The ratio between SARS-CoV-2 RNA viral load and culturable viral titer differs depending on stage of infection ============================================================================================================== * Michael K. Porter * Alexander Viloria Winnett * Linhui Hao * Natasha Shelby * Jessica A. Reyes * Noah W. Schlenker * Anna E. Romano * Colton Tognazzini * Matthew Feaster * Ying-Ying Goh * Michael Gale, Jr. * Rustem F. Ismagilov ## Abstract Analysis of incident, longitudinal RNA viral loads in saliva and nasal swabs and culturable viral titers in nasal swabs collected twice-daily by a tricenarian male infected with SARS-CoV-2 revealed the ratio between viral load and viral titer can be five orders of magnitude higher during early infection than late infection. Keywords * SARS-CoV-2 * incident * culture * infectivity * longitudinal ## MAIN TEXT ### Introduction Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the relationship between the detection of viral RNA and replication-competent virus has been used as guiding evidence for infection-control strategies. For example, studies suggesting that low viral load specimens are unlikely to have observable replication-competent virus [1] were used to argue that low-analytical-sensitivity antigen tests (which only detect high viral loads [2]) would more specifically identify infectious individuals [3, 4]. Additionally, the lack of replication-competent virus in specimens collected more than a week after symptom onset [5-10] was used as evidence to release individuals from isolation despite persistently detectable viral RNA [11]. Assessment of replication-competent virus in clinical specimens is technically challenging [12] and therefore not routinely performed to determine whether an individual is infectious. Rather, the studies which have generated viral-culture data are often applied broadly to guide infection-control strategies [13]. However, the design of such studies influences the data, conclusions, and resulting policies. Many studies that assess presence of replication-competent virus in specimens from individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection are primarily cross-sectional, include data from only one specimen type, and are biased toward specimens collected late in the course of infection (e.g. after symptom onset) [4, 14-18]. However, during the earliest phase of infection, detection of infected individuals can help reduce subsequent transmission [19, 20] and improve clinical outcomes [21]. Few studies report viral loads starting from the incidence of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection [13, 22-29], and of these, few report both viral-load and viral-culture data [25, 27]. If studies of replication-competent virus during SARS-CoV-2 infection are insufficiently representative of early infection, resulting infection control policies may not be optimally effective. As part of the Caltech COVID-19 Study [23, 24, 30], we attempted to fill this gap by capturing both viral load and viral titer measurements longitudinally from the incidence of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection in a subset of participants at risk of becoming infected. Within this subset, one individual was found to have incident infection with the B.1.243 lineage of SARS-CoV-2 while enrolled and collecting twice-daily specimens, from which we measured both anterior-nares (nasal) swab viral load and viral titer. This participant also collected saliva specimens for viral-load measurements. SARS-CoV-2 *N* gene viral loads and human *RNaseP* marker Cq values in saliva and nasal swab specimens from this individual (Participant AC) have previously been reported [30]. Here, we provide additional quantifications of SARS-CoV-2 *E* and *RdRp* gene viral loads and viral-titer measurements from this participant’s nasal-swab specimens to investigate the relationship of RNA viral load and infectious virus longitudinally from the incidence of naturally acquired infection. ## Results We report the case (**Figure 1A**) of a 30–39-year-old male (Participant AC), who does not smoke/vape and is otherwise healthy (no chronic medical conditions and self-reported health as “very good”). The participant did not report evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection nor receipt of any SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses. The participant reported taking Vitamin C and fish oil supplements, and no other medications. In late-January 2021, six days prior to enrollment in this study, the participant reported exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Three days prior to enrollment, the participant began experiencing a sore throat, but two days prior to enrollment tested negative on an outpatient, non-rapid nasopharyngeal test. At this time, a household contact of Participant AC (Participant AB, **Figure S1**) tested positive, prompting eligibility of both Participant AC for enrollment in this study. ![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2023/07/12/2023.07.06.23292300/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/07/12/2023.07.06.23292300/F1) Figure 1. The viral load and viral titer trajectories from a single study participant from the incidence of infection. **(A)** A timeline of Participant AC’s infection is shown with notable case events (exposure, symptom onset, study enrollment), as well as SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in saliva (circles) and anterior-nares nasal swabs (triangles) on the left y-axis, and SARS-CoV-2 viral titer (log10 TCID50/mL) on the right y-axis. Human *RNaseP* Cq values are shown as a measure of sampling consistency and specimen RNA integrity. **(B)** Cross-sectional relationship of SARS-CoV-2 viral load (log10 *N* copies/mL, y axis) in nasal swab specimens (triangles) or saliva specimens (circles) based on whether viral culture positivity (yellow) of the nasal swab from the same timepoint. Black horizontal bars indicate median viral load. **(C)** For specimens with detectable viral titer and viral load, the ratio of viral titer (TCID50/mL) over *N* gene viral load (copies/mL) in nasal swab specimens collected by the participant is plotted through days of enrollment. The open symbol indicates a specimen with detectable but not quantifiable viral titer, for which 100 TCID50/mL was imputed. ND, not detected. Upon enrollment, Participant AC had detectable and rising salivary viral loads, but was negative in anterior-nares nasal-swab specimens collected over the next day. During this time, the participant remained symptomatic with only a sore throat. In the subsequent day the participant developed shortness of breath and low (<105copies/mL) nasal viral loads without replication-competent virus detected by culture. After this point, the participant’s nasal swab specimens achieved high (>107 copies/mL) viral loads and high (>106 TCID50/mL) viral titers for approximately 3 days before gradually declining. Throughout this time, headaches, cough, congestion, change in taste/smell, muscle aches, and one event of severe nausea were reported, all of which resolved before completion of enrollment. Cross-sectional SARS-CoV-2 viral loads from different gene targets in nasal swab specimens correlated closely with each other **(Figure 1A, Figure S2A)** and the relationship between viral loads from different gene targets remained proportional throughout the course of infection **(Figure S2B)**. Cross-sectional analysis of viral load and viral titer revealed that only high viral load nasal swab specimens (>108 *N* cp/mL) would contain replication competent virus (**Figure 1B**). Additionally, saliva viral load is less distinguishable between samples with and without replication competent virus in nasal swab specimens (**Figure 1B**). However, longitudinal analysis revealed that the ratio of nasal swab viral load and viral titer changed by over five orders of magnitude throughout the course of acute infection **(Figure 1C)**. This relationship indicates that RNA viral load alone, without considering infection stage, may not represent whether a specimen or a person is likely to be infectious or not. ## Discussion High-frequency nasal swab and saliva sampling from the incidence of infection, and paired measurements of viral load and viral titer in nasal swab specimens revealed four key findings uniquely enabled by this study design. First, saliva exhibited higher *N* gene viral loads than in nasal swabs for approximately the first two days of incident infection, after which nasal swab viral loads rose and remained subsequently higher than saliva viral loads. This supports previous observations that SARS-CoV-2 often presents first in oral specimen types before anterior nares swabs [23, 24], and that testing a single specimen type (e.g. nasal swabs) may yield false negative results during early infection. Second, replication-competent virus was observed in nasal swabs at many timepoints when saliva viral loads were low. This suggests that the low viral load of one specimen type is not necessarily indicative of the absence of replication competent virus in another specimen type. Third, nasal-swab viral-load measurements from different gene targets (*N, E*, and *RdRP* genes) correlated strongly with each other longitudinally, such that measurement of any one viral RNA target was indicative of other viral RNA targets [31]. Fourth, we note that the ratio between RNA viral load and culturable viral titer in nasal swabs decreased substantially (greater than 5 orders of magnitude) through the first week of infection. Cross-sectional analyses of data from participant AC and in other studies [4, 15, 18, 25, 32] have suggested a correlation between viral load and the presence of infectious virus. However, these cross-sectional analyses overlook that the relationship between viral load and infectious virus is dynamic, and that early viral loads are more indicative of viral titer than viral loads later in the infection. Therefore, earlier in the infection, individuals with lower viral loads could actually be more infectious than expected based on cross-sectional data. Data from a SARS-CoV-2 human challenge study [25] supported these conclusions (Figure S4). In that study, 36 human participants were inoculated intranasally with 10 TCID50 virus, and 18 participants had subsequent sustained detectable infection. We reanalyzed longitudinal nasal swab viral load and viral culture data graciously provided by the study authors to compare to what was observed in Participant AC’s naturally acquired infection. Indeed, among specimens with replication competent virus, the average ratio between viral titer and viral load at each timepoint after inoculation decreased by nearly four orders of magnitude in the five days following inoculation. Taken together, these results caution against conclusions about infectiousness that assume a constant ratio of RNA viral load and culturable viral titer, commonly inferred based on cross-sectional data or from single specimen types [4, 33-35]. Assuming a constant ratio of RNA viral load and culturable viral titer may not reflect early infection or all anatomical sites from which transmissible virus can be shed, and therefore may be suboptimal evidence for public health policies that seek to reduce transmission. We acknowledge three main limitations. First, data are from a single unvaccinated person with acute SARS-CoV-2 B.1.243 infection, prior to the availability of COVID-19 vaccines and the emergence of currently circulating variants. Infection characteristics may exhibit substantial person-to-person variation, and vaccination status and/or viral variant may affect the relationship between viral load and viral titer [36]. Second, Participant AC collected saliva specimens in a preservation buffer that precluded the ability to perform viral culture, thereby prohibiting inferences on the relationship between saliva viral load and viral titer, or saliva viral titer and nasal viral titer. Third, the lack of detection of replication-competent virus by viral culture may not reflect a true absence of replication-competent virus in the specimen or shedding of infectious virus by the individual as specimen collection, handling, and storage affect virion viability [37, 38]. Moreover, both the methods of attempted viral culture and viral characteristics can affect the analytical sensitivity to detect replication-competent virus [39]. Therefore, it is possible that replication-competent virus was present in the first two nasal-swab specimens with detectable viral RNA collected by this participant, but at a concentration below the limit of detection by viral culture. The data presented here is rare and challenging to obtain. We hope that similar datasets of viral load and viral titer in paired specimen types collected longitudinally starting from early infection can be made accessible for metanalysis and guide optimized public health strategies that reduce the burden of SARS-CoV-2 or other pathogens. ## Methods ### Participant eligibility and enrollment Participants were recruited for a COVID-19 household transmission study under Caltech IRB protocol #20-1026 as previously described [23, 30]. All adult participants provided written informed consent. ### Study design and specimen collection Enrolled participants began self-collecting saliva and nasal swab specimens immediately upon receipt of specimen collection materials at enrollment, and then each subsequent morning (immediately after waking), and evening (prior to bed). Participants self-collected anterior-nares nasal swabs in Nest viral transport medium (VTM) (catalog no. NST-NST-202117; Stellar Scientific, Baltimore, MD) and saliva specimens in the Spectrum SDNA-1000 saliva collection kit (Spectrum Solutions LLC, Draper, UT). Study participants were instructed not to eat, smoke, chew gum, or brush their teeth for at least 30 min prior to collection and asked to gently blow their noses before nasal swabbing (four complete rotations with gentle pressure in each nostril) with sterile flocked swabs. Specimens were transported daily by medical courier to the Caltech laboratory for analysis. ### Nucleic acid extraction, quantification of viral load by RT-qPCR, and viral variant determination Nucleic-acid extraction was performed as previously described [23]. Conversion from RT-qPCR Cq to viral load (in copies/mL) was determined via calibration curves, reported for *N* gene previously [23], and built for *E* and *RdRP* gene using standard positive controls (IDT 10006896, IDT 10006897): ![Formula][1] Nucleic acids extracted from the 7th saliva and nasal swab specimens collected by the participant underwent viral sequencing and variant determination as previously described [23]. ### Measurement of viral titer Tissue culture infection dose to infect 50% of test cultures (TCID50) assay was performed to measure the viral titer in VTM samples. Briefly, 500 μl VTM sample was filter-cleaned with a spin column (CLS-8160, Corning). VeroE6 cells ectopically expressing human ACE2 and TMPRSS2 (VeroE6-AT cells; a gift from Dr. Barney Graham, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda MD) were seeded confluent in a 96-well plate, after replacing the seeding medium with 90 µL of assay medium (Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Media (DMEM) + 2% heat inactivated Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS) + 10 mM HEPES + 1% Penicillin/Streptomycin), 10 µL of filtered VTM sample was added to the first row of the plate as the starting inoculation. Then, 10-fold serial dilutions were performed in the 2nd through 7th rows, leaving the 8th row as the negative control. Each sample was tested with 5 replicates. Cells were fixed with 10% formaldehyde and stained with 1% crystal violet three days post infection. Digital photographs were taken, and cell death indicated by clear areas in a well, were scored to calculate TCID50. ## Supporting information Supplemental Information [[supplements/292300_file02.pdf]](pending:yes) ## Data Availability The data underlying the results presented in the study are available at CaltechDATA at [https://data.caltech.edu/records/cgf4q-byr92](https://data.caltech.edu/records/cgf4q-byr92). [https://data.caltech.edu/records/cgf4q-byr92](https://data.caltech.edu/records/cgf4q-byr92) ## Funding This study is based on research funded in part by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-023124). The findings and conclusions contained within are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect positions or policies of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. This work was also funded by the Ronald and Maxine Linde Center for New Initiatives at the California Institute of Technology and the Jacobs Institute for Molecular Engineering for Medicine at the California Institute of Technology. A.V.W. is supported by a UCLA DGSOM Geffen Fellowship. MG and LH were supported by National Institutes of Health grant AI151698 for the United World Antiviral Research Network (UWARN) component of the Centers for Research in Emerging Infectious Disease (CREID). ## Data Availability The data underlying the results presented in the study are available at CaltechDATA at [https://data.caltech.edu/records/cgf4q-byr92](https://data.caltech.edu/records/cgf4q-byr92). ## Disclosures R.F.I. is a cofounder, consultant, and a director and has stock ownership of Talis Biomedical Corp. All other co-authors report no competing interests. ## Acknowledgements We wish to thank the participant who contributed these specimens for analysis, the contact tracers at the Pasadena Public Health Department, as well as Dr. Matthew Bidwell Goetz and Dr. David Beehouwer for their thoughts on this data. We thank Maira Phelps, Lienna Chan, Lucy Li, Dan Lu, and Amy Kistler at the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub for performing SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. * Received July 6, 2023. * Revision received July 6, 2023. * Accepted July 12, 2023. * © 2023, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ## References(40 or fewer) 1. 1.Walsh, K.A., et al., SARS-CoV-2 detection, viral load and infectivity over the course of an infection. Journal of Infection, 2020. 81(3): p. 357–371. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.06.067&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F07%2F12%2F2023.07.06.23292300.atom) 2. 2.Drain, P.K., Rapid Diagnostic Testing for SARS-CoV-2. New England Journal of Medicine, 2022. 386(3): p. 264–272. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMCP2117115&link_type=DOI) 3. 3.Mina, M.J., R. Parker, and D.B. Larremore, Rethinking Covid-19 Test Sensitivity — A Strategy for Containment. New England Journal of Medicine, 2020. 383(22): p. e120. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMp2025631&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F07%2F12%2F2023.07.06.23292300.atom) 4. 4.Pickering, S., et al., Comparative performance of SARS-CoV-2 lateral flow antigen tests and association with detection of infectious virus in clinical specimens: a single-centre laboratory evaluation study. The Lancet Microbe, 2021. 2(9): p. e461–e471. 5. 5. Perera Rapm Fau - Tso, E., et al., SARS-CoV-2 Virus Culture and Subgenomic RNA for Respiratory Specimens from Patients with Mild Coronavirus Disease. Emerging Infectious Disease, 2020. 26(26): p. 1080–6059 (Electronic) 6. 6.Wölfel, R., et al., Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019. Nature, 2020. 581(7809): p. 465–469. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41586-020-2196-x&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F07%2F12%2F2023.07.06.23292300.atom) 7. 7.Siedner, M.J., et al., Duration of viral shedding and culture positivity with postvaccination SARS-CoV-2 delta variant infections. JCI Insight, 2022. 7(2). 8. 8.Murata, T., et al., Shedding of Viable Virus in Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Carriers. mSphere, 2021. 6(3): p. 10.1128/msphere.00019-21. 9. 9.Jefferson, T., et al., Viral Cultures for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infectivity Assessment: A Systematic Review. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2021. 73(11): p. e3884–e3899. 10. 10.van Kampen, J.J.A., et al., Duration and key determinants of infectious virus shedding in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Nature Communications, 2021. 12(1): p. 267. 11. 11.Ending Isolation and Precautions for People with COVID-19: Interim Guidance. 2022; Available from: [https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html). 12. 12.Santos Bravo, M., et al., Viral Culture Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 Subgenomic RNA Value as a Good Surrogate Marker of Infectivity. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 2022. 60(1): p. e01609–21. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1128/JCM.01609-21&link_type=DOI) 13. 13.Ke, R., et al., Longitudinal Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections Reveals Limited Infectious Virus Shedding and Restricted Tissue Distribution. Open Forum Infectious Diseases, 2022. 9(7): p. ofac192. 14. 14.Pekosz, A., et al., Antigen-Based Testing but Not Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Correlates With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Viral Culture. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2021. 73(9): p. e2861–e2866. 15. 15.Kirby, J.E., et al., Sars-Cov-2 antigen tests predict infectivity based on viral culture: comparison of antigen, PCR viral load, and viral culture testing on a large sample cohort. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 2023. 29(1): p. 94–100. 16. 16.Korenkov, M., et al., Evaluation of a Rapid Antigen Test To Detect SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Identify Potentially Infectious Individuals. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 2021. 59(9): p. 10.1128/jcm.00896-21. 17. 17.Kohmer, N., et al. The Comparative Clinical Performance of Four SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Tests and Their Correlation to Infectivity In Vitro. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2021. 10, DOI: 10.3390/jcm10020328. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3390/jcm10020328&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33477365&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F07%2F12%2F2023.07.06.23292300.atom) 18. 18.Bullard, J., et al., Predicting Infectious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 From Diagnostic Samples. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2020(1537–6591 (Electronic)). 19. 19.Jenny, J., et al., Index Cases First Identified by Nasal-Swab Rapid COVID-19 Tests Had More Transmission to Household Contacts Than Cases Identified by Other Test Types. medRxiv, 2023: p. 2023.03.09.23286855. 20. 20.McGarry, B.E., A.D. Gandhi, and M.L. Barnett, Covid-19 Surveillance Testing and Resident Outcomes in Nursing Homes. New England Journal of Medicine, 2023. 388(12): p. 1101–1110. 21. 21.Prevention, C.f.D.C.a. COVID-19 Treatments and Medications. 2023. 22. 22.Kissler, S.M., et al., Viral dynamics of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and applications to diagnostic and public health strategies. PLOS Biology, 2021. 19(7): p. e3001333. 23. 23.Savela Emily, S., et al., Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 Viral-Load Curves in Paired Saliva Samples and Nasal Swabs Inform Appropriate Respiratory Sampling Site and Analytical Test Sensitivity Required for Earliest Viral Detection. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 2022. 60(2): p. e01785–21. 24. 24.Viloria Winnett, A., et al., Extreme differences in SARS-CoV-2 viral loads among respiratory specimen types during presumed pre-infectious and infectious periods. PNAS Nexus, 2023. 2(3): p. pgad033. 25. 25.Killingley, B., et al., Safety, tolerability and viral kinetics during SARS-CoV-2 human challenge in young adults. Nature Medicine, 2022. 28(5): p. 1031–1041. 26. 26.Kissler, S.M., et al., Viral Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Persons. New England Journal of Medicine, 2021. 385(26): p. 2489–2491. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/nejmc2102507&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F07%2F12%2F2023.07.06.23292300.atom) 27. 27.Ke, R., et al., Daily longitudinal sampling of SARS-CoV-2 infection reveals substantial heterogeneity in infectiousness. Nature Microbiology, 2022. 7(5): p. 640–652. 28. 28.Stankiewicz Karita, H.C., et al., Trajectory of Viral RNA Load Among Persons With Incident SARS-CoV-2 G614 Infection (Wuhan Strain) in Association With COVID-19 Symptom Onset and Severity. JAMA Network Open, 2022. 5(1): p. e2142796–e2142796. 29. 29.Hakki, S., et al., Onset and window of SARS-CoV-2 infectiousness and temporal correlation with symptom onset: a prospective, longitudinal, community cohort study. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 2022. 10(11): p. 1061–1073. 30. 30.Viloria Winnett, A., et al., Morning SARS-CoV-2 Testing Yields Better Detection of Infection Due to Higher Viral Loads in Saliva and Nasal Swabs upon Waking. Microbiology Spectrum, 2022. 10(6): p. e03873–22. 31. 31.Dimcheff, D.E., et al., Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Total and Subgenomic RNA Viral Load in Hospitalized Patients. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2021. 224(8): p. 1287–1293. 32. 32.Stanley, S., et al., Limit of Detection for Rapid Antigen Testing of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron and Delta Variants of Concern Using Live-Virus Culture. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 2022. 60(5): p. e00140–22. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1128/jcm.00140-22&link_type=DOI) 33. 33.Babady, N.E., et al., Variable duration of viral shedding in cancer patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 2022. 43(10): p. 1413–1415. 34. 34.Puhach, O., et al., Infectious viral load in unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals infected with ancestral, Delta or Omicron SARS-CoV-2. Nature Medicine, 2022. 28(7): p. 1491–1500. 35. 35.Smith, R.L., et al., Longitudinal Assessment of Diagnostic Test Performance Over the Course of Acute SARS-CoV-2 Infection. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2021. 224(6): p. 976–982. 36. 36.Tassetto, M., et al., Detection of Higher Cycle Threshold Values in Culturable SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 Sublineage Compared with Pre-Omicron Variant Specimens — San Francisco Bay Area, California, July 2021—March 2022. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 2022. 71(36): p. 1151–1154. 37. 37.Chin, A.W.H., et al., Stability of SARS-CoV-2 in different environmental conditions. The Lancet Microbe, 2020. 1(1): p. e10. 38. 38.McAuley, J., et al., Optimal preparation of SARS-CoV-2 viral transport medium for culture. Virology Journal, 2021. 18(1): p. 53. 39. 39.Mautner, L., et al., Replication kinetics and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern in common cell culture models. Virology Journal, 2022. 19(1): p. 76. [1]: /embed/graphic-2.gif