Effectiveness of Omicron XBB.1.5 vaccine against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB and JN.1 variants, prospective cohort study, the Netherlands, October 2023 to January 2024.

We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB.1.5 vaccination against self-reported infection between 9 October 2023 and 9 January 2024 in 23,895 XBB.1.5 vaccine-eligible adults who had previously received at least one booster. VE was 41% (95% CI: 23-55) in 18-59-year-olds and 50% (95% CI: 44-56) in 60-85-year-olds. Sequencing data suggest lower protection against the BA.2.86 (including JN.1) variant from recent prior infection (OR = 2.8; 95% CI:1.2-6.5) and, not statistically significant, from XBB.1.5 vaccination (OR = 1.5; 95% CI:0.8-2.6).

Health-related quality of life during the COVID-19 pandemic: The impact of restrictive measures using data from two Dutch population-based cohort studies.

OBJECTIVES: We describe health-related quality of life during the COVID-19 pandemic in the general Dutch population and correlations with restrictive measures. METHODS: Data were obtained from 18-85 year-old participants of two population-based cohort studies (February 2021-July 2022): PIENTER Corona (n = 8,019) and VASCO (n = 45,413). Per cohort, mean scores of mental and physical health and health utility from the SF-12 were calculated by age group, sex and presence of a medical risk condition. Spearman correlations with stringency of measures were calculated. RESULTS: Both cohorts showed comparable results. Participants <30 years had lowest health utility and mental health score, and highest physical health score. Health utility and mental health score increased with age (up to 79 years), while physical health score decreased with age. Women and participants with a medical risk condition scored lower than their counterparts. Fluctuations were small over time but most pronounced among participants <60 years, and correlated weakly, but mostly positively with measure stringency. CONCLUSIONS: During the Dutch COVID-19 epidemic, health utility and mental health scores were lower and fluctuated strongest among young adults compared to older adults. In our study population, age, sex and presence of a medical risk condition seemed to have more impact on health scores than stringency of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions.

Early COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness of XBB.1.5 vaccine against hospitalisation and admission to intensive care, the Netherlands, 9 October to 5 December 2023.

We present early vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates of the 2023 seasonal COVID-19 XBB.1.5 vaccine against COVID-19 hospitalisation and admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) in previously vaccinated adults ≥ 60 years in the Netherlands. We compared vaccination status of 2,050 hospitalisations including 92 ICU admissions with age group-, sex-, region- and date-specific population vaccination coverage between 9 October and 5 December 2023. VE against hospitalisation was 70.7% (95% CI: 66.6-74.3), VE against ICU admission was 73.3% (95% CI: 42.2-87.6).

The epidemiological impact of digital and manual contact tracing on the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in the Netherlands: Empirical evidence.

The Dutch government introduced the CoronaMelder smartphone application for digital contact tracing (DCT) to complement manual contact tracing (MCT) by Public Health Services (PHS) during the 2020-2022 SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. Modelling studies showed great potential but empirical evidence of DCT and MCT impact is scarce. We determined reasons for testing, and mean exposure-testing intervals by reason for testing, using routine data from PHS Amsterdam (1 December 2020 to 31 May 2021) and data from two SARS-CoV-2 rapid diagnostic test accuracy studies at other PHS sites in the Netherlands (14 December 2020 to 18 June 2021). Throughout the study periods, notification of DCT-identified contacts was via PHS contact-tracers, and self-testing was not yet widely available. The most commonly reported reason for testing was having symptoms. In asymptomatic individuals, it was having been warned by an index case. Only around 2% and 2-5% of all tests took place after DCT or MCT notification, respectively. About 20-36% of those who had received a DCT or MCT notification had symptoms at the time of test request. Test positivity after a DCT notification was significantly lower, and exposure-test intervals after a DCT or MCT notification were longer, than for the above-mentioned other reasons for testing. Our data suggest that the impact of DCT and MCT on the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in the Netherlands was limited. However, DCT impact might be enlarged if app use coverage is improved, contact-tracers are eliminated from the digital notification process to minimise delays, and DCT is combined with self-testing.

Effects of COVID-19 vaccination and previous infection on Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection and relation with serology.

An increasing proportion of the population has acquired immunity through COVID-19 vaccination and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, i.e., hybrid immunity, possibly affecting the risk of new infection. We aim to estimate the protective effect of previous infections and vaccinations on SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection, using data from 43,257 adult participants in a prospective community-based cohort study in the Netherlands, collected between 10 January 2022 and 1 September 2022. Our results show that, for participants with 2, 3 or 4 prior immunizing events (vaccination or previous infection), hybrid immunity is more protective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron than vaccine-induced immunity, up to at least 30 weeks after the last immunizing event. Differences in risk of infection are partly explained by differences in anti-Spike RBD (S) antibody concentration, which is associated with risk of infection in a dose-response manner. Among participants with hybrid immunity, with one previous pre-Omicron infection, we do not observe a relevant difference in risk of Omicron infection by sequence of vaccination(s) and infection. Additional immunizing events increase the protection against infection, but not above the level of the first weeks after the previous event.

Age-specific severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in February 2020 to June 2021 in the Netherlands.

Background: The severity of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 infection varies with age and time. Here, we quantify how age-specific risks of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death upon infection changed from February 2020 to June 2021 in the Netherlands. Methods: A series of large representative serology surveys allowed us to estimate age-specific numbers of infections in three epidemic periods (late-February 2020 to mid-June 2020, mid-June 2020 to mid-February 2021, and mid-February 2021 to late-June 2021). We accounted for reinfections and breakthrough infections. Severity measures were obtained by combining infection numbers with age-specific numbers of hospitalization, ICU admission, and excess all-cause deaths. Results: There was an accelerating, almost exponential, increase in severity with age in each period. The rate of increase with age was the highest for death and the lowest for hospitalization. In late-February 2020 to mid-June 2020, the overall risk of hospitalization upon infection was 1.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-1.8%), the risk of ICU admission was 0.36% (95% CI: 0.31-0.42%), and the risk of death was 1.2% (95% CI: 1.0-1.4%). The risk of hospitalization was significantly increased in mid-June 2020 to mid-February 2021, while the risk of ICU admission remained stable over time. The risk of death decreased over time, with a significant drop among ≥70-years-olds in mid-February 2021 to late-June 2021; COVID-19 vaccination started early January 2021. Conclusion: Whereas the increase in severity of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 with age remained stable, the risk of death upon infection decreased over time. A significant drop in risk of death among elderly coincided with the introduction of COVID-19 vaccination.

Effect of COVID-19 vaccination on mortality by COVID-19 and on mortality by other causes, the Netherlands, January 2021-January 2022.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 mortality, and to explore whether an increased risk of non-COVID-19 mortality exists in the weeks following a COVID-19 vaccine dose. METHODS: National registries of causes of death, COVID-19 vaccination, specialized health care and long-term care reimbursements were linked by a unique person identifier using data from 1 January 2021 to 31 January 2022. We used Cox regression with calendar time as underlying time scale to, firstly, estimate VE against COVID-19 mortality after primary and first booster vaccination, per month since vaccination and, secondly, estimate risk of non-COVID-19 mortality in the 5 or 8 weeks following a first, second or first booster dose, adjusting for birth year, sex, medical risk group and country of origin. RESULTS: VE against COVID-19 mortality was > 90 % for all age groups two months after completion of the primary series. VE gradually decreased thereafter, to around 80 % at 7-8 months post-primary series for most groups, and around 60 % for elderly receiving a high level of long-term care and for people aged 90+ years. Following a first booster dose, the VE increased to > 85 % in all groups. The risk of non-COVID-19 mortality was lower or similar in the 5 or 8 weeks following a first dose compared to no vaccination, as well as following a second dose compared to one dose and a booster compared to two doses, for all age and long-term care groups. CONCLUSION: At the population level, COVID-19 vaccination greatly reduced the risk of COVID-19 mortality and no increased risk of death from other causes was observed.

Vaccine effectiveness of primary and booster COVID-19 vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Netherlands from July 12, 2021 to June 6, 2022: A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of primary and booster vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 infection overall and in four risk groups defined by age and medical risk condition during the Delta and Omicron BA.1/BA.2 periods. METHODS: VAccine Study COvid-19 is an ongoing prospective cohort study among Dutch adults. The primary end point was a self-reported positive SARS-CoV-2 test from July 12, 2021 to June 06, 2022. The analyses included only participants without a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection based on a positive test or serology. We used Cox proportional hazard models with vaccination status as the time-varying exposure and adjustment for age, sex, educational level, and medical risk condition. RESULTS: A total of 37,170 participants (mean age 57 years) were included. In the Delta period, VE <6 weeks after the primary vaccination was 80% (95% confidence interval 69-87) and decreased to 71% (65-77) after 6 months. VE increased to 96% (86-99) shortly after the first booster vaccination. In the Omicron period, these estimates were 46% (22-63), 25% (8-39), and 57% (52-62), respectively. For the Omicron period, an interaction term between vaccination status and risk group significantly improved the model (P <0.001), with generally lower VEs for those with a medical risk condition. CONCLUSION: Our results show the benefit of booster vaccinations against infection, also in risk groups; although, the additional protection wanes quite rapidly.

Vaccine Effectiveness Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Delta and Omicron Infection and Infectiousness Within Households in the Netherlands Between July 2021 and August 2022.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate vaccine effectiveness against infection (VE-infection) and against further transmission (VE-infectiousness) in a household setting during Delta and Omicron. Knowing these effects can aid policy makers in deciding which groups to prioritize for vaccination. METHODS: Participants with a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test were asked about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination status and SARS-CoV-2 testing of their household members 1 month later. VE-infection and VE-infectiousness were estimated using generalized estimating equation logistic regression adjusting for age, vaccination status, calendar week, and household size. RESULTS: A total of 3399 questionnaires concerning 4105 household members were included. During the Delta period, VE-infection and VE-infectiousness of primary series were 47% (95% confidence interval [CI], -27% to 78%) and 70% (95% CI, 28% to 87%), respectively. During the Omicron period, VE-infection was -36% (95% CI, -88% to 1%) for primary series and -28% (95% CI, -77% to 7%) for booster vaccination. VE-infectiousness was 45% (95% CI, -14% to 74%) for primary series and 64% (95% CI, 31% to 82%) for booster vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that COVID-19 vaccination is effective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Delta and against infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron. Estimation of VE against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron was limited by several factors. Our results support booster vaccination for those in close contact with vulnerable people to prevent transmission.

Higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.4/5 infection than of BA.2 infection after previous BA.1 infection, the Netherlands, 2 May to 24 July 2022.

BackgroundIn summer 2022, SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5 became dominant in Europe. In vitro studies have shown a large reduction of antibody neutralisation for this variant.AimWe aimed to investigate differences in protection from previous infection and/or vaccination against infection with Omicron BA.4/5 vs BA.2.MethodsWe employed a case-only approach including positive PCR tests from community testing between 2 May and 24 July 2022 that were tested for S gene target failure (SGTF), which distinguishes BA.4/5 from BA.2 infection. Previous infections were categorised by variant using whole genome sequencing or SGTF. We estimated by logistic regression the association of SGTF with vaccination and/or previous infection, and of SGTF of the current infection with the variant of the previous infection, adjusting for testing week, age group and sex.ResultsThe percentage of registered previous SARS-CoV-2 infections was higher among 19,836 persons infected with Omicron BA.4/5 than among 7,052 persons infected with BA.2 (31.3% vs 20.0%). Adjusting for testing week, age group and sex, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) was 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3-1.5). The distribution of vaccination status did not differ for BA.4/5 vs BA.2 infections (aOR = 1.1 for primary and booster vaccination). Among persons with a previous infection, those currently infected with BA4/5 had a shorter interval between infections, and the previous infection was more often caused by BA.1, compared with those currently infected with BA.2 (aOR = 1.9; 95% CI: 1.5-2.6).ConclusionOur results suggest immunity induced by BA.1 is less effective against BA.4/5 infection than against BA.2 infection.

Effectiveness of bivalent mRNA booster vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection, the Netherlands, September to December 2022.

We used data of 32,542 prospective cohort study participants who previously received primary and one or two monovalent booster COVID-19 vaccinations. Between 26 September and 19 December 2022, relative effectiveness of bivalent original/Omicron BA.1 vaccination against self-reported Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection was 31% in 18-59-year-olds and 14% in 60-85-year-olds. Protection of Omicron infection was higher than of bivalent vaccination without prior infection. Although bivalent booster vaccination increases protection against COVID-19 hospitalisations, we found limited added benefit in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen self-tests in asymptomatic individuals in the omicron period: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the performances of three commonly used antigen rapid diagnostic tests used as self-tests in asymptomatic individuals in the Omicron period. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional diagnostic test accuracy study in the Omicron period in three public health service COVID-19 test sites in the Netherlands, including 3600 asymptomatic individuals aged ≥ 16 years presenting for SARS-CoV-2 testing for any reason except confirmatory testing after a positive self-test. Participants were sampled for RT-PCR (reference test) and received one self-test (either Acon Flowflex [Flowflex], MP Biomedicals (MPBio), or Siemens-Healthineers CLINITEST [CLINITEST]) to perform unsupervised at home. Diagnostic accuracies of each self-test were calculated. RESULTS: Overall sensitivities were 27.5% (95% CI, 21.3-34.3%) for Flowflex, 20.9% (13.9-29.4%) for MPBio, and 25.6% (19.1-33.1%) for CLINITEST. After applying a viral load cut-off (≥5.2 log10 SARS-CoV-2 E-gene copies/mL), sensitivities increased to 48.3% (37.6-59.2%), 37.8% (22.5-55.2%), and 40.0% (29.5-51.2%), respectively. Specificities were >99% for all tests in most analyses. DISCUSSION: The sensitivities of three commonly used SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic tests when used as self-tests in asymptomatic individuals in the Omicron period were very low. Antigen rapid diagnostic test self-testing in asymptomatic individuals may only detect a minority of infections at that point in time. Repeated self-testing in case of a negative self-test is advocated to improve the diagnostic yield, and individuals should be advised to re-test when symptoms develop.

Epidemiological evaluation of mass testing in a small municipality in the Netherlands during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic.

During 6 weeks in February-March 2021, the Dutch municipal health service Utrecht studied the epidemiological effects on test incidence and the detection of acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with mass testing (MT). During MT, inhabitants of Bunschoten could repeatedly test regardless of symptoms and as often as desired at the close-by test facilities in the municipality. Data from the regular COVID-19 registration was used for analysis. In Bunschoten, MT caused a significant increase in test incidence and an immediate increase in the number of detected active infections, in contrast to a stabilisation in the rest of the province of Utrecht. Age distribution of test incidence shifted to the older population in Bunschoten during MT. During MT, there was a 6.8 percentage point increase in detected asymptomatic cases, a 0.4 percentage point increase in pre-symptomatic cases and a decrease of 0.5 days between onset of symptoms and test date. This study has shown that MT increases test incidence and helps to obtain a more complete view of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in a community, which can be useful in specific situations with a defined target group or goal. However, the question remains open whether the use of MT is proportionate to the overall gain.

Head-to-head comparison of the accuracy of saliva and nasal rapid antigen SARS-CoV-2 self-testing: cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic accuracy of unsupervised self-testing with rapid antigen diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) is mostly unknown. We studied the diagnostic accuracy of a self-performed SARS-CoV-2 saliva and nasal Ag-RDT in the general population. METHODS: This large cross-sectional study consecutively included unselected individuals aged ≥ 16 years presenting for SARS-CoV-2 testing at three public health service test sites. Participants underwent molecular test sampling and received two self-tests (the Hangzhou AllTest Biotech saliva self-test and the SD Biosensor nasal self-test by Roche Diagnostics) to perform themselves at home. Diagnostic accuracy of both self-tests was assessed with molecular testing as reference. RESULTS: Out of 2819 participants, 6.5% had a positive molecular test. Overall sensitivities were 46.7% (39.3-54.2%) for the saliva Ag-RDT and 68.9% (61.6-75.6%) for the nasal Ag-RDT. With a viral load cut-off (≥ 5.2 log10 SARS-CoV-2 E-gene copies/mL) as a proxy of infectiousness, these sensitivities increased to 54.9% (46.4-63.3%) and 83.9% (76.9-89.5%), respectively. For the nasal Ag-RDT, sensitivities were 78.5% (71.1-84.8%) and 22.6% (9.6-41.1%) in those symptomatic and asymptomatic at the time of sampling, which increased to 90.4% (83.8-94.9%) and 38.9% (17.3-64.3%) after applying the viral load cut-off. In those with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, sensitivities were 36.8% (16.3-61.6%) and 72.7% (65.1-79.4%). Specificities were > 99% and > 99%, positive predictive values > 70% and > 90%, and negative predictive values > 95% and > 95%, for the saliva and nasal Ag-RDT, respectively, in most analyses. Most participants considered the self-performing and result interpretation (very) easy for both self-tests. CONCLUSIONS: The Hangzhou AllTest Biotech saliva self Ag-RDT is not reliable for SARS-CoV-2 detection, overall, and in all studied subgroups. The SD Biosensor nasal self Ag-RDT had high sensitivity in individuals with symptoms and in those without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection but low sensitivity in asymptomatic individuals and those with a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection which warrants further investigation.

Diagnostic accuracy of covid-19 rapid antigen tests with unsupervised self-sampling in people with symptoms in the omicron period: cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of rapid antigen tests with unsupervised nasal and combined oropharyngeal and nasal self-sampling during the omicron period. DESIGN: Prospective cross sectional diagnostic test accuracy study. SETTING: Three public health service covid-19 test sites in the Netherlands, 21 December 2021 to 10 February 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 6497 people with covid-19 symptoms aged ≥16 years presenting for testing. INTERVENTIONS: Participants had a swab sample taken for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR, reference test) and received one rapid antigen test to perform unsupervised using either nasal self-sampling (during the emergence of omicron, and when omicron accounted for >90% of infections, phase 1) or with combined oropharyngeal and nasal self-sampling in a subsequent (phase 2; when omicron accounted for >99% of infections). The evaluated tests were Flowflex (Acon Laboratories; phase 1 only), MPBio (MP Biomedicals), and Clinitest (Siemens-Healthineers). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcomes were sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of each self-test, with RT-PCR testing as the reference standard. RESULTS: During phase 1, 45.0% (n=279) of participants in the Flowflex group, 29.1% (n=239) in the MPBio group, and 35.4% ((n=257) in the Clinitest group were confirmatory testers (previously tested positive by a self-test at own initiative). Overall sensitivities with nasal self-sampling were 79.0% (95% confidence interval 74.7% to 82.8%) for Flowflex, 69.9% (65.1% to 74.4%) for MPBio, and 70.2% (65.6% to 74.5%) for Clinitest. Sensitivities were substantially higher in confirmatory testers (93.6%, 83.6%, and 85.7%, respectively) than in those who tested for other reasons (52.4%, 51.5%, and 49.5%, respectively). Sensitivities decreased from 87.0% to 80.9% (P=0.16 by χ2 test), 80.0% to 73.0% (P=0.60), and 83.1% to 70.3% (P=0.03), respectively, when transitioning from omicron accounting for 29% of infections to >95% of infections. During phase 2, 53.0% (n=288) of participants in the MPBio group and 44.4% (n=290) in the Clinitest group were confirmatory testers. Overall sensitivities with combined oropharyngeal and nasal self-sampling were 83.0% (78.8% to 86.7%) for MPBio and 77.3% (72.9% to 81.2%) for Clinitest. When combined oropharyngeal and nasal self-sampling was compared with nasal self-sampling, sensitivities were found to be slightly higher in confirmatory testers (87.4% and 86.1%, respectively) and substantially higher in those testing for other reasons (69.3% and 59.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivities of three rapid antigen tests with nasal self-sampling decreased during the emergence of omicron but was only statistically significant for Clinitest. Sensitivities appeared to be substantially influenced by the proportion of confirmatory testers. Sensitivities of MPBio and Clinitest improved after the addition of oropharyngeal to nasal self-sampling. A positive self-test result justifies prompt self-isolation without the need for confirmatory testing. Individuals with a negative self-test result should adhere to general preventive measures because a false negative result cannot be ruled out. Manufacturers of MPBio and Clinitest may consider extending their instructions for use to include combined oropharyngeal and nasal self-sampling, and other manufacturers of rapid antigen tests should consider evaluating this as well.

Protection of COVID-19 vaccination and previous infection against Omicron BA.1, BA.2 and Delta SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Given the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 variants and the roll-out of booster COVID-19 vaccination, evidence is needed on protection conferred by primary vaccination, booster vaccination and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection by variant. We employed a test-negative design on S-gene target failure data from community PCR testing in the Netherlands from 22 November 2021 to 31 March 2022 (n = 671,763). Previous infection, primary vaccination or both protected well against Delta infection. Protection against Omicron BA.1 infection was much lower compared to Delta. Protection was similar against Omicron BA.1 compared to BA.2 infection after previous infection, primary and booster vaccination. Higher protection was observed against all variants in individuals with both vaccination and previous infection compared with either one. Protection against all variants decreased over time since last vaccination or infection. We found that primary vaccination with current COVID-19 vaccines and previous SARS-CoV-2 infections offered low protection against Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 infection. Booster vaccination considerably increased protection against Omicron infection, but decreased rapidly after vaccination.

Estimated incubation period for monkeypox cases confirmed in the Netherlands, May 2022.

In May 2022, monkeypox outbreaks have been reported in countries not endemic for monkeypox. We estimated the monkeypox incubation period, using reported exposure and symptom-onset times for 18 cases detected and confirmed in the Netherlands up to 31 May 2022. Mean incubation period was 9.0 [corrected] days (5th-95th percentiles: 4.2-17.3), underpinning the current recommendation to monitor or isolate/quarantine case contacts for 21 days. However, as the incubation period may differ between different transmission routes, further epidemiological investigations are needed.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population by three prevailing rapid antigen tests: cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid antigen diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) are the most widely used point-of-care tests for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection. Since the accuracy may have altered by changes in SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology, indications for testing, sampling and testing procedures, and roll-out of COVID-19 vaccination, we evaluated the performance of three prevailing SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDTs. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we consecutively enrolled individuals aged >16 years presenting for SARS-CoV-2 testing at three Dutch public health service COVID-19 test sites. In the first phase, participants underwent either BD-Veritor System (Becton Dickinson), PanBio (Abbott), or SD-Biosensor (Roche Diagnostics) testing with routine sampling procedures. In a subsequent phase, participants underwent SD-Biosensor testing with a less invasive sampling method (combined oropharyngeal-nasal [OP-N] swab). Diagnostic accuracies were assessed against molecular testing. RESULTS: Six thousand nine hundred fifty-five of 7005 participants (99%) with results from both an Ag-RDT and a molecular reference test were analysed. SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and overall sensitivities were 13% (188/1441) and 69% (129/188, 95% CI 62-75) for BD-Veritor, 8% (173/2056) and 69% (119/173, 61-76) for PanBio, and 12% (215/1769) and 74% (160/215, 68-80) for SD-Biosensor with routine sampling and 10% (164/1689) and 75% (123/164, 68-81) for SD-Biosensor with OP-N sampling. In those symptomatic or asymptomatic at sampling, sensitivities were 72-83% and 54-56%, respectively. Above a viral load cut-off (≥5.2 log10 SARS-CoV-2 E-gene copies/mL), sensitivities were 86% (125/146, 79-91) for BD-Veritor, 89% (108/121, 82-94) for PanBio, and 88% (160/182, 82-92) for SD-Biosensor with routine sampling and 84% (118/141, 77-89) with OP-N sampling. Specificities were >99% for all tests in most analyses. Sixty-one per cent of false-negative Ag-RDT participants returned for testing within 14 days (median: 3 days, interquartile range 3) of whom 90% tested positive. CONCLUSIONS: Overall sensitivities of three SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDTs were 69-75%, increasing to ≥86% above a viral load cut-off. The decreased sensitivity among asymptomatic participants and high positivity rate during follow-up in false-negative Ag-RDT participants emphasise the need for education of the public about the importance of re-testing after an initial negative Ag-RDT should symptoms develop. For SD-Biosensor, the diagnostic accuracy with OP-N and deep nasopharyngeal sampling was similar; adopting the more convenient sampling method might reduce the threshold for professional testing.

Shorter serial intervals in SARS-CoV-2 cases with Omicron BA.1 variant compared with Delta variant, the Netherlands, 13 to 26 December 2021.

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has a growth advantage over the Delta variant because of higher transmissibility, immune evasion or shorter serial interval. Using S gene target failure (SGTF) as indication for Omicron BA.1, we identified 908 SGTF and 1,621 non-SGTF serial intervals in the same period. Within households, the mean serial interval for SGTF cases was 0.2-0.6 days shorter than for non-SGTF cases. This suggests that the growth advantage of Omicron is partly due to a shorter serial interval.