine lengths to suppress relative risk below given thresholds. SARS-CoV-2 variants showed similar relative risk across strategy families and quarantine lengths, with at most 2 days' between-variant difference in minimum quarantine lengths. ART-based and PCR-based strategies showed comparable effectiveness, with regular testing strategies requiring at most 9 days. For influenza A-H1N1, ART-based strategies were ineffective. Daily ART testing reduced relative risk only 9% faster than without regular testing. PCR-based strategies were moderately effective, with daily PCR (0-day delay) testing requiring 16 days for the second-most stringent threshold. Viruses with high typical viral loads and low transmission risk given low viral loads, such as SARS-CoV-2, are effectively controlled with moderate-sensitivity tests (ARTs) and modest quarantine periods. Viruses with low typical viral loads and substantial transmission risk at low viral loads, such as influenza A-H1N1, require high-sensitivity tests (PCR) and longer quarantine periods.

Extreme differences in SARS-CoV-2 viral loads among respiratory specimen types during presumed pre-infectious and infectious periods

SARS-CoV-2 viral-load measurements from a single-specimen type are used to establish diagnostic strategies, interpret clinical-trial results for vaccines and therapeutics, model viral transmission, and understand virus-host interactions. However, measurements from a single-specimen type are implicitly assumed to be representative of other specimen types. We quantified viral-load timecourses from individuals who began daily self-sampling of saliva, anterior-nares (nasal), and oropharyngeal (throat) swabs before or at the incidence of infection with the Omicron variant. Viral loads in different specimen types from the same person at the same timepoint exhibited extreme differences, up to 10⁹ copies/mL. These differences were not due to variation in sample self-collection, which was consistent. For most individuals, longitudinal viral-load timecourses in different specimen types did not correlate. Throat-swab and saliva viral loads began to rise as many as 7 days earlier than nasal-swab viral loads in most individuals, leading to very low clinical sensitivity of nasal swabs during the first days of infection. Individuals frequently exhibited presumably infectious viral loads in one specimen type while viral loads were low or undetectable in other specimen types. Therefore, defining an individual as infectious based on assessment of a single-specimen type underestimates the infectious period, and overestimates the ability of that specimen type to detect infectious individuals. For diagnostic COVID-19 testing, these three single-specimen types have low clinical sensitivity, whereas a combined throat-nasal swab, and assays with high analytical sensitivity, was inferred to have significantly better clinical sensitivity to detect presumed pre-infectious and infectious individuals.

Performance of Rapid Antigen Tests Based on Symptom Onset and Close Contact Exposure: A secondary analysis from the Test Us At Home prospective cohort study

Background

The performance of rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 (Ag-RDT) in temporal relation to symptom onset or exposure is unknown, as is the impact of vaccination on this relationship.

Objective

To evaluate the performance of Ag-RDT compared with RT-PCR based on day after symptom onset or exposure in order to decide on 'when to test'.

Design Setting and Participants

The Test Us at Home study was a longitudinal cohort study that enrolled participants over 2 years old across the United States between October 18, 2021 and February 4, 2022. All participants were asked to conduct Ag-RDT and RT-PCR testing every 48 hours over a 15-day period. Participants with one or more symptoms during the study period were included in the Day Post Symptom Onset (DPSO) analyses, while those who reported a COVID-19 exposure were included in the Day Post Exposure (DPE) analysis.

Exposure

Participants were asked to self-report any symptoms or known exposures to SARS-CoV-2 every 48-hours, immediately prior to conducting Ag-RDT and RT-PCR testing. The first day a participant reported one or more symptoms was termed DPSO 0, and the day of exposure was DPE 0. Vaccination status was self-reported.

Main Outcome and Measures

Results of Ag-RDT were self-reported (positive, negative, or invalid) and RT-PCR results were analyzed by a central laboratory. Percent positivity of SARS-CoV-2 and sensitivity of Ag-RDT and RT-PCR by DPSO and DPE were stratified by vaccination status and calculated with 95% confidence intervals.

Results

A total of 7,361 participants enrolled in the study. Among them, 2,086 (28.3%) and 546 (7.4%) participants were eligible for the DPSO and DPE analyses, respectively. Unvaccinated participants were nearly twice as likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 than vaccinated participants in event of symptoms (PCR+: 27.6% vs 10.1%) or exposure (PCR+: 43.8% vs. 22.2%). The highest proportion of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals tested positive on DPSO 2 and DPE 5-8. Performance of RT-PCR and Ag-RDT did not differ by vaccination status. Ag-RDT detected 78.0% (95% Confidence Interval: 72.56-82.61) of PCR-confirmed infections by DPSO 4. For exposed participants, Ag-RDT detected 84.9% (95% CI: 75.0-91.4) of PCR-confirmed infections by day five post-exposure (DPE 5).

Conclusions and Relevance

Performance of Ag-RDT and RT-PCR was highest on DPSO 0-2 and DPE 5 and did not differ by vaccination status. These data suggests that serial testing remains integral to enhancing the performance of Ag-RDT.

A multiplexed, paired-pooled droplet digital PCR assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva

In response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, we developed a multiplexed, paired-pool droplet digital PCR (MP4) screening assay. Key features of our assay are the use of minimally processed saliva, 8-sample paired pools, and reverse-transcription droplet digital PCR (RT-ddPCR) targeting the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid gene. The limit of detection was determined to be 2 and 12 copies per µl for individual and pooled samples, respectively. Using the MP4 assay, we routinely processed over 1,000 samples a day with a 24-h turnaround time and over the course of 17 months, screened over 250,000 saliva samples. Modeling studies showed that the efficiency of 8-sample pools was reduced with increased viral prevalence and that this could be mitigated by using 4-sample pools. We also present a strategy for, and modeling data supporting, the creation of a third paired pool as an additional strategy to employ under high viral prevalence.

Optimized workplace risk mitigation measures for SARS-CoV-2 in 2022

596 million SARS-CoV-2 cases have been reported and over 12 billion vaccine doses have been administered. As vaccination rates increase, a gap in knowledge exists regarding appropriate thresholds for escalation and de-escalation of workplace COVID-19 preventative measures. We conducted 133,056 simulation experiments, evaluating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 virus in hypothesized working environments subject to COVID-19 infections from the community. We tested the rates of workplace-acquired infections based on applied isolation strategies, community infection rates, methods and scales of testing, non-pharmaceutical interventions, variant predominance, vaccination coverages, and vaccination efficacies. When 75% of a workforce is vaccinated with a 70% efficacious vaccine against infection, then no masking or routine testing + isolation strategies are needed to prevent workplace-acquired omicron variant infections when the community infection rate per 100,000 persons is ≤ 1. A CIR ≤ 30, and ≤ 120 would result in no workplace-acquired infections in this same scenario against the delta and alpha variants, respectively. Workforces with 100% worker vaccination can prevent workplace-acquired infections with higher community infection rates. Identifying and isolating workers with antigen-based SARS-CoV-2 testing methods results in the same or fewer workplace-acquired infections than testing with slower turnaround time polymerase chain reaction methods. Risk migration measures such as mask-wearing, testing, and isolation can be relaxed, or escalated, in commensurate with levels of community infections, workforce immunization, and risk tolerance. The interactive heatmap we provide can be used for immediate, parameter-based case count predictions to inform institutional policy making. The simulation approach we have described can be further used for future evaluation of strategies to mitigate COVID-19 spread.

Quantitative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Antigen- and Polymerase Chain Reaction-Based Combination Strategies for Containing COVID-19 Transmission in a Simulated Community

The number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases continues to surge, overwhelming healthcare systems and causing excess mortality in many countries. Testing of infectious populations remains a key strategy to contain the COVID-19 outbreak, delay the exponential spread of the disease, and flatten the epidemic curve. Using the Omicron variant outbreak as a background, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of testing strategies with different test combinations and frequencies, analyze the factors associated with testing effectiveness, and optimize testing strategies based on these influencing factors. We developed a stochastic, agent-based, discrete-time susceptible-latent-infectious-recovered model simulating a community to estimate the association between three levels of testing strategies and COVID-19 transmission. Antigen testing and its combination strategies were more efficient than polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-related strategies. Antigen testing also showed better performance in reducing the demand for hospital beds and intensive care unit beds. The delay in the turnaround time of test results had a more significant impact on the efficiency of the testing strategy compared to the detection limit of viral load and detection-related contacts. The main advantage of antigen testing strategies is the short turnaround time, which is also a critical factor to be optimized to improve PCR strategies. After modifying the turnaround time, the strategies with less frequent testing were comparable to daily testing. The choice of testing strategy requires consideration of containment goals, test efficacy, community prevalence, and economic factors. This study provides evidence for the selection and optimization of testing strategies in the post-pandemic era and provides guidance for optimizing healthcare resources.

Ascertainment rate of SARS-CoV-2 infections from healthcare and community testing in the UK

The proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections ascertained through healthcare and community testing is generally unknown and expected to vary depending on natural factors and changes in test-seeking behaviour. Here we use population surveillance data and reported daily case numbers in the United Kingdom to estimate the rate of case ascertainment. We mathematically describe the relationship between the ascertainment rate, the daily number of reported cases, population prevalence, and the sensitivity of PCR and Lateral Flow tests as a function time since exposure. Applying this model to the data, we estimate that 20%-40% of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the UK were ascertained with a positive test with results varying by time and region. Cases of the Alpha variant were ascertained at a higher rate than the wild type variants circulating in the early pandemic, and higher again for the Delta variant and Omicron BA.1 sub-lineage, but lower for the BA.2 sub-lineage. Case ascertainment was higher in adults than in children. We further estimate the daily number of infections and compare this to mortality data to estimate that the infection fatality rate increased by a factor of 3 during the period dominated by the Alpha variant, and declined in line with the distribution of vaccines. This manuscript was submitted as part of a theme issue on "Modelling COVID-19 and Preparedness for Future Pandemics".

Minimising school disruption under high incidence conditions due to the Omicron variant in France, Switzerland, Italy, in January 2022

BackgroundAs record cases of Omicron variant were registered in Europe in early 2022, schools remained a vulnerable setting undergoing large disruption.AimThrough mathematical modelling, we compared school protocols of reactive screening, regular screening, and reactive class closure implemented in France, in Baselland (Switzerland), and in Italy, respectively, and assessed them in terms of case prevention, testing resource demand, and schooldays lost.MethodsWe used a stochastic agent-based model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in schools accounting for within- and across-class contacts from empirical contact data. We parameterised it to the Omicron BA.1 variant to reproduce the French Omicron wave in January 2022. We simulated the three protocols to assess their costs and effectiveness for varying peak incidence rates in the range experienced by European countries.ResultsWe estimated that at the high incidence rates registered in France during the Omicron BA.1 wave in January 2022, the reactive screening protocol applied in France required higher test resources compared with the weekly screening applied in Baselland (0.50 vs 0.45 tests per student-week), but achieved considerably lower control (8% vs 21% reduction of peak incidence). The reactive class closure implemented in Italy was predicted to be very costly, leading to > 20% student-days lost.ConclusionsAt high incidence conditions, reactive screening protocols generate a large and unplanned demand in testing resources, for marginal control of school transmissions. Comparable or lower resources could be more efficiently used through weekly screening. Our findings can help define incidence levels triggering school protocols and optimise their cost-effectiveness.

Finding a Needle in a Haystack: Design and Implementation of a Digital Site-less Clinical Study of Serial Rapid Antigen Testing to Identify Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Background

Rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 with Emergency Use Authorization generally include a condition of authorization to evaluate the test's performance in asymptomatic individuals when used serially.

Objective

To describe a novel study design to generate regulatory-quality data to evaluate serial use of Ag-RDT in detecting SARS-CoV-2 virus among asymptomatic individuals.

Design

Prospective cohort study using a decentralized approach. Participants were asked to test using Ag-RDT and molecular comparators every 48 hours for 15 days.

Setting

Participants throughout the mainland United States were enrolled through a digital platform between October 18, 2021 and February 15, 2022. Ag-RDTs were completed at home, and molecular comparators were shipped to a central laboratory.

Participants

Individuals over 2 years old from across the U.S. with no reported COVID-19 symptoms in the 14 days prior to study enrollment were eligible to enroll in this study.

Measurements

Enrollment demographics, geographic distribution, and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates are reported.

Key Results

A total of 7,361 participants enrolled in the study, and 492 participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, including 154 who were asymptomatic and tested negative to start the study. This exceeded the initial enrollment goals of 60 positive participants. We enrolled participants from 44 U.S. states, and geographic distribution of participants shifted in accordance with the changing COVID-19 prevalence nationwide.

Limitations

New, complex workflows required significant operational and data team support. Conclusions: The digital site-less approach employed in the 'Test Us At Home' study enabled rapid, efficient, and rigorous evaluation of rapid diagnostics for COVID-19, and can be adapted across research disciplines to optimize study enrollment and accessibility.

Patterns of reported infection and reinfection of SARS-CoV-2 in England

One of the key features of any infectious disease is whether infection generates long-lasting immunity or whether repeated reinfection is common. In the former, the long-term dynamics are driven by the birth of susceptible individuals while in the latter the dynamics are governed by the speed of waning immunity. Between these two extremes a range of scenarios is possible. During the early waves of SARS-CoV-2, the underlying paradigm was for long-lasting immunity, but more recent data and in particular the 2022 Omicron waves have shown that reinfection can be relatively common. Here we investigate reported SARS-CoV-2 cases in England, partitioning the data into four main waves, and consider the temporal distribution of first and second reports of infection. We show that a simple low-dimensional statistical model of random (but scaled) reinfection captures much of the observed dynamics, with the value of this scaling, k, providing information of underlying epidemiological patterns. We conclude that there is considerable heterogeneity in risk of reporting reinfection by wave, age-group and location. The high levels of reinfection in the Omicron wave (we estimate that 18% of all Omicron cases had been previously infected, although not necessarily previously reported infection) point to reinfection events dominating future COVID-19 dynamics. This manuscript was submitted as part of a theme issue on "Modelling COVID-19 and Preparedness for Future Pandemics".

Combined Symptom Screening and At-Home Tests for COVID-19

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

At-home rapid antigen tests provide a convenient and expedited resource to learn about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection status. However, low sensitivity of at-home antigen tests presents a challenge. This study examines the accuracy of at-home tests, when combined with computer-facilitated symptom screening.

METHODS

The study used primary data sources with data collected during 2 phases at different periods (phase 1 and phase 2): one during the period in which the alpha variant of SARS-CoV-2 was predominant in the United States and another during the surge of the delta variant. Four hundred sixty-one study participants were included in the analyses from phase 1 and 374 subjects from phase 2. Phase 1 data were used to develop a computerized symptom screening tool, using ordinary logistic regression with interaction terms, which predicted coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test results. Phase 2 data were used to validate the accuracy of predicting COVID-19 diagnosis with (1) computerized symptom screening; (2) at-home rapid antigen testing; (3) the combination of both screening methods; and (4) the combination of symptom screening and vaccination status. The McFadden pseudo-R2 was used as a measure of percentage of variation in RT-PCR test results explained by the various screening methods.

RESULTS

The McFadden pseudo-R2 for the first at-home test, the second at-home test, and computerized symptom screening was 0.274, 0.140, and 0.158, respectively. Scores between 0.2 and 0.4 indicated moderate levels of accuracy. The first at-home test had low sensitivity (0.587) and high specificity (0.989). Adding a second at-home test did not improve the sensitivity of the first test. Computerized symptom screening improved the accuracy of the first at-home test (added 0.131 points to sensitivity and 6.9% to pseudo-R2 of the first at-home test). Computerized symptom screening and vaccination status was the most accurate method to screen patients for COVID-19 or an active infection with SARS-CoV-2 in the community (pseudo-R2 = 0.476).

CONCLUSION

Computerized symptom screening could either improve, or in some situations, replace at-home antigen tests for those individuals experiencing COVID-19 symptoms.

Development, testing and validation of a SARS-CoV-2 multiplex panel for detection of the five major variants of concern on a portable PCR platform

Many SARS-CoV-2 variants have emerged during the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. These variants have acquired mutations conferring phenotypes such as increased transmissibility or virulence, or causing diagnostic, therapeutic, or immune escape. Detection of Alpha and the majority of Omicron sublineages by PCR relied on the so-called S gene target failure due to the deletion of six nucleotides coding for amino acids 69-70 in the spike (S) protein. Detection of hallmark mutations in other variants present in samples relied on whole genome sequencing. However, whole genome sequencing as a diagnostic tool is still in its infancy due to geographic inequities in sequencing capabilities, higher cost compared to other molecular assays, longer turnaround time from sample to result, and technical challenges associated with producing complete genome sequences from samples that have low viral load and/or high background. Hence, there is a need for rapid genotyping assays. In order to rapidly generate information on the presence of a variant in a given sample, we have created a panel of four triplex RT-qPCR assays targeting 12 mutations to detect and differentiate all five variants of concern: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Omicron. We also developed an expanded pentaplex assay that can reliably distinguish among the major sublineages (BA.1-BA.5) of Omicron. In silico, analytical and clinical testing of the variant panel indicate that the assays exhibit high sensitivity and specificity. This panel can help fulfill the need for rapid identification of variants in samples, leading to quick decision making with respect to public health measures, as well as treatment options for individuals. Compared to sequencing, these genotyping PCR assays allow much faster turn-around time from sample to results-just a couple hours instead of days or weeks.

Evaluation of the Access Bio CareStart rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in asymptomatic individuals tested at a community mass-testing program in Western Massachusetts

Point-of-care antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) to detect Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) represent a scalable tool for surveillance of active SARS-CoV-2 infections in the population. Data on the performance of these tests in real-world community settings are paramount to guide their implementation to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the performance characteristics of the CareStart COVID-19 Antigen test (CareStart) in a community testing site in Holyoke, Massachusetts. We compared CareStart to a SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) reference, both using anterior nasal swab samples. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and the expected positive and negative predictive values at different SARS-CoV-2 prevalence estimates. We performed 666 total tests on 591 unique individuals. 573 (86%) were asymptomatic. There were 52 positive tests by RT-qPCR. The sensitivity of CareStart was 49.0% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 34.8-63.4) and specificity was 99.5% (95% CI 98.5-99.9). Among positive RT-qPCR tests, the median cycle threshold (Ct) was significantly lower in samples that tested positive on CareStart. Using a Ct ≤ 30 as a benchmark for positivity increased the sensitivity of the test to 64.9% (95% CI 47.5-79.8). Our study shows that CareStart has a high specificity and moderate sensitivity. The utility of RDTs, such as CareStart, in mass implementation should prioritize use cases in which a higher specificity is more important, such as triage tests to rule-in active infections in community surveillance programs.

Saliva-based methods for SARS-CoV-2 testing in low- and middle-income countries

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to disproportionately affect low- and middle-income countries, the need for simple, accessible and frequent diagnostic testing grows. In lower-resource settings, case detection is often limited by a lack of available testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). To address global inequities in testing, alternative sample types could be used to increase access to testing by reducing the associated costs. Saliva is a sensitive, minimally invasive and inexpensive diagnostic sample for SARS-CoV-2 detection that is appropriate for asymptomatic surveillance, symptomatic testing and at-home collection. Saliva testing can lessen two major challenges faced by lower- and middle-income countries: constrained resources and overburdened health workers. Saliva sampling enables convenient self-collection and requires fewer resources than swab-based methods. However, saliva testing for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics has not been implemented on a large scale in low- and middle-income countries. While numerous studies based in these settings have demonstrated the usefulness of saliva sampling, there has been insufficient attention on optimizing its implementation in practice. We argue that implementation science research is needed to bridge this gap between evidence and practice. Low- and middle-income countries face many barriers as they continue their efforts to provide mass COVID-19 testing in the face of substantial inequities in global access to vaccines. Laboratories should look to replicate successful approaches for sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva, while governments should act to facilitate mass testing by lifting restrictions that limit implementation of saliva-based methods.

Evaluation of self-administered antigen testing in a college setting

BACKGROUND

The objective of our investigation was to better understand barriers to implementation of self-administered antigen screening testing for SARS-CoV-2 at institutions of higher education (IHE).

METHODS

Using the Quidel QuickVue At-Home COVID-19 Test, 1347 IHE students and staff were asked to test twice weekly for seven weeks. We assessed seroconversion using baseline and endline serum specimens. Online surveys assessed acceptability.

RESULTS

Participants reported 9971 self-administered antigen test results. Among participants who were not antibody positive at baseline, the median number of tests reported was eight. Among 324 participants seronegative at baseline, with endline antibody results and ≥ 1 self-administered antigen test results, there were five COVID-19 infections; only one was detected by self-administered antigen test (sensitivity = 20%). Acceptability of self-administered antigen tests was high.

CONCLUSIONS

Twice-weekly serial self-administered antigen testing in a low prevalence period had low utility in this investigation. Issues of testing fatigue will be important to address in future testing strategies.

Comparison of Rapid Antigen Tests' Performance Between Delta and Omicron Variants of SARS-CoV-2 : A Secondary Analysis From a Serial Home Self-testing Study

BACKGROUND

It is important to document the performance of rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDTs) in detecting SARS-CoV-2 variants.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of Ag-RDTs in detecting the Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variants of SARS-CoV-2.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study that enrolled participants between 18 October 2021 and 24 January 2022. Participants did Ag-RDTs and collected samples for reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing every 48 hours for 15 days.

SETTING

The parent study enrolled participants throughout the mainland United States through a digital platform. All participants self-collected anterior nasal swabs for rapid antigen testing and RT-PCR testing. All Ag-RDTs were completed at home, whereas nasal swabs for RT-PCR were shipped to a central laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Of 7349 participants enrolled in the parent study, 5779 asymptomatic persons who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 on day 1 of the study were eligible for this substudy.

MEASUREMENTS

Sensitivity of Ag-RDTs on the same day as the first positive (index) RT-PCR result and 48 hours after the first positive RT-PCR result.

RESULTS

A total of 207 participants were positive on RT-PCR (58 Delta, 149 Omicron). Differences in sensitivity between variants were not statistically significant (same day: Delta, 15.5% [95% CI, 6.2% to 24.8%] vs. Omicron, 22.1% [CI, 15.5% to 28.8%]; at 48 hours: Delta, 44.8% [CI, 32.0% to 57.6%] vs. Omicron, 49.7% [CI, 41.6% to 57.6%]). Among 109 participants who had RT-PCR-positive results for 48 hours, rapid antigen sensitivity did not differ significantly between Delta- and Omicron-infected participants (48-hour sensitivity: Delta, 81.5% [CI, 66.8% to 96.1%] vs. Omicron, 78.0% [CI, 69.1% to 87.0%]). Only 7.2% of the 69 participants with RT-PCR-positive results for shorter than 48 hours tested positive by Ag-RDT within 1 week; those with Delta infections remained consistently negative on Ag-RDTs.

LIMITATION

A testing frequency of 48 hours does not allow a finer temporal resolution of the analysis of test performance, and the results of Ag-RDTs are based on self-report.

CONCLUSION

The performance of Ag-RDTs in persons infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is not inferior to that in persons with Delta infections. Serial testing improved the sensitivity of Ag-RDTs for both variants. The performance of rapid antigen testing varies on the basis of duration of RT-PCR positivity.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

Frequency of Positive Results for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Symptomatic Pediatric Patients Treated in the Emergency Department of a Regional Hospital

Objectives: Since 11 March 2020, when the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 pandemic, trials have found that the pediatric population is the least affected, and most positive cases are asymptomatic or have mild symptoms such as fever and cough. Aims: The main objective of this study was to describe the percentage of positive tests among children who presented to the emergency department for symptoms compatible with SARS-CoV-2. Additional objectives were to identify clinical screening criteria to identify candidates to perform a polymerase chain reaction or antigen screening test. Patients/Methods: The study had a mixed cross-sectional and case-control design. Data were obtained from the electronic medical records of the emergency service of Hospital Sant Camil, Sant Pere de Ribes (Spain), from May 2020 to September 2021. Patients included had symptoms compatible with COVID-19 and a positive polymerase chain reaction or antigen SARS-CoV-2 screening test. Results: The study included 1508 patients with a mean age of 4.5 years (SD 4.2): 670 of whom were female (44.4%). The percentage of children with a positive polymerase chain reaction or antigen test was 3.51%. For the secondary objectives, some rules were created to create groups in which all patients tested negative: (1) Patients with abdominal pain, who did not present with diarrhea or fatigue, (2) Patients with asthma or allergies, (3) patients older than 3.5 years, with asthenia but without abdominal pain, and (4) patients younger than 3.5 years with abdominal pain and rash. Conclusions: The frequency of children who tested positive for COVID-19 was low among those with a clinical suspicion tested in the emergency room. Some combinations of symptoms and personal history were without exception associated with a negative polymerase chain reaction result for SARS-CoV-2 and could therefore help rule out the disease.

A clinical-grade liquid biomarker detects neuroendocrine differentiation in prostate cancer

BackgroundNeuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is an aggressive subtype, the presence of which changes the prognosis and management of metastatic prostate cancer.MethodsWe performed analytical validation of a Circulating Tumor Cell (CTC) multiplex RNA qPCR assay to identify the limit of quantification (LOQ) in cell lines, synthetic cDNA, and patient samples. We next profiled 116 longitudinal samples from a prospectively collected institutional cohort of 17 patients with metastatic prostate cancer (7 NEPC, 10 adenocarcinoma) as well as 265 samples from 139 patients enrolled in 3 adenocarcinoma phase II trials of androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs). We assessed a NEPC liquid biomarker via the presence of neuroendocrine markers and the absence of androgen receptor (AR) target genes.ResultsUsing the analytical validation LOQ, liquid biomarker NEPC detection in the longitudinal cohort had a per-sample sensitivity of 51.35% and a specificity of 91.14%. However, when we incorporated the serial information from multiple liquid biopsies per patient, a unique aspect of this study, the per-patient predictions were 100% accurate, with a receiver-operating-curve (ROC) AUC of 1. In the adenocarcinoma ARSI trials, the presence of neuroendocrine markers, even while AR target gene expression was retained, was a strong negative prognostic factor.ConclusionOur analytically validated CTC biomarker can detect NEPC with high diagnostic accuracy when leveraging serial samples that are only feasible using liquid biopsies. Patients with expression of NE genes while retaining AR-target gene expression may indicate the transition to neuroendocrine differentiation, with clinical characteristics consistent with this phenotype.FundingNIH (DP2 OD030734, 1UH2CA260389, R01CA247479, and P30 CA014520), Department of Defense (PC190039 and PC200334), and Prostate Cancer Foundation (Movember Foundation - PCF Challenge Award).

Impact of antigen test target failure and testing strategies on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 variants

Population testing remains central to COVID-19 control and surveillance, with countries increasingly using antigen tests rather than molecular tests. Here we describe a SARS-CoV-2 variant that escapes N antigen tests due to multiple disruptive amino-acid substitutions in the N protein. By fitting a multistrain compartmental model to genomic and epidemiological data, we show that widespread antigen testing in the Italian region of Veneto favored the undetected spread of the antigen-escape variant compared to the rest of Italy. We highlight novel limitations of widespread antigen testing in the absence of molecular testing for diagnostic or confirmatory purposes. Notably, we find that genomic surveillance systems which rely on antigen population testing to identify samples for sequencing will bias detection of escape antigen test variants. Together, these findings highlight the importance of retaining molecular testing for surveillance purposes, including in contexts where the use of antigen tests is widespread.

Exhaled breath SARS-CoV-2 shedding patterns across variants of concern

OBJECTIVES

We performed exhaled breath (EB) and nasopharyngeal (NP) quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and NP rapid antigen testing (NP RAT) of SARS-CoV-2 infections with different variants.

METHODS

We included immuno-naïve alpha-infected (n = 11) and partly boosted omicron-infected patients (n = 8) as high-risk contacts. We compared peak NP and EB qPCR cycle time (ct) values between cohorts (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test). Test positivity was compared for three infection phases using Cochran Q test.

RESULTS

Peak median NP ct was 11.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 10.1-12.1) for alpha and 12.2 (IQR 11.1-15.3) for omicron infections. Peak median EB ct was 25.2 (IQR 24.5-26.9) and 28.3 (IQR 26.4-30.8) for alpha and omicron infections, respectively. Distributions did not differ between cohorts for NP (P = 0.19) or EB (P = 0.09). SARS-CoV-2 shedding peaked on day 1 in EB (confidence interval [CI] 0.0 - 4.5) and day 3 in NP (CI 1.5 - 6.0). EB qPCR positivity equaled NP qPCR positivity on D0-D1 (P = 0.44) and D2-D6 (P = 1.0). It superseded NP RAT positivity on D0-D1 (P = 0.003) and D2-D6 (P = 0.008). It was inferior to both on D7-D10 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Peak EB and nasopharynx shedding were comparable across variants. EB qPCR positivity matched NP qPCR and superseded NP RAT in the first week of infection.

SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen screening of asymptomatic employees: a pilot project

SETTING

Rapid antigen screening can be effective in identifying infectious individuals in occupational settings to reduce transmission and outbreaks. We report results from a pilot project at the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) and describe the operationalization. Toronto Pearson is a large international airport encompassing over 400 employers and, pre-pandemic, with approximately 50,000 employees.

INTERVENTION

An employee screening program was piloted between March 8 and May 28, 2021, to implement rapid antigen testing for asymptomatic employees. Recruitment targeted enrolment of 400 employees and yielded participation of 717 from 58 companies. Employees were recommended to book three times per week for nasal swabs on site, and were tested on the Abbot Panbio^TM rapid antigen test. No action was taken from a negative result, and if positive, the employee was told to isolate at home and obtain a confirmatory polymerase chain reaction test.

OUTCOMES

A total of 5117 tests were performed on 717 individuals over 12 weeks; 5091 tests were negative (99.5%), and 22 individuals tested positive (3.1% positivity rate). One hundred twenty-four (17%) completed the post-participation survey. All respondents reported that testing did not change their behaviour at work with respect to public health recommendations, and only 1 (1%) reported behaviour change outside of work (socializing with family) as a result of the program.

IMPLICATIONS

This pilot program identified 22 (3.1%) potentially infectious employees. Onsite testing was feasible and highly accepted by this group of employees who completed the survey. Education resulted in reasonable uptake and no substantial change in behaviour, although the survey response rate may limit generalizability. Home-based testing may facilitate larger recruitment.

Test sensitivity for infection versus infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2

The most commonly used test for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 is a PCR test that is able to detect very low viral loads and inform on treatment decisions. Medical research has confirmed that many individuals might be infected with SARS-CoV-2 but not infectious. Knowing whether an individual is infectious is the critical piece of information for a decision to isolate an individual or not. This paper examines the value of different tests from an information-theoretic approach and shows that applying treatment-based approval standards for tests for infection will lower the value of those tests and likely causes decisions based on them to have too many false positives (i.e., individuals isolated who are not infectious). The conclusion is that test scoring be tailored to the decision being made.

A mixed methods study evaluating acceptability of a daily COVID-19 testing regimen with a mobile-app connected, at-home, rapid antigen test: Implications for current and future pandemics

BACKGROUND

Widespread use of at-home rapid COVID-19 antigen tests has been proposed as an important public health intervention to interrupt chains of transmission. Antigen tests may be preferred over PCR because they provide on-demand results for relatively low cost and can identify people when they are most likely to be infectious, particularly when used daily. Yet the extent to which a frequent antigen testing intervention will result in a positive public health impact for COVID-19 will depend on high acceptability and high adherence to such regimens.

METHODS

We conducted a mixed-methods study assessing acceptability of and adherence to a daily at-home mobile-app connected rapid antigen testing regimen among employees of a US-based media company. Acceptability was assessed across seven domains of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.

RESULTS

Among 31 study participants, acceptability of the daily testing intervention was generally high, with participants reporting high perceived effectiveness, intervention coherence, and self-efficacy; positive affective attitude; acceptable degree of burden and opportunity cost; and assessing the intervention as ethical. 71% reported a preference to test daily using an at-home antigen test than weekly employment-based PCR. Mean adherence to the 21-day testing regimen was 88% with 43% of participants achieving 100% adherence, 48% testing at least every other day, and 10% testing less than every other day.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite overall high acceptability and adherence, we identified three implementation challenges that must be addressed for frequent serial testing for COVID-19 to be implemented at scale and have a positive public health impact. First, users need guidance on how and when to adapt testing frequencies to different epidemiological conditions. Second, users and institutions need guidelines for how to safely store and share test results. Third, implementation of serial testing strategies must prioritize health equity and protect those most vulnerable to COVID-19.

Rapid Antigen Diagnostics as Frontline Testing in the COVID-19 Pandemic

The ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has resulted in significant loss of life since December 2019. Timely and precise virus detection has been proven as an effective solution to reduce the spread of the virus and to track the epidemic. Rapid antigen diagnostics has played a significant role in the frontline of COVID-19 testing because of its convenience, low cost, and high accuracy. Herein, different types of recently innovated in-lab and commercial antigen diagnostic technologies with emphasis on the strengths and limitations of these technologies including the limit of detection, sensitivity, specificity, affordability, and usability are systematically reviewed. The perspectives of assay development are looked into.