Search

Objectives: Uncovering and addressing disparities in infectious disease outbreaks require a rapid, methodical understanding of local epidemiology. We conducted a seroprevalence study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Holyoke, Massachusetts, a majority Hispanic city with high levels of socio-economic disadvantage to estimate seroprevalence and identify disparities in SARS-CoV-2 infection., Methods: We invited 2000 randomly sampled households between 11/5/2020 and 12/31/2020 to complete questionnaires and provide dried blood spots for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. We calculated seroprevalence based on the presence of IgG antibodies using a weighted Bayesian procedure that incorporated uncertainty in antibody test sensitivity and specificity and accounted for household clustering., Results: Two hundred eighty households including 472 individuals were enrolled. Three hundred twenty-eight individuals underwent antibody testing. Citywide seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG was 13.1% (95% CI 6.9-22.3) compared to 9.8% of the population infected based on publicly reported cases. Seroprevalence was 16.1% (95% CI 6.2-31.8) among Hispanic individuals compared to 9.4% (95% CI 4.6-16.4) among non-Hispanic white individuals. Seroprevalence was higher among Spanish-speaking households (21.9%; 95% CI 8.3-43.9) compared to English-speaking households (10.2%; 95% CI 5.2-18.0) and among individuals in high social vulnerability index (SVI) areas based on the CDC SVI (14.4%; 95% CI 7.1-25.5) compared to low SVI areas (8.2%; 95% CI 3.1-16.9)., Conclusions: The SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence in a city with high levels of social vulnerability was 13.1% during the pre-vaccination period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Hispanic individuals and individuals in communities characterized by high SVI were at the highest risk of infection. Public health interventions should be designed to ensure that individuals in high social vulnerability communities have access to the tools to combat COVID-19., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Rapid IgM/IgG antibody tests were largely used in lieu of RT-PCR tests as part of COVID-19 public health response activities in Lima, Peru. To assess their utility, we explored the relationship between the time since onset of several COVID-19-related symptoms and the sensitivity of a rapid combined IgM/IgG antibody test., Methods: We collected data from a community sample of individuals (n = 492) who received concurrent RT-PCR and rapid IgM/IgG antibody testing between May 2020 and March 2021. We estimated the sensitivity of the antibody test, against the RT-PCR test, by weeks since symptom onset via segmented regression analysis., Results: The overall sensitivity of the rapid IgM/IgG antibody test was 46.7% (95% CI, 42.4-51.2%). Among 372 (75.6%) participants who reported COVID-19-related symptoms, sensitivity increased from 30.4% (95% CI, 24.7-36.6%) in week 1 after symptom onset to 83.3% (95% CI, 41.6-98.4%) in week 4. The test sensitivity increased by 31.9% (95% CI, 24.8-39.0%) per week until week 2 to 3, then decreased by - 6.0% (95% CI, - 25.7-13.7%) per week thereafter., Conclusion: Rapid antibody tests are a poor substitute for RT-PCR testing, regardless of presenting symptoms. This highlights the need for future pandemic planning to include timely and equitable access to gold-standard diagnostics, treatment, and vaccination., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Point-of-care antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) to detect Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) represent a scalable tool for surveillance of active SARS-CoV-2 infections in the population. Data on the performance of these tests in real-world community settings are paramount to guide their implementation to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the performance characteristics of the CareStart COVID-19 Antigen test (CareStart) in a community testing site in Holyoke, Massachusetts. We compared CareStart to a SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) reference, both using anterior nasal swab samples. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and the expected positive and negative predictive values at different SARS-CoV-2 prevalence estimates. We performed 666 total tests on 591 unique individuals. 573 (86%) were asymptomatic. There were 52 positive tests by RT-qPCR. The sensitivity of CareStart was 49.0% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 34.8-63.4) and specificity was 99.5% (95% CI 98.5-99.9). Among positive RT-qPCR tests, the median cycle threshold (Ct) was significantly lower in samples that tested positive on CareStart. Using a Ct ≤ 30 as a benchmark for positivity increased the sensitivity of the test to 64.9% (95% CI 47.5-79.8). Our study shows that CareStart has a high specificity and moderate sensitivity. The utility of RDTs, such as CareStart, in mass implementation should prioritize use cases in which a higher specificity is more important, such as triage tests to rule-in active infections in community surveillance programs., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Widely available and reliable testing for SARS-CoV-2 is essential for the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We estimated the diagnostic performance of reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) performed on saliva and the SD Biosensor STANDARD Q antigen test performed on nasopharyngeal swab compared to the reference standard, nasopharyngeal swab (NP) RT-PCR. We enrolled participants living and/or seeking care in health facilities in North Lima, Peru from November 2020 to January 2021. Consenting participants underwent same-day RT-PCR on both saliva and nasopharyngeal swab specimens, antigen testing on a nasopharyngeal swab specimen, pulse oximetry, and standardized symptom assessment. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for the nasopharyngeal antigen and saliva RT-PCR compared to nasopharyngeal RT-PCR. Of 896 participants analyzed, 567 (63.3%) had acute signs/symptoms of COVID-19. The overall sensitivity and specificity of saliva RT-PCR were 85.8% and 98.1%, respectively. Among participants with and without acute signs/symptoms of COVID-19, saliva sensitivity was 87.3% and 37.5%, respectively. Saliva sensitivity was 97.4% and 56.0% among participants with cycle threshold ( C T ) values of ≤30 and >30 on nasopharyngeal RT-PCR, respectively. The overall sensitivity and specificity of nasopharyngeal antigen were 73.2% and 99.4%, respectively. The sensitivity of the nasopharyngeal antigen test was 75.1% and 12.5% among participants with and without acute signs/symptoms of COVID-19, and 91.2% and 26.7% among participants with C T values of ≤30 and >30 on nasopharyngeal RT-PCR, respectively. Saliva RT-PCR achieved the WHO-recommended threshold of >80% for sensitivity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, while the SD Biosensor nasopharyngeal antigen test did not. IMPORTANCE In this diagnostic validation study of 896 participants in Peru, saliva reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) had >80% sensitivity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 among all-comers and symptomatic individuals, while the SD Biosensor STANDARD Q antigen test performed on nasopharyngeal swab had <80% sensitivity, except for participants whose same-day nasopharyngeal RT-PCR results showed cycle threshold values of <30, consistent with a high viral load in the nasopharynx. The specificity was high for both tests. Our results demonstrate that saliva sampling could serve as an alternative noninvasive technique for RT-PCR diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. The role of nasopharyngeal antigen testing is more limited; when community transmission is low, it may be used for mass screenings among asymptomatic individuals with high testing frequency. Among symptomatic individuals, the nasopharyngeal antigen test may be relied upon for 4 to 8 days after symptom onset, or in those likely to have high viral load, whereupon it showed >80% sensitivity.

We report severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody positivity among market and city bus depot workers in Lima, Peru. Among 1285 vendors from 8 markets, prevalence ranged from 27% to 73%. Among 488 workers from 3 city bus depots, prevalence ranged from 11% to 47%. Self-reported symptoms were infrequent., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background Few studies have examined the burden of postacute sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (PASC) in low- and middle-income countries. We sought to characterize PASC with self-reported questionnaires and clinical examinations of end-organ function in Lima, Peru. Methods From January to July 2021, we recruited participants at least 8 weeks after COVID-19 diagnosis from a case registry in Lima, Peru. We evaluated participants for PASC with questionnaires, neuropsychiatric evaluations, chest X-ray, spirometry, electrocardiogram, and echocardiogram. We used multivariable models to identify risk factors for PASC. Results We assessed 989 participants for PASC at a median 4.7 months after diagnosis. Clinically significant respiratory symptoms were reported by 68.3% of participants, particularly those who had been severely ill during acute COVID-19, and were associated with cardiac findings of ventricular hypertrophy or dilation on echocardiogram. Neuropsychiatric questionnaires were consistent with depression in 20.7% and cognitive impairment in 8.0%. Female sex and older age were associated with increased risk of respiratory (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.36 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.69–3.31] and aOR, 1.01 [95% CI, 1.00–1.03], respectively) and neuropsychiatric sequelae (aOR, 2.99 [95% CI, 2.16–4.18] and aOR, 1.02 [95% CI, 1.01–1.03], respectively). Conclusions COVID-19 survivors in Lima, Peru, experienced frequent postacute respiratory symptoms and depression, particularly among older and female participants. Clinical examinations highlighted the need for cardiopulmonary rehabilitation among persons with severe COVID-19; psychosocial support may be required among all COVID-19 survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]