38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Variation in False-Negative Rate of Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction–Based SARS-CoV-2 Tests by Time Since Exposure

      other
      , MD, PhD * , , PhD * , , PhD, MBA, , PhD, , PhD
      Annals of Internal Medicine
      American College of Physicians

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) based on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) are being used to “rule out” infection among high-risk persons, such as exposed inpatients and health care workers. It is critical to understand how the predictive value of the test varies with time from exposure and symptom onset to avoid being falsely reassured by negative test results.

          Objective:

          To estimate the false-negative rate by day since infection.

          Design:

          Literature review and pooled analysis.

          Setting:

          7 previously published studies providing data on RT-PCR performance by time since symptom onset or SARS-CoV-2 exposure using samples from the upper respiratory tract ( n = 1330).

          Patients:

          A mix of inpatients and outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

          Measurements:

          A Bayesian hierarchical model was fitted to estimate the false-negative rate by day since exposure and symptom onset.

          Results:

          Over the 4 days of infection before the typical time of symptom onset (day 5), the probability of a false-negative result in an infected person decreases from 100% (95% CI, 100% to 100%) on day 1 to 67% (CI, 27% to 94%) on day 4. On the day of symptom onset, the median false-negative rate was 38% (CI, 18% to 65%). This decreased to 20% (CI, 12% to 30%) on day 8 (3 days after symptom onset) then began to increase again, from 21% (CI, 13% to 31%) on day 9 to 66% (CI, 54% to 77%) on day 21.

          Limitation:

          Imprecise estimates due to heterogeneity in the design of studies on which results were based.

          Conclusion:

          Care must be taken in interpreting RT-PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection—particularly early in the course of infection—when using these results as a basis for removing precautions intended to prevent onward transmission. If clinical suspicion is high, infection should not be ruled out on the basis of RT-PCR alone, and the clinical and epidemiologic situation should be carefully considered.

          Primary Funding Source:

          National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins Health System, and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

          Abstract

          Tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 based on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) are being used to “rule out” infection among high-risk persons, such as exposed inpatients and health care workers, but studies suggest that test sensitivity may be low. This study estimates the false-negative rate by day since exposure to infection by pooling and modeling data from previously published studies on RT-PCR sensitivity of upper respiratory tract samples of persons who were ultimately confirmed to have coronavirus disease 19.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR

          Background The ongoing outbreak of the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge for public health laboratories as virus isolates are unavailable while there is growing evidence that the outbreak is more widespread than initially thought, and international spread through travellers does already occur. Aim We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available. Methods Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV, its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology. Results The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from SARS-CoV. Through coordination between academic and public laboratories, we confirmed assay exclusivity based on 297 original clinical specimens containing a full spectrum of human respiratory viruses. Control material is made available through European Virus Archive – Global (EVAg), a European Union infrastructure project. Conclusion The present study demonstrates the enormous response capacity achieved through coordination of academic and public laboratories in national and European research networks.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019

            Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an acute infection of the respiratory tract that emerged in late 20191,2. Initial outbreaks in China involved 13.8% of cases with severe courses, and 6.1% of cases with critical courses3. This severe presentation may result from the virus using a virus receptor that is expressed predominantly in the lung2,4; the same receptor tropism is thought to have determined the pathogenicity-but also aided in the control-of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 20035. However, there are reports of cases of COVID-19 in which the patient shows mild upper respiratory tract symptoms, which suggests the potential for pre- or oligosymptomatic transmission6-8. There is an urgent need for information on virus replication, immunity and infectivity in specific sites of the body. Here we report a detailed virological analysis of nine cases of COVID-19 that provides proof of active virus replication in tissues of the upper respiratory tract. Pharyngeal virus shedding was very high during the first week of symptoms, with a peak at 7.11 × 108 RNA copies per throat swab on day 4. Infectious virus was readily isolated from samples derived from the throat or lung, but not from stool samples-in spite of high concentrations of virus RNA. Blood and urine samples never yielded virus. Active replication in the throat was confirmed by the presence of viral replicative RNA intermediates in the throat samples. We consistently detected sequence-distinct virus populations in throat and lung samples from one patient, proving independent replication. The shedding of viral RNA from sputum outlasted the end of symptoms. Seroconversion occurred after 7 days in 50% of patients (and by day 14 in all patients), but was not followed by a rapid decline in viral load. COVID-19 can present as a mild illness of the upper respiratory tract. The confirmation of active virus replication in the upper respiratory tract has implications for the containment of COVID-19.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Incubation Period of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) From Publicly Reported Confirmed Cases: Estimation and Application

              Background: A novel human coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was identified in China in December 2019. There is limited support for many of its key epidemiologic features, including the incubation period for clinical disease (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]), which has important implications for surveillance and control activities. Objective: To estimate the length of the incubation period of COVID-19 and describe its public health implications. Design: Pooled analysis of confirmed COVID-19 cases reported between 4 January 2020 and 24 February 2020. Setting: News reports and press releases from 50 provinces, regions, and countries outside Wuhan, Hubei province, China. Participants: Persons with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection outside Hubei province, China. Measurements: Patient demographic characteristics and dates and times of possible exposure, symptom onset, fever onset, and hospitalization. Results: There were 181 confirmed cases with identifiable exposure and symptom onset windows to estimate the incubation period of COVID-19. The median incubation period was estimated to be 5.1 days (95% CI, 4.5 to 5.8 days), and 97.5% of those who develop symptoms will do so within 11.5 days (CI, 8.2 to 15.6 days) of infection. These estimates imply that, under conservative assumptions, 101 out of every 10 000 cases (99th percentile, 482) will develop symptoms after 14 days of active monitoring or quarantine. Limitation: Publicly reported cases may overrepresent severe cases, the incubation period for which may differ from that of mild cases. Conclusion: This work provides additional evidence for a median incubation period for COVID-19 of approximately 5 days, similar to SARS. Our results support current proposals for the length of quarantine or active monitoring of persons potentially exposed to SARS-CoV-2, although longer monitoring periods might be justified in extreme cases. Primary Funding Source: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, and Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ann Intern Med
                Ann. Intern. Med
                aim
                Annals of Internal Medicine
                American College of Physicians
                0003-4819
                1539-3704
                13 May 2020
                13 May 2020
                : M20-1495
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland (L.M.K.)
                [2 ]Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland (S.A.L., D.B., J.L.)
                [3 ]Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Baltimore, Maryland (O.L.)
                Article
                aim-olf-M201495
                10.7326/M20-1495
                7240870
                32422057
                db141584-b0d5-497c-85fe-ef1ad813a793
                Copyright @ 2020

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted re-use for research, analyses, and text and data mining through PubMed Central. Acknowledgement of the original source shall include a notice similar to the following: "© 2020 American College of Physicians. Some rights reserved. This work permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited." These permissions are granted for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic or until permissions are revoked in writing. Upon expiration of these permissions, PMC is granted a perpetual license to make this article available via PMC and Europe PMC, consistent with existing copyright protections.

                History
                Categories
                Original Research
                Hospital Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article