Repeat testing for SARS-CoV-2: persistence of viral RNA is common, and clearance is slower in older people

Evaluating Policies to Decrease the Risk of Introducing SARS-CoV-2 Infections to Nursing Home Facilities

We used an individual-based microsimulation model of North Carolina to determine what facility-level policies would result in the greatest reduction in the number of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 entering the nursing home environment from 12/15/2021 to 1/3/2022 (e.g., Omicron variant surge). On average, there were 14,287 (Credible Interval [CI]: 13,477-15,147) daily visitors and 17,168 (CI: 16,571-17,768) HCW coming from the community into 426 nursing home facilities. Policies requiring a negative rapid test or vaccinated status for visitors resulted in the greatest reduction in the number of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection entering the nursing home environment with a 29.6% (26.9%-32.0%) and 24.0% (CI: 22.2%-25.5%) reduction, respectively. Policies halving visits (21.2% [20.0%-28.2%]), requiring all vaccinated HCW to receive a booster (7.8% [CI: 7.4%-8.7%]), and limiting visitation to a primary visitor (6.5% [CI: 3.5%-9.7%]) reduced infectious contacts to a lesser degree.

A Randomized Trial of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Moderate to Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome from COVID-19

Rationale: There are limited therapeutic options for patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome with inflammation-mediated lung injury. Mesenchymal stromal cells offer promise as immunomodulatory agents. Objectives: Evaluation of efficacy and safety of allogeneic mesenchymal cells in mechanically-ventilated patients with moderate or severe COVID-19-induced respiratory failure. Methods: Patients were randomized to two infusions of 2 million cells/kg or sham infusions, in addition to the standard of care. We hypothesized that cell therapy would be superior to sham control for the primary endpoint of 30-day mortality. The key secondary endpoint was ventilator-free survival within 60 days, accounting for deaths and withdrawals in a ranked analysis. Measurements and Main Results: At the third interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board recommended that the trial halt enrollment as the prespecified mortality reduction from 40% to 23% was unlikely to be achieved (n = 222 out of planned 300). Thirty-day mortality was 37.5% (42/112) in cell recipients versus 42.7% (47/110) in control patients (relative risk [RR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.21; P = 0.43). There were no significant differences in days alive off ventilation within 60 days (median rank, 117.3 [interquartile range, 60.0-169.5] in cell patients and 102.0 [interquartile range, 54.0-162.5] in control subjects; higher is better). Resolution or improvement of acute respiratory distress syndrome at 30 days was observed in 51/104 (49.0%) cell recipients and 46/106 (43.4%) control patients (odds ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-3.21). There were no infusion-related toxicities and overall serious adverse events over 30 days were similar. Conclusions: Mesenchymal cells, while safe, did not improve 30-day survival or 60-day ventilator-free days in patients with moderate and/or severe COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome.

The impacts of vaccination status and host factors during early infection on SARS-CoV-2 persistence:a retrospective single-center cohort study

BACKGROUND

Viral persistence is a crucial factor that influences the transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2. However, the impacts of vaccination and physiological variables on viral persistence have not been adequately clarified.

METHODS

We collected the clinical records of 377 COVID-19 patients, which contained unvaccinated patients and patients received two doses of an inactivated vaccine or an mRNA vaccine. The impacts of vaccination on disease severity and viral persistence and the correlations between 49 laboratory variables and viral persistence were analyzed separately. Finally, we established a multivariate regression model to predict the persistence of viral RNA.

RESULTS

Both inactivated and mRNA vaccines significantly reduced the rate of moderate cases, while the vaccine related shortening of viral RNA persistence was only observed in moderate patients. Correlation analysis showed that 10 significant laboratory variables were shared by the unvaccinated mild patients and mild patients inoculated with an inactivated vaccine, but not by the mild patients inoculated with an mRNA vaccine. A multivariate regression model established based on the variables correlating with viral persistence in unvaccinated mild patients could predict the persistence of viral RNA for all patients except three moderate patients inoculated with an mRNA vaccine.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination contributed limitedly to the clearance of viral RNA in COVID-19 patients. While, laboratory variables in early infection could predict the persistence of viral RNA.

Impact of Remdesivir on SARS-CoV-2 Clearance in a Real-Life Setting: A Matched-Cohort Study

Background

Evidence regarding the impact of remdesivir (RDV) on SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance (VC) is scarce. The aim of this study was to compare VC timing in hospitalized COVID-19 patients who did or did not receive RDV.

Methods

This was a matched-cohort study of patients hospitalized with pneumonia, a SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) at admission, and at least one NPS during follow-up. Patients who received RDV (cases) and those who did not (controls) were matched in a 1:2 ratio by age, sex, and PaO₂/FiO₂ (P/F) values at admission. NPSs were analyzed using real-time polymerase chain reaction. Time to VC (within 30 days after hospital discharge) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier curve. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was fitted to determine factors associated with VC.

Results

There were 648 patients enrolled in the study (216 cases and 432 controls). VC was observed in 490 patients (75.6%), with a median time of 25 (IQR 16-34) days. Overall, time to VC was similar between cases and controls (p = 0.519). However, time to VC was different when considering both RDV treatment status and age (p = 0.007). A significant finding was also observed when considering both RDV treatment status and P/F values at admission (p = 0.007). A multivariate analysis showed that VC was associated with a younger age (aHR = 0.990, 95% CI 0.983-0.998 per every 10-year increase in age; p = 0.009) and a higher baseline P/F ratio (aHR=1.275, 95% CI 1.029-1.579; p=0.026), but not with RDV treatment status.

Conclusion

Time to VC was similar in cases and controls. However, there was a benefit associated with using RDV in regard to time to VC in younger patients and in those with a P/F ratio ≤200 mmHg at hospital admission.