Results from Canton Grisons of Switzerland suggest repetitive testing reduces SARS-CoV-2 incidence (February-March 2021)

Diagnostic performance of multiplex lateral flow tests in ambulatory patients with acute respiratory illness

We assessed the performance of three different multiplex lateral flow assays manufactured by SureScreen, Microprofit and Goldsite which provide results for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and SARS-CoV-2. Between 4 April and 20 October 2023, 1646 patients 6 months and older presenting to an outpatient department of a hospital in Hong Kong with ≥2 symptoms or signs of an acute respiratory illness were enrolled. The point estimates for all three multiplex tests had sensitivity >80% for influenza A and SARS-CoV-2 compared to PCR, and the tests manufactured by Microprofit and Goldsite had sensitivity >84% to detect RSV. Specificity was >97% for all three tests except for the SureScreen test which had specificity 86.2% (95% CI: 83.9% to 88.3%) for influenza A. Sensitivity was lower than reported by the manufacturers, resulting in a higher risk of false negatives. The three multiplex tests performed better in patients with high viral loads.

Emergence of the reproduction matrix in epidemic forecasting

During the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the instantaneous reproduction number, R(t), has surged as a widely used measure to target public health interventions aiming at curbing the infection rate. In analogy with the basic reproduction number that arises from the linear stability analysis, R(t) is typically interpreted as a threshold parameter that separates exponential growth (R(t) > 1) from exponential decay (R(t) < 1). In real epidemics, however, the finite number of susceptibles, the stratification of the population (e.g. by age or vaccination state), and heterogeneous mixing lead to more complex epidemic courses. In the context of the multidimensional renewal equation, we generalize the scalar R(t) to a reproduction matrix, [Formula: see text], which details the epidemic state of the stratified population, and offers a concise epidemic forecasting scheme. First, the reproduction matrix is computed from the available incidence data (subject to some a priori assumptions), then it is projected into the future by a transfer functional to predict the epidemic course. We demonstrate that this simple scheme allows realistic and accurate epidemic trajectories both in synthetic test cases and with reported incidence data from the COVID-19 pandemic. Accounting for the full heterogeneity and nonlinearity of the infection process, the reproduction matrix improves the prediction of the infection peak. In contrast, the scalar reproduction number overestimates the possibility of sustaining the initial infection rate and leads to an overshoot in the incidence peak. Besides its simplicity, the devised forecasting scheme offers rich flexibility to be generalized to time-dependent mitigation measures, contact rate, infectivity and vaccine protection.

Intensified screening for SARS-CoV-2 in 18 emergency departments in the Paris metropolitan area, France (DEPIST-COVID): A cluster-randomized, two-period, crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic infections account for a substantial portion of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmissions. The value of intensified screening strategies, especially in emergency departments (EDs), in reaching asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic patients and helping to improve detection and reduce transmission has not been documented. The objective of this study was to evaluate in EDs whether an intensified SARS-CoV-2 screening strategy combining nurse-driven screening for asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients with routine practice (intervention) could contribute to higher detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections compared to routine practice alone, including screening for symptomatic or hospitalized patients (control).

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted a cluster-randomized, two-period, crossover trial from February 2021 to May 2021 in 18 EDs in the Paris metropolitan area, France. All adults visiting the EDs were eligible. At the start of the first period, 18 EDs were randomized to the intervention or control strategy by balanced block randomization with stratification, with the alternative condition being applied in the second period. During the control period, routine screening for SARS-CoV-2 included screening for symptomatic or hospitalized patients. During the intervention period, in addition to routine screening practice, a questionnaire about risk exposure and symptoms and a SARS-CoV-2 screening test were offered by nurses to all remaining asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients. The primary outcome was the proportion of newly diagnosed SARS-CoV-2-positive patients among all adults visiting the 18 EDs. Primary analysis was by intention-to-treat. The primary outcome was analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model (Poisson distribution) with the center and center by period as random effects and the strategy (intervention versus control) and period (modeled as a weekly categorical variable) as fixed effects with additional adjustment for community incidence. During the intervention and control periods, 69,248 patients and 69,104 patients, respectively, were included for a total of 138,352 patients. Patients had a median age of 45.0 years [31.0, 63.0], and women represented 45.7% of the patients. During the intervention period, 6,332 asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients completed the questionnaire; 4,283 were screened for SARS-CoV-2 by nurses, leading to 224 new SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses. A total of 1,859 patients versus 2,084 patients were newly diagnosed during the intervention and control periods, respectively (adjusted analysis: 26.7/1,000 versus 26.2/1,000, adjusted relative risk: 1.02 (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.94, 1.11]; p = 0.634)). The main limitation of this study is that it was conducted in a rapidly evolving epidemiological context.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study showed that intensified screening for SARS-CoV-2 in EDs was unlikely to identify a higher proportion of newly diagnosed patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04756609.

Sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 RNA Fragments in Wastewater Detects the Spread of New Variants during Major Events

The sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in wastewater is an unbiased method to detect the spread of emerging variants and to track regional infection dynamics, which is especially useful in case of limited testing and clinical sequencing. To test how major international events influence the spread of new variants we have sequenced SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the wastewater samples of Davos, Landquart, Lostallo, and St. Moritz in the Swiss canton of Grisons in the time around the international sports competitions in Davos and St. Moritz in December 2021, and additionally in May 2022 and January 2023 in Davos and St. Moritz during the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos. The prevalence of the variants identified from the wastewater sequencing data showed that the Omicron variant BA.1 had spread in Davos and St. Moritz during the international sporting events hosted there in December 2021. This spread was associated with an increase in case numbers, while it was not observed in Landquart and Lostallo. Another instance of new variant spread occurred during the WEF in January 2023, when the Omicron variant BA.2.75 arrived in Davos but not in St. Moritz. We can therefore conclude that major international events promote the spread of new variants in the respective host region, which has important implications for the protective measures that should be taken.

Effectiveness of testing, contact tracing and isolation interventions among the general population on reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review

We conducted a systematic literature review of general population testing, contact tracing, case isolation and contact quarantine interventions to assess their effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, as implemented in real-world settings. We designed a broad search strategy and aimed to identify peer-reviewed studies of any design provided there was a quantitative measure of effectiveness on a transmission outcome. Studies that assessed the effect of testing or diagnosis on disease outcomes via treatment, but did not assess a transmission outcome, were not included. We focused on interventions implemented among the general population rather than in specific settings; these were from anywhere in the world and published any time after 1 January 2020 until the end of 2022. From 26 720 titles and abstracts, 1181 were reviewed as full text, and 25 met our inclusion criteria. These 25 studies included one randomized control trial (RCT) and the remaining 24 analysed empirical data and made some attempt to control for confounding. Studies included were categorized by the type of intervention: contact tracing (seven studies); specific testing strategies (12 studies); strategies for isolating cases/contacts (four studies); and 'test, trace, isolate' (TTI) as a part of a package of interventions (two studies). None of the 25 studies were rated at low risk of bias and many were rated as serious risk of bias, particularly due to the likely presence of uncontrolled confounding factors, which was a major challenge in assessing the independent effects of TTI in observational studies. These confounding factors are to be expected from observational studies during an on-going pandemic, when the emphasis was on reducing the epidemic burden rather than trial design. Findings from these 25 studies suggested an important public health role for testing followed by isolation, especially where mass and serial testing was used to reduce transmission. Some of the most compelling analyses came from examining fine-grained within-country data on contact tracing; while broader studies which compared behaviour between countries also often found TTI led to reduced transmission and mortality, this was not universal. There was limited evidence for the benefit of isolation of cases/contacts away from the home environment. One study, an RCT, showed that daily testing of contacts could be a viable strategy to replace lengthy quarantine of contacts. Based on the scarcity of robust empirical evidence, we were not able to draw any firm quantitative conclusions about the quantitative impact of TTI interventions in different epidemic contexts. While the majority of studies found that testing, tracing and isolation reduced transmission, evidence for the scale of this impact is only available for specific scenarios and hence is not necessarily generalizable. Our review therefore emphasizes the need to conduct robust experimental studies that help inform the likely quantitative impact of different TTI interventions on transmission and their optimal design. Work is needed to support such studies in the context of future emerging epidemics, along with assessments of the cost-effectiveness of TTI interventions, which was beyond the scope of this review but will be critical to decision-making. This article is part of the theme issue 'The effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions on the COVID-19 pandemic: the evidence'.