Abstract
Background Widespread use of at-home COVID-19 tests hampers determination of community COVID-19 incidence. Using nationwide data available through the US National Wastewater Surveillance System, we examined the performance of two wastewater metrics in predicting high case and hospitalizations rates both before and after widespread use of at-home tests.
Methods We performed area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis (AUC) for two wastewater metrics—viral concentration relative to the peak of January 2022 (“wastewater percentile”) and 15-day percent change in SARS-CoV-2 (“percent change”). Dichotomized reported cases (≥ 200 or <200 cases per 100,000) and new hospitalizations (≥ 10 or <10 per 100,000) were our dependent variables, stratified by calendar quarter. Using logistic regression, we assessed the performance of combining wastewater metrics.
Results Among 268 counties across 22 states, wastewater percentile detected high reported case and hospitalizations rates in the first quarter of 2022 (AUC 0.95 and 0.86 respectively) whereas the percent change did not (AUC 0.54 and 0.49 respectively). A wastewater percentile of 51% maximized sensitivity (0.93) and specificity (0.82) for detecting high case rates. A model inclusive of both metrics performed no better than using wastewater percentile alone. The predictive capability of wastewater percentile declined over time (AUC 0.84 and 0.72 for cases for second and third quarters of 2022).
Conclusion Nationwide, county wastewater levels above 51% relative to the historic peak predicted high COVID rates and hospitalization in the first quarter of 2022, but performed less well in subsequent quarters. Decline over time in predictive performance of this metric likely reflects underreporting of cases, reduced testing, and possibly lower virulence of infection due to vaccines and treatments.
Competing Interest Statement
Ascend Clinical Laboratory and Abbott Laboratory provide COVID-19 testing materials, supplies and personnel for 5U01AI169477. Dr Anand reports consulting fees from Vera Therapeutics.
Funding Statement
This work was funded by NIH NIAID 5U01AI169477.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
We used publicly available data for this analysis. The dataset we constructed for this analysis is available upon request to Dr Varkila.
https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data
https://healthdata.gov/Hospital/COVID-19-Reported-Patient-Impact-and-Hospital-Capa/anag-cw7u
