Wastewater Surveillance for Identifying SARS-CoV-2 Infections in Long-Term Care Facilities, Kentucky, USA, 2021-2022.

Persons living in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) were disproportionately affected by COVID-19. We used wastewater surveillance to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection in this setting by collecting and testing 24-hour composite wastewater samples 2-4 times weekly at 6 LTCFs in Kentucky, USA, during March 2021-February 2022. The LTCFs routinely tested staff and symptomatic and exposed residents for SARS-CoV-2 using rapid antigen tests. Of 780 wastewater samples analyzed, 22% (n = 173) had detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The LTCFs reported 161 positive (of 16,905) SARS-CoV-2 clinical tests. The wastewater SARS-CoV-2 signal showed variable correlation with clinical test data; we observed the strongest correlations in the LTCFs with the most positive clinical tests (n = 45 and n = 58). Wastewater surveillance was 48% sensitive and 80% specific in identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections found on clinical testing, which was limited by frequency, coverage, and rapid antigen test performance.

Optimal sample size division in two-stage seamless designs.

Inferentially seamless 2/3 designs are increasingly popular in clinical trials. It is important to understand their relative advantages compared with separate phase 2 and phase 3 trials, and to understand the consequences of design choices such as the proportion of patients included in the phase 2 portion of the design. Extending previous work in this area, we perform a simulation study across multiple numbers of arms and efficacy response curves. We consider a design space crossing the choice of a separate versus seamless design with the choice of allocating 0%-100% of available patients in phase 2, with the remainder in phase 3. The seamless designs achieve greater power than their separate trial counterparts. Importantly, the optimal seamless design is more robust than the optimal separate program, meaning that one range of values for the proportion of patients used in phase 2 (30%-50% of the total phase 2/3 sample size) is nearly optimal for a wide range of response scenarios. In contrast, a percentage of patients used in phase 2 for separate trials may be optimal for some alternative scenarios but decidedly inferior for other alternative scenarios. When operationally and scientifically viable, seamless trials provide superior performance compared with separate phase 2 and phase 3 trials. The results also provide guidance for the implementation of these trials in practice.