Relationship between viral load and symptoms in children infected with SARS-CoV-2

SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen in plasma of children hospitalized for COVID-19 or with incidental detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection

In hospitalized children, SARS-CoV-2 infection can present as either a primary reason for admission (patients admitted for COVID-19) or an incidental finding during follow-up (patients admitted with COVID-19). We conducted a nested case-control study within a cohort of pediatric patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, to investigate the concentration of plasma nucleocapsid antigen (N-Ag) in children admitted for COVID-19 or with COVID-19. While reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction Ct values in nasopharyngeal swab were similar between the two groups, children admitted for COVID-19 had a higher rate of detectable N-Ag (12/18 (60.7%) versus 6/18 (33.3%), p = 0.0455) and a higher concentration of N-Ag (medians: 19.51 g/mL vs. 1.08 pg/mL, p = 0.0105). In children hospitalized for COVID-19, the youngest had higher concentration of N-Ag (r = -0.74, p = 0.0004). We also observed a lower prevalence of detectable spike antibodies in children hospitalized for COVID-19 compared to those hospitalized for other medical reasons (3/15 [20%] vs. 13/16 [81.25%], respectively, p = < 0.0011), but similar rates of IgG nucleocapsid antibodies (5/14 [35.7%] vs. 6/17 [35.3%], respectively, p = 0.99). Our findings indicate that N-Ag is associated with COVID-19-related hospitalizations in pediatric patients, and less frequently detected in children tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 but hospitalized for another medical reason. Further studies are needed to confirm the value of N-Ag in identifying COVID-19 disease infections in which SARS-CoV-2 is the main pathogen responsible for symptoms.

Digital PCR to Measure SARS-CoV-2 RNA, Variants, and Outcomes in Youth

BACKGROUND

The role of SARS-CoV-2 viral load in predicting contagiousness, disease severity, transmissibility, and clinical decision-making continues to be an area of great interest. However, most studies have been in adults and have evaluated SARS-CoV-2 loads using cycle thresholds (Ct) values, which are not standardized preventing consistent interpretation critical to understanding clinical impact and utility. Here, a quantitative SARS-CoV-2 reverse-transcription digital PCR (RT-dPCR) assay normalized to WHO International Units was applied to children at risk of severe disease diagnosed with COVID-19 at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital between March 28, 2020, and January 31, 2022.

METHODS

Demographic and clinical information from children, adolescents, and young adults treated at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital were abstracted from medical records. Respiratory samples underwent SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantitation by RT-dPCR targeting N1 and N2 genes, with sequencing to determine the genetic lineage of infecting virus.

RESULTS

Four hundred and sixty-two patients aged 0-24 years (median 11 years old) were included during the study period. Most patients were infected by the omicron variant (43.72%), followed by ancestral strain (22.29%), delta (13.20%), and alpha (2.16%). Viral load at presentation ranged from 2.49 to 9.14 log10 IU/mL, and higher viral RNA loads were associated with symptoms (OR 1.32; CI 95% 1.16-1.49) and respiratory disease (OR 1.23; CI 95% 1.07-1.41). Viral load did not differ by SARS-CoV-2 variant, vaccination status, age, or baseline diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 RNA loads predict the presence of symptomatic and respiratory diseases. The use of standardized, quantitative methods is feasible, allows for replication, and comparisons across institutions, and has the potential to facilitate consensus quantitative thresholds for risk stratification and treatment.

Viral load: We need a new look at an old problem?

The concept of viral load was introduced in the 1980s to measure the amount of viral genetic material in a person's blood, primarily for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). It has since become crucial for monitoring HIV infection progression and assessing the efficacy of antiretroviral therapy. However, during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the term "viral load" became widely popularized, not only for the scientific community but for the general population. Viral load plays a critical role in both clinical patient management and research, providing valuable insights for antiviral treatment strategies, vaccination efforts, and epidemiological control measures. As measuring viral load is so important, why don't researchers discuss the best way to do it? Is it simply acceptable to use raw Ct values? Relying solely on Ct values for viral load estimation can be problematic due to several reasons. First, Ct values can vary between different quantitative polymerase chain reaction assays, platforms, and laboratories, making it difficult to compare data across studies. Second, Ct values do not directly measure the quantity of viral particles in a sample and they can be influenced by various factors such as initial viral load, sample quality, and assay sensitivity. Moreover, variations in viral RNA extraction and reverse-transcription steps can further impact the accuracy of viral load estimation, emphasizing the need for careful interpretation of Ct values in viral load assessment. Interestingly, we did not observe scientific articles addressing different strategies to quantify viral load. The absence of standardized and validated methods impedes the implementation of viral load monitoring in clinical management. The variability in cell quantities within samples and the variation in viral particle numbers within infected cells further challenge accurate viral load measurement and interpretation. To advance the field and improve patient outcomes, there is an urgent need for the development and validation of tailored, standardized methods for precise viral load quantification.