Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Vaccine ; 41(11): 1808-1818, 2023 03 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2279516

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The extent to which vaccinated persons who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 contribute to transmission is unclear. During a SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant outbreak among incarcerated persons with high vaccination rates in a federal prison, we assessed markers of viral shedding in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons. METHODS: Consenting incarcerated persons with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection provided mid-turbinate nasal specimens daily for 10 consecutive days and reported symptom data via questionnaire. Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), viral whole genome sequencing, and viral culture was performed on these nasal specimens. Duration of RT-PCR positivity and viral culture positivity was assessed using survival analysis. RESULTS: A total of 957 specimens were provided by 93 participants, of whom 78 (84 %) were vaccinated and 17 (16 %) were unvaccinated. No significant differences were detected in duration of RT-PCR positivity among vaccinated participants (median: 13 days) versus those unvaccinated (median: 13 days; p = 0.50), or in duration of culture positivity (medians: 5 days and 5 days; p = 0.29). Among vaccinated participants, overall duration of culture positivity was shorter among Moderna vaccine recipients versus Pfizer (p = 0.048) or Janssen (p = 0.003) vaccine recipients. In post-hoc analyses, Moderna vaccine recipients demonstrated significantly shorter duration of culture positivity compared to unvaccinated participants (p = 0.02). When restricted to participants without reported prior infection, the difference between Moderna vaccine recipients and unvaccinated participants was more pronounced (medians: 3 days and 6 days, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Infectious periods for vaccinated and unvaccinated persons who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 are similar and can be highly variable, though some vaccinated persons are likely infectious for shorter durations. These findings are critically important, especially in congregate settings where viral transmission can lead to large outbreaks. In such settings, clinicians and public health practitioners should consider vaccinated, infected persons to be no less infectious than unvaccinated, infected persons.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Prisons , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks
2.
J Clin Microbiol ; 60(1): e0174221, 2022 01 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097916

ABSTRACT

Point-of-care antigen tests are an important tool for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Antigen tests are less sensitive than real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR). Data on the performance of the BinaxNOW antigen test compared to rRT-PCR and viral culture by symptom and known exposure status, timing during disease, or exposure period and demographic variables are limited. During 3 to 17 November 2020, we collected paired upper respiratory swab specimens to test for SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR and Abbott BinaxNOW antigen test at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona. We administered a questionnaire to capture symptoms, known exposure status, and previous SARS-CoV-2 test results. Specimens positive by either test were analyzed by viral culture. Previously we showed overall BinaxNOW sensitivity was 52.5%. Here, we showed BinaxNOW sensitivity increased to 65.7% among currently symptomatic individuals reporting a known exposure. BinaxNOW sensitivity was lower among participants with a known exposure and previously symptomatic (32.4%) or never symptomatic (47.1%) within 14 days of testing. Sensitivity was 71.1% in participants within a week of symptom onset. In participants with a known exposure, sensitivity was highest 8 to 10 days postexposure (75%). The positive predictive value for recovery of virus in cell culture was 56.7% for BinaxNOW-positive and 35.4% for rRT-PCR-positive specimens. Result reporting time was 2.5 h for BinaxNOW and 26 h for rRT-PCR. Point-of-care antigen tests have a shorter turnaround time than laboratory-based nucleic acid amplification tests, which allows for more rapid identification of infected individuals. Antigen test sensitivity limitations are important to consider when developing a testing program.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antigens, Viral , Humans , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , Sensitivity and Specificity
3.
PeerJ ; 10: e13821, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2010486

ABSTRACT

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has spread globally and is being surveilled with an international genome sequencing effort. Surveillance consists of sample acquisition, library preparation, and whole genome sequencing. This has necessitated a classification scheme detailing Variants of Concern (VOC) and Variants of Interest (VOI), and the rapid expansion of bioinformatics tools for sequence analysis. These bioinformatic tools are means for major actionable results: maintaining quality assurance and checks, defining population structure, performing genomic epidemiology, and inferring lineage to allow reliable and actionable identification and classification. Additionally, the pandemic has required public health laboratories to reach high throughput proficiency in sequencing library preparation and downstream data analysis rapidly. However, both processes can be limited by a lack of a standardized sequence dataset. Methods: We identified six SARS-CoV-2 sequence datasets from recent publications, public databases and internal resources. In addition, we created a method to mine public databases to identify representative genomes for these datasets. Using this novel method, we identified several genomes as either VOI/VOC representatives or non-VOI/VOC representatives. To describe each dataset, we utilized a previously published datasets format, which describes accession information and whole dataset information. Additionally, a script from the same publication has been enhanced to download and verify all data from this study. Results: The benchmark datasets focus on the two most widely used sequencing platforms: long read sequencing data from the Oxford Nanopore Technologies platform and short read sequencing data from the Illumina platform. There are six datasets: three were derived from recent publications; two were derived from data mining public databases to answer common questions not covered by published datasets; one unique dataset representing common sequence failures was obtained by rigorously scrutinizing data that did not pass quality checks. The dataset summary table, data mining script and quality control (QC) values for all sequence data are publicly available on GitHub: https://github.com/CDCgov/datasets-sars-cov-2. Discussion: The datasets presented here were generated to help public health laboratories build sequencing and bioinformatics capacity, benchmark different workflows and pipelines, and calibrate QC thresholds to ensure sequencing quality. Together, improvements in these areas support accurate and timely outbreak investigation and surveillance, providing actionable data for pandemic management. Furthermore, these publicly available and standardized benchmark data will facilitate the development and adjudication of new pipelines.

4.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(6): 206-211, 2022 02 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1687588

ABSTRACT

Genomic surveillance is a critical tool for tracking emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), which can exhibit characteristics that potentially affect public health and clinical interventions, including increased transmissibility, illness severity, and capacity for immune escape. During June 2021-January 2022, CDC expanded genomic surveillance data sources to incorporate sequence data from public repositories to produce weighted estimates of variant proportions at the jurisdiction level and refined analytic methods to enhance the timeliness and accuracy of national and regional variant proportion estimates. These changes also allowed for more comprehensive variant proportion estimation at the jurisdictional level (i.e., U.S. state, district, territory, and freely associated state). The data in this report are a summary of findings of recent proportions of circulating variants that are updated weekly on CDC's COVID Data Tracker website to enable timely public health action.† The SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2 and AY sublineages) variant rose from 1% to >50% of viral lineages circulating nationally during 8 weeks, from May 1-June 26, 2021. Delta-associated infections remained predominant until being rapidly overtaken by infections associated with the Omicron (B.1.1.529 and BA sublineages) variant in December 2021, when Omicron increased from 1% to >50% of circulating viral lineages during a 2-week period. As of the week ending January 22, 2022, Omicron was estimated to account for 99.2% (95% CI = 99.0%-99.5%) of SARS-CoV-2 infections nationwide, and Delta for 0.7% (95% CI = 0.5%-1.0%). The dynamic landscape of SARS-CoV-2 variants in 2021, including Delta- and Omicron-driven resurgences of SARS-CoV-2 transmission across the United States, underscores the importance of robust genomic surveillance efforts to inform public health planning and practice.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Genomics , Humans , Prevalence , Public Health Surveillance/methods , United States/epidemiology
5.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(3): 100-105, 2021 Jan 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1040195

ABSTRACT

Rapid antigen tests, such as the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card (BinaxNOW), offer results more rapidly (approximately 15-30 minutes) and at a lower cost than do highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) (1). Rapid antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in symptomatic persons (2), but data are lacking on test performance in asymptomatic persons to inform expanded screening testing to rapidly identify and isolate infected persons (3). To evaluate the performance of the BinaxNOW rapid antigen test, it was used along with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing to analyze 3,419 paired specimens collected from persons aged ≥10 years at two community testing sites in Pima County, Arizona, during November 3-17, 2020. Viral culture was performed on 274 of 303 residual real-time RT-PCR specimens with positive results by either test (29 were not available for culture). Compared with real-time RT-PCR testing, the BinaxNOW antigen test had a sensitivity of 64.2% for specimens from symptomatic persons and 35.8% for specimens from asymptomatic persons, with near 100% specificity in specimens from both groups. Virus was cultured from 96 of 274 (35.0%) specimens, including 85 (57.8%) of 147 with concordant antigen and real-time RT-PCR positive results, 11 (8.9%) of 124 with false-negative antigen test results, and none of three with false-positive antigen test results. Among specimens positive for viral culture, sensitivity was 92.6% for symptomatic and 78.6% for asymptomatic individuals. When the pretest probability for receiving positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 is elevated (e.g., in symptomatic persons or in persons with a known COVID-19 exposure), a negative antigen test result should be confirmed by NAAT (1). Despite a lower sensitivity to detect infection, rapid antigen tests can be an important tool for screening because of their quick turnaround time, lower costs and resource needs, high specificity, and high positive predictive value (PPV) in settings of high pretest probability. The faster turnaround time of the antigen test can help limit transmission by more rapidly identifying infectious persons for isolation, particularly when used as a component of serial testing strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Community Health Services , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Arizona/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Sensitivity and Specificity , Time Factors , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL