Insights into the practical effectiveness of RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 from serologic data, a cohort study

Author:

Zhang Zhen,Bi Qifang,Fang Shisong,Wei Lan,Wang Xin,He Jianfan,Wu Yongsheng,Liu Xiaojian,Gao Wei,Zhang Renli,Gong Wenfeng,Su Qiru,Azman Andrew S,Lessler JustinORCID,Zou Xuan

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundVirologic detection of SARS-CoV-2 through Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) has limitations for surveillance. Serologic tests can be an important complementary approach.ObjectiveAssess the practical performance of RT-PCR based surveillance protocols, and the extent of undetected SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Shenzhen, China.DesignCohort study nested in a public health response.SettingShenzhen, China; January-May 2020.Participants880 PCR-negative close-contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases and 400 residents without known exposure (main analysis). Fifty-seven PCR-positive case contacts (timing analysis).MeasurementsVirological testing by RT-PCR. Measurement of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in PCR-negative contacts 2-15 weeks after initial testing using total Ab ELISA. Rates of undetected infection, performance of RT-PCR over the course of infection, and characteristics of seropositive but PCR-negative individuals were assessed.ResultsThe adjusted seropositivity rate for total Ab among 880 PCR-negative close-contacts was 4.1% (95%CI, 2.9% to 5.7%), significantly higher than among residents without known exposure to cases (0.0%, 95%CI, 0.0% to 1.0%). PCR-positive cases were 8.0 times (RR; 95% CI, 5.3 to 12.7) more likely to report symptoms than the PCR-negative individuals who were seropositive, but otherwise similar. RT-PCR missed 36% (95%CI, 28% to 44%) of infected close-contacts, and false negative rates appear to be highly dependent on stage of infection.LimitationsNo serological data were available on PCR-positive cases. Sample size was limited, and only 20% of PCR-negative contacts met inclusion criteria.ConclusionEven rigorous RT-PCR testing protocols may miss a significant proportion of infections, perhaps in part due to difficulties timing testing of asymptomatics for optimal sensitivity. Surveillance and control protocols relying on RT-PCR were, nevertheless, able to contain community spread in Shenzhen.Funding sourceBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Special Foundation of Science and Technology Innovation Strategy of Guangdong Province of China, and Key Project of Shenzhen Science and Technology Innovation Commission, Shenzhen, China

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3