RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 testing is punctuated by intermittent positivity and variable rates of cycle-threshold decline
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.10.01.21264373
DO 10.1101/2021.10.01.21264373
A1 Hawken, Shawn E.
A1 Sellers, Subhashini A.
A1 Smedberg, Jason R.
A1 Ward, Jeremy D.
A1 Whinna, Herbert C.
A1 Fischer, William
A1 Miller, Melissa B.
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/01/2021.10.01.21264373.abstract
AB The COVID-19 pandemic is complicated by cases of vaccine-breakthrough, re-infection, and widespread transmission of variants of concern (VOC). Consequently, the need to interpret longitudinal positive SARS-CoV-2 (SCV-2) tests is crucial in guiding clinical decisions regarding infection control precautions and treatment. Although quantitative tests are not routinely used diagnostically, standard diagnostic RT-PCR tests yield Ct values that are inversely correlated with RNA quantity. In this study, we performed a retrospective review of 72,217 SCV-2 PCR positive tests and identified 264 patients with longitudinal positivity prior to vaccination and VOC circulation. Patients with longitudinal positivity fell into two categories: short-term (207, 78%) or prolonged (57, 22%) positivity, defined as <= 28 (range 1-28, median 16) days and >28 (range 29-152, median 41) days, respectively. In general, Ct values declined over time in both groups; however, 11 short-term positive patients had greater amounts of RNA detected at their terminal test compared to the first positive, and 5 patients had RNA detected at Ct < 35 at least 40 days after initial infection. Oscillating positive and negative results occurred in both groups, although oscillation was seen three times more frequently in prolonged-positive patients. Patients with prolonged positivity had diverse clinical characteristics but were often critically ill and were discharged to high-level care or deceased (22%). Overall, this study demonstrates that caution must be emphasized when interpreting Ct values as a proxy for infectivity, predictor of severity, or a guide for patient care decisions in the absence of additional clinical context.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Institutional Review BoardAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesNot applicable