Duration of COVID-19 PCR positivity for Omicron vs earlier variants.

There have been reports that the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is milder and may resolve more quickly than earlier variants of SARS-CoV-2, like the Delta variant. Due to a dearth of studies on duration of PCR positivity for the Omicron variant, we studied this question in a cohort of routinely tested employees that work in a large laboratory. We found that there was no difference in duration of PCR positivity among those infected with the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 versus earlier variants of SARS-CoV-2. That suggests in a clinical study that the increased infectiousness of Omicron might likely be due to factors related to viral and host cell interactions, rather than viral load or duration of infectivity, which has been suggested in immune escape studies.

A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Oral Cefixime 800 mg for the Treatment of Gonorrhea

BACKGROUND: To treat Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection, the CDC recommends a single oral dose of cefixime 800 mg as an alternative to injectable ceftriaxone 500 mg if ceftriaxone is not available. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the efficacy of cefixime 800 mg by mouth in treating gonorrhea at different anatomic sites. METHOD(S): Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed using a standardized query limited to human studies of oral cefixime 800 mg as a single dose between January 1980 and December 2021. We excluded studies that did not specify the cefixime dose/frequency or single case reports. We ed treatment success rates and cefixime dosage/frequency using Covidence software (Melbourne, Australia). We performed a meta-analysis by anatomic site with 95% Wald confidence intervals with logit transformation. We tested for heterogeneity using chi2 statistic of the likelihood ratio (LR) test comparing the randomand fixed-effects model. RESULT(S): Of the 215 studies returned, 5 met our inclusion criteria. Those 5 studies represented 266 total gonorrhea infections (228 urogenital, 12 rectal, 26 pharyngeal) treated with a single dose of oral cefixime 800 mg. The LR p-value=0.11 suggesting there was heterogeneity between studies. The percent of gonorrhea cured for urogenital, pharyngeal, and rectal infections was 98% (CI: 95%-99%), 81% (CI: 61%-92%) and 100% (CI could not be calculated due to low sample size), respectively. CONCLUSION(S): A single dose of oral cefixime 800 mg was found to be highly efficacious at treating urogenital gonorrhea and less efficacious at treating pharyngeal gonorrhea. Further investigation of multiple doses and efficacy at treating rectal gonorrhea are needed.

Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among previously infected or vaccinated employees.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to determine the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among individuals with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection versus vaccinated individuals. METHODS: In March 2020, a SARS-CoV-2 testing company began routinely screening its workforce for SARS-CoV-2 with a PCR test. On December 15, 2020, vaccination with either the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines became available. Routine screening has continued through July 2021. We compared the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection between people who were SARS-CoV-2 naïve and unvaccinated, people with prior COVID-19 without vaccination, and people vaccinated without prior COVID-19. Incidence in 100 person-years with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) was calculated with the Poisson Exact equation. The incidence rate ratio (IRR), the ratio of confirmed COVID-19 cases per 100 person-years of follow-up with 95% CIs, was used as a measure of association between groups. Analyses were performed on StataSE. RESULTS: The median age of employees was 29.0 years (interquartile range: 23.6, 39.9). During the observation period, 258 SARS-CoV-2 incident infections were identified. The naïve, unvaccinated group had a SARS-CoV-2 incidence of 25.9 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 22.8-29.3). The previously infected, unvaccinated group had an incidence of 0 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 0-5.0). The vaccinated group had an incidence of 1.6 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 0.04-4.2). CONCLUSION: We found a strong association between prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 with either the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines and the reduced incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection when compared with those naïve and/or unvaccinated to SARS-CoV-2.

Self-Collected Oral Fluid and Nasal Swabs Demonstrate Comparable Sensitivity to Clinician Collected Nasopharyngeal Swabs for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Detection.

We compared self-collected oral fluid swab specimens with and without clinician supervision, clinician-supervised self-collected anterior nasal swab specimens, and clinician-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Supervised oral fluid and nasal swab specimens performed similarly to clinician-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens. No sample type could detect SARS-CoV-2 infections amongst all positive participants.

A Systematic Review of the Protective Effect of Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection on Repeat Infection.

We systematically reviewed studies to estimate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. For this systematic review, we searched scientific publications on PubMed and MedRxiv, a pre-print server, through August 18, 2021. Eligible studies were retrieved on August 18, 2021. The following search term was used on PubMed: ((("Cohort Studies"[Majr]) AND ("COVID-19"[Mesh] OR "SARS-CoV-2"[Mesh])) OR "Reinfection"[Majr]) OR "Reinfection"[Mesh]. The following search term was used on MedRxiv: "Cohort Studies" AND "COVID-19" OR "SARS-CoV-2" AND "Reinfection". The search terms were broad to encompass all applicable studies. There were no restrictions on the date of publication. Studies that did not describe cohorts with estimates of the risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among those with previous infection were excluded. Studies that included vaccinated participants were either excluded or limited to sub-groups of non-vaccinated individuals. To identify relevant studies with appropriate control groups, we developed the following criteria for studies to be included in the systematic analysis: (1) baseline polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, (2) a uninfected comparison group, (3) longitudinal follow-up, (4) a cohort of human participants, i.e. not a case report or case series, and (5) outcome determined by PCR. The review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. We assessed for selection, information, and analysis bias, per PRISMA guidelines. We identified 1,392 reports. Of those, 10 studies were eligible for our systematic review. The weighted average risk reduction against reinfection was 90.4% with a standard deviation of 7.7% (p-value: <0.01). Protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was observed for up to 10 months. Studies had potential information, selection, and analysis biases. The protective effect of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection on re-infection is high and similar to the protective effect of vaccination. More research is needed to characterize the duration of protection and the impact of different SARS-CoV-2 variants.