ABSTRACT
As population immunity to SARS-CoV-2 evolves and new variants emerge, the role and accuracy of antigen tests remain active questions. To describe recent test performance, the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by antigen testing was compared with that by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and viral culture testing during November 2022-May 2023. Participants who were enrolled in a household transmission study completed daily symptom diaries and collected two nasal swabs (tested for SARS-CoV-2 via RT-PCR, culture, and antigen tests) each day for 10 days after enrollment. Among participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection, the percentages of positive antigen, RT-PCR, and culture results were calculated each day from the onset of symptoms or, in asymptomatic persons, from the date of the first positive test result. Antigen test sensitivity was calculated using RT-PCR and viral culture as references. The peak percentage of positive antigen (59.0%) and RT-PCR (83.0%) results occurred 3 days after onset, and the peak percentage of positive culture results (52%) occurred 2 days after onset. The sensitivity of antigen tests was 47% (95% CI = 44%-50%) and 80% (95% CI = 76%-85%) using RT-PCR and culture, respectively, as references. Clinicians should be aware of the lower sensitivity of antigen testing compared with RT-PCR, which might lead to false-negative results. This finding has implications for timely initiation of SARS-CoV-2 antiviral treatment, when early diagnosis is essential; clinicians should consider RT-PCR for persons for whom antiviral treatment is recommended. Persons in the community who are at high risk for severe COVID-19 illness and eligible for antiviral treatment should seek testing from health care providers with the goal of obtaining a more sensitive diagnostic test than antigen tests (i.e., an RT-PCR test).
Subject(s)
Antigens, Viral , COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Virus Shedding , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adult , Antigens, Viral/analysis , Male , Sensitivity and Specificity , Female , Middle Aged , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Young Adult , Adolescent , United States/epidemiology , Aged , COVID-19 TestingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (N/R) reduces severe outcomes among patients with COVID-19; however, rebound after treatment has been reported. We compared symptom and viral dynamics in community-based individuals with COVID-19 who completed N/R and similar untreated individuals. METHODS: We identified symptomatic participants who tested SARS-CoV-2 positive and were N/R eligible from a COVID-19 household transmission study: index cases from ambulatory settings and their households were enrolled, collecting daily symptoms, medication use, and respiratory specimens for quantitative PCR for 10 days, March 2022-May 2023. Participants who completed N/R (treated) were propensity score matched to untreated participants. We compared symptom rebound, viral load (VL) rebound, average daily symptoms, and average daily VL by treatment status measured after N/R completion or, if untreated, seven days after symptom onset. RESULTS: Treated (n=130) and untreated participants (n=241) had similar baseline characteristics. After treatment completion, treated participants had greater occurrence of symptom rebound (32% vs 20%; p=0.009) and VL rebound (27% vs 7%; p<0.001). Average daily symptoms were lower among treated participants compared to untreated participants without symptom rebound (1.0 vs 1.6; p<0.01), but not statistically lower with symptom rebound (3.0 vs 3.4; p=0.5). Treated participants had lower average daily VLs without VL rebound (0.9 vs 2.6; p<0.01), but not statistically lower with VL rebound (4.8 vs 5.1; p=0.7). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who completed N/R experienced fewer symptoms and lower VL but were more likely to have rebound compared to untreated individuals. Providers should still prescribe N/R, when indicated, and communicate possible increased rebound risk to patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The natural history and clinical progression of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections can be better understood using combined serological and reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs and serum were collected at a single time-point from patients at an urban, public hospital during August-November 2020 and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR, viral culture, and anti-spike pan-immunoglobulin antibody testing. Participant demographics and symptoms were collected through interview. The χâ2 and Fisher exact tests were used to identify associations between RT-PCR and serology results with presence of viable virus and frequency of symptoms. RESULTS: Among 592 participants, 129 (21.8%) had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR or serology. Presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was strongly associated with lack of viable virus (P = .016). COVID-19 symptom frequency was similar for patients testing RT-PCR positive/seronegative and patients testing RT-PCR positive/seropositive. Patients testing RT-PCR positive/seronegative reported headaches, fatigue, diarrhea, and vomiting at rates not statistically significantly different from those testing RT-PCR negative/seropositive. CONCLUSIONS: While patients testing SARS-CoV-2 seropositive were unlikely to test positive for viable virus and were therefore at low risk for forward transmission, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms were common. Paired SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and antibody testing provides more nuanced understanding of patients' COVID-19 status.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Young AdultABSTRACT
On December 2, 2021, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) notified CDC of a COVID-19 case caused by sequence-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant in a Minnesota resident (patient A), the first such case identified in the state and one of the earliest identified in the United States. Patient A had attended a large indoor convention in New York, New York with approximately 53,000 attendees from 52 U.S jurisdictions and 30 foreign countries during November 19-21, 2021, and had close contact during 5 days with 29 fellow attendees. The convention required attendees to have received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose and enforced mask-use while indoors. On November 22, these close contact attendees were directly and immediately notified by patient A of their exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and they sought testing over the next few days while quarantined or isolated. As part of the larger investigation into SARS-CoV-2 transmission at the convention, a subinvestigation was conducted during December by CDC, MDH, and respective state and local health departments to characterize the epidemiology of Omicron variant infection among this group of close contacts and determine the extent of secondary household transmission. Among 30 convention attendees that included patient A (the index patient) and the 29 other close contacts, 23 were interviewed, among whom all were fully vaccinated, including 11 (48%) who had received a booster dose; all 23 sought testing, and 16 (70%) received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. Fewer attendees who had received a booster dose before the convention received a positive test result (six of 11) compared with those who had not received a booster dose (10 of 12). The 16 attendees with positive test results had a total of 20 household contacts, 18 of whom sought testing after exposure; six received a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2. None of the persons with positive test results was hospitalized or died. There was limited convention-associated transmission identified outside of this cluster; the larger investigation included cases of both SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) and Omicron, and all Omicron cases were associated with this group (1). Data from this investigation reinforces the importance of COVID-19 booster doses in combination with early notification and other multicomponent prevention measures to limit transmission and prevent severe illness from Omicron and other SARS-CoV-2 variants.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Contact Tracing/methods , Disease Outbreaks , Mass Gatherings , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Female , Humans , Male , New York City/epidemiology , Social Networking , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
During November 19-21, 2021, an indoor convention (event) in New York City (NYC), was attended by approximately 53,000 persons from 52 U.S. jurisdictions and 30 foreign countries. In-person registration for the event began on November 18, 2021. The venue was equipped with high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration, and attendees were required to wear a mask indoors and have documented receipt of at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.* On December 2, 2021, the Minnesota Department of Health reported the first case of community-acquired COVID-19 in the United States caused by the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant in a person who had attended the event (1). CDC collaborated with state and local health departments to assess event-associated COVID-19 cases and potential exposures among U.S.-based attendees using data from COVID-19 surveillance systems and an anonymous online attendee survey. Among 34,541 attendees with available contact information, surveillance data identified test results for 4,560, including 119 (2.6%) persons from 16 jurisdictions with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Most (4,041 [95.2%]), survey respondents reported always wearing a mask while indoors at the event. Compared with test-negative respondents, test-positive respondents were more likely to report attending bars, karaoke, or nightclubs, and eating or drinking indoors near others for at least 15 minutes. Among 4,560 attendees who received testing, evidence of widespread transmission during the event was not identified. Genomic sequencing of 20 specimens identified the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant (AY.25 and AY.103 sublineages) in 15 (75%) cases, and the Omicron variant (BA.1 sublineage) in five (25%) cases. These findings reinforce the importance of implementing multiple, simultaneous prevention measures, such as ensuring up-to-date vaccination, mask use, physical distancing, and improved ventilation in limiting SARS-CoV-2 transmission, during large, indoor events..
Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Mass Gatherings , Patient Compliance , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , New York City/epidemiology , Public Health Surveillance , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
We evaluated the performance of self-collected anterior nasal swab (ANS) and saliva samples compared with healthcare worker-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens used to test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We used the same PCR diagnostic panel to test all self-collected and healthcare worker-collected samples from participants at a public hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Among 1,076 participants, 51.9% were men, 57.1% were >50 years of age, 81.2% were Black (non-Hispanic), and 74.9% reported >1 chronic medical condition. In total, 8.0% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Compared with nasopharyngeal swab samples, ANS samples had a sensitivity of 59% and saliva samples a sensitivity of 68%. Among participants tested 3-7 days after symptom onset, ANS samples had a sensitivity of 80% and saliva samples a sensitivity of 85%. Sensitivity varied by specimen type and patient characteristics. These findings can help physicians interpret PCR results for SARS-CoV-2.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 Testing , Georgia , Humans , Male , Nasopharynx , Saliva , Specimen HandlingABSTRACT
Compared with the volume of data on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks among older adults, relatively few data are available concerning COVID-19 in younger, healthy persons in the United States (1,2). In late March 2020, the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt arrived at port in Guam after numerous U.S. service members onboard developed COVID-19. In April, the U.S. Navy and CDC investigated this outbreak, and the demographic, epidemiologic, and laboratory findings among a convenience sample of 382 service members serving aboard the aircraft carrier are reported in this study. The outbreak was characterized by widespread transmission with relatively mild symptoms and asymptomatic infection among this sample of mostly young, healthy adults with close, congregate exposures. Service members who reported taking preventive measures had a lower infection rate than did those who did not report taking these measures (e.g., wearing a face covering, 55.8% versus 80.8%; avoiding common areas, 53.8% versus 67.5%; and observing social distancing, 54.7% versus 70.0%, respectively). The presence of neutralizing antibodies, which represent antibodies that inhibit SARS-CoV-2, among the majority (59.2%) of those with antibody responses is a promising indicator of at least short-term immunity. This report improves the understanding of COVID-19 in the U.S. military and among young adults in congregate settings and reinforces the importance of preventive measures to lower risk for infection in similar environments.
Subject(s)
Aircraft , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Disease Outbreaks , Military Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Betacoronavirus/immunology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) infection prevention and control (IPC) in healthcare facilities is key to reducing transmission risk. A framework for systematically improving TB IPC through training and mentorship was implemented in 9 healthcare facilities in China from 2017 to 2019. METHODS: Facilities conducted standardized TB IPC assessments at baseline and quarterly thereafter for 18 months. Facility-based performance was assessed using quantifiable indicators for IPC core components and administrative, environmental, and respiratory protection controls, and as a composite of all control types We calculated the percentage changes in scores over time and differences by IPC control type and facility characteristics. RESULTS: Scores for IPC core components increased by 72% during follow-up when averaged across facilities. The percentage changes for administrative, environmental, and respiratory protection controls were 39%, 46%, and 30%, respectively. Composite scores were 45% higher after the intervention. Overall, scores increased most during the first 6 months. There was no association between IPC implementation and provincial economic development or volume of TB services. CONCLUSIONS: TB IPC policies and practices showed most improvement early during implementation and did not differ consistently by facility characteristics. The training component of the project helped increase the capacity of healthcare professionals to manage TB transmission risks. Lessons learned here will inform national TB IPC guidance.
Subject(s)
Cross Infection , Latent Tuberculosis , Tuberculosis , Humans , Infection Control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Tuberculosis/prevention & control , Health Facilities , Delivery of Health CareABSTRACT
Background: Human adenoviruses (HAdVs) can cause outbreaks of flu-like illness in university settings. Most infections in healthy young adults are mild; severe illnesses rarely occur. In Fall 2022, an adenovirus outbreak was identified in university students. Methods: HAdV cases were defined as university students 17-26 years old who presented to the University Health Service or nearby emergency department with flu-like symptoms (eg, fever, cough, headache, myalgia, nausea) and had confirmed adenovirus infections by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Demographic and clinical characteristics were abstracted from electronic medical records; clinical severity was categorized as mild, moderate, severe, or critical. We performed contact investigations among critical cases. A subset of specimens was sequenced to confirm the HAdV type. Results: From 28 September 2022 to 30 January 2023, 90 PCR-confirmed cases were identified (51% female; mean age, 19.6 years). Most cases (88.9%) had mild illness. Seven cases required hospitalization, including 2 critical cases that required intensive care. Contact investigation identified 44 close contacts; 6 (14%) were confirmed HAdV cases and 8 (18%) reported symptoms but never sought care. All typed HAdV-positive specimens (n = 36) were type 4. Conclusions: While most students with confirmed HAdV had mild illness, 7 otherwise healthy students had severe or critical illness. Between the relatively high number of hospitalizations and proportion of close contacts with symptoms who did not seek care, the true number of HAdV cases was likely higher. Our findings illustrate the need to consider a wide range of pathogens, even when other viruses are known to be circulating.
ABSTRACT
We aimed to describe frequency of COVID-19 exposure risk factors among patients presenting for medical care at an urban, public hospital serving mostly uninsured/Medicare/Medicaid clients and risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Consenting, adult patients seeking care at a public hospital from August to November 2020 were enrolled in this cross-sectional investigation. Saliva, anterior nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR. Participant demographics, close contact, and activities ≤14 days prior to enrollment were collected through interview. Logistic regression was used to identify risk factors associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among 1,078 participants, 51.8% were male, 57.0% were aged ≥50 years, 81.3% were non-Hispanic Black, and 7.6% had positive SARS-CoV-2 tests. Only 2.7% reported COVID-19 close contact ≤14 days before enrollment; this group had 6.79 adjusted odds of testing positive (95%CI = 2.78-16.62) than those without a reported exposure. Among participants who did not report COVID-19 close contact, working in proximity to ≥10 people (adjusted OR = 2.17; 95%CI = 1.03-4.55), choir practice (adjusted OR = 11.85; 95%CI = 1.44-97.91), traveling on a plane (adjusted OR = 5.78; 95%CI = 1.70-19.68), and not participating in an essential indoor activity (i.e., grocery shopping, public transit use, or visiting a healthcare facility; adjusted OR = 2.15; 95%CI = 1.07-4.30) were associated with increased odds of testing positive. Among this population of mostly Black, non-Hispanic participants seeking care at a public hospital, we found several activities associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection in addition to close contact with a case. Understanding high-risk activities for SARS-CoV-2 infection among different communities is important for issuing awareness and prevention strategies.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Georgia/epidemiology , Hospitals, Public , Humans , Male , Medicare , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , United StatesABSTRACT
Self-collected specimens can expand access to SARS-CoV-2 testing. At a large inner-city hospital 1,082 participants self-collected saliva and anterior nasal swab (ANS) samples before healthcare workers collected nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples on the same day. To characterize patient preferences for self-collection, this investigation explored ability, comfort, and ease of ANS and saliva self-collection for SARS-CoV-2 testing along with associated patient characteristics, including medical history and symptoms of COVID-19. With nearly all participants successfully submitting a specimen, favorable ratings from most participants (at least >79% in ease and comfort), and equivocal preference between saliva and ANS, self-collection is a viable SARS-CoV-2 testing option.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Specimen Handling/methods , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Testing , Female , Georgia , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/metabolism , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Saliva/virology , Young AdultABSTRACT
(1) Background: The reliability of disease surveillance may be restricted by sensitivity or ability to capture all disease. Objective: To quantify under-reporting and concordance of recording persons with tuberculosis (TB) in national TB surveillance systems: the Infectious Disease Reporting System (IDRS) and Tuberculosis Information Management System (TBIMS). (2) Methods: This retrospective review includes 4698 patients identified in 2016 in China. County staff linked TB patients identified from facility-specific health and laboratory information systems with records in IDRS and TBIMS. Under-reporting was calculated, and timeliness, concordance, accuracy, and completeness were analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with under-reporting. (3) Results: We found that 505 (10.7%) patients were missing within IDRS and 1451 (30.9%) patients were missing within TBIMS. Of 171 patient records reviewed in IDRS and 170 patient records in TBIMS, 12.3% and 6.5% were found to be untimely, and 10.7% and 7.1% were found to have an inconsistent home address. The risk of under-reporting to both IDRS and TBIMS was greatest at tertiary health facilities and among non-residents; the risk of under-reporting to TBIMS was greatest with patients aged 65 or older and with extrapulmonary TB (EPTB). (4) Conclusions: It is important to improve the reporting and recording of TB patients. Local TB programs that focus on training, and mentoring high-burden hospitals, facilities that cater to EPTB, and migrant patients may improve reporting and recording.