Search

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antigen tests have been used extensively for screening during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemics. However, the real-world sensitivity and specificity of the two testing procedures in the field have not yet been estimated without assuming that the PCR constitutes a gold standard test. We use latent class models to estimate the in situ performance of both tests using data from the Danish national registries. We find that the specificity of both tests is very high (>99.7%), while the sensitivities are 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92.8%-98.4%) and 53.8% (95% CI: 49.8%-57.9%) for the PCR and antigen tests, respectively. These findings have implications for the use of confirmatory PCR tests following a positive antigen test result: we estimate that serial testing is counterproductive at higher prevalence levels., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Medical Virology Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

New lineages of SARS-CoV-2 are of potential concern due to higher transmissibility, risk of severe outcomes, and/or escape from neutralizing antibodies. Lineage B.1.1.7 (the Alpha variant) became dominant in early 2021, but the association between transmissibility and risk factors, such as age of primary case and viral load remains poorly understood. Here, we used comprehensive administrative data from Denmark, comprising the full population (January 11 to February 7, 2021), to estimate household transmissibility. This study included 5,241 households with primary cases; 808 were infected with lineage B.1.1.7 and 4,433 with other lineages. Here, we report an attack rate of 38% in households with a primary case infected with B.1.1.7 and 27% in households with other lineages. Primary cases infected with B.1.1.7 had an increased transmissibility of 1.5-1.7 times that of primary cases infected with other lineages. The increased transmissibility of B.1.1.7 was multiplicative across age and viral load., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: The more infectious SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 rapidly spread in Europe after December, 2020, and a concern that B.1.1.7 could cause more severe disease has been raised. Taking advantage of Denmark's high RT-PCR testing and whole genome sequencing capacities, we used national health register data to assess the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation in individuals infected with B.1.1.7 compared with those with other SARS-CoV-2 lineages., Methods: We did an observational cohort study of all SARS-CoV-2-positive cases confirmed by RT-PCR in Denmark, sampled between Jan 1 and March 24, 2021, with 14 days of follow-up for COVID-19 hospitalisation. Cases were identified in the national COVID-19 surveillance system database, which includes data from the Danish Microbiology Database (RT-PCR test results), the Danish COVID-19 Genome Consortium, the National Patient Registry, the Civil Registration System, as well as other nationwide registers. Among all cases, COVID-19 hospitalisation was defined as first admission lasting longer than 12 h within 14 days of a sample with a positive RT-PCR result. The study population and main analysis were restricted to the proportion of cases with viral genome data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) of admission according to infection with B.1.1.7 versus other co-existing lineages with a Poisson regression model with robust SEs, adjusted a priori for sex, age, calendar time, region, and comorbidities. The contribution of each covariate to confounding of the crude RR was evaluated afterwards by a stepwise forward inclusion., Findings: Between Jan 1 and March 24, 2021, 50 958 individuals with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test and at least 14 days of follow-up for hospitalisation were identified; 30 572 (60·0%) had genome data, of whom 10 544 (34·5%) were infected with B.1.1.7. 1944 (6·4%) individuals had a COVID-19 hospitalisation and of these, 571 (29·4%) had a B.1.1.7 infection and 1373 (70·6%) had an infection with other SARS-CoV-2 lineages. Although the overall number of hospitalisations decreased during the study period, the proportion of individuals infected with B.1.1.7 increased from 3·5% to 92·1% per week. B.1.1.7 was associated with a crude RR of hospital admission of 0·79 (95% CI 0·72-0·87; p<0·0001) and an adjusted RR of 1·42 (95% CI 1·25-1·60; p<0·0001). The adjusted RR was increased in all strata of age and calendar period-the two covariates with the largest contribution to confounding of the crude RR., Interpretation: Infection with SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 was associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation compared with that of other lineages in an analysis adjusted for covariates. The overall effect on hospitalisations in Denmark was lessened due to a strict lockdown, but our findings could support hospital preparedness and modelling of the projected impact of the epidemic in countries with uncontrolled spread of B.1.1.7., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To examine the impact of ACE inhibitor (ACE-I)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use on rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection and adverse outcomes., Methods: This nationwide case-control and cohort study included all individuals in Denmark tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA with PCR from 27 February 2020 to 26 July 2020. We estimated confounder-adjusted ORs for a positive test among all SARS-CoV-2 tested, and inverse probability of treatment weighted 30-day risk and risk ratios (RRs) of hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality comparing current ACE-I/ARB use with calcium channel blocker (CCB) use and with non-use., Results: The study included 13 501 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive and 1 088 695 PCR-negative individuals. Users of ACE-I/ARB had a marginally increased rate of a positive PCR when compared with CCB users (aOR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.37), but not when compared with non-users (aOR 1.00 95% CI 0.92 to 1.09).Among PCR-positive individuals, 1466 (11%) were ACE-I/ARB users. The weighted risk of hospitalisation was 36.5% in ACE-I/ARB users and 43.3% in CCB users (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02). The risk of ICU admission was 6.3% in ACE-I/ARB users and 5.4% in CCB users (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.16), while the 30-day mortality was 12.3% in ACE-I/ARB users and 13.9% in CCB users (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.30). The associations were similar when ACE-I/ARB users were compared with non-users., Conclusions: ACE-I/ARB use was associated neither with a consistently increased rate nor with adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our findings support the current recommendation of continuing use of ACE-Is/ARBs during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic., Trial Registration Number: EUPAS34887., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CFC, UH-J, RWT and HTS have not received any personal fees, grants, travel grants or teaching grants from companies, but the Department of Clinical Epidemiology is involved in studies with funding from various companies as research grants to (and administered by) Aarhus University. MR, LCL, AP and JH have participated in industry-funded projects with money paid to their employer, the University of Southern Denmark. MM has received speaker or advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Novo Nordisk., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Anton Pottegård,1 Kasper Bruun Kristensen,1 Mette Reilev,1 Lars Christian Lund,1 Martin Thomsen Ernst,1 Jesper Hallas,1,2 Reimar Wernich Thomsen,3 Christian Fynbo Christiansen,3 Henrik Toft Sørensen,3,4 Nanna Borup Johansen,5 Henrik Støvring,1,6 Steffen Christensen,7 Marianne Kragh Thomsen,8 Anders Husby,9 Marianne Voldstedlund,10 Jesper Kjær,11 Nikolai C Brun5 1Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; 2Department of Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark; 3Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; 4Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; 5Department of Medical Evaluation and Biostatistics, Danish Medicines Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark; 6Department of Public Health – Biostatistics, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark; 7Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; 8Department of Clinical Microbiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; 9Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark; 10Infection Preparedness, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark; 11Data Analytics Center, Danish Medicines Agency, Copenhagen, DenmarkCorrespondence: Anton PottegårdClinical Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, JB Winsløws Vej 19, 2, Odense DK-5000, DenmarkTel +45 28913340Email apottegaard@health.sdu.dkBackground: To facilitate research on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a prospective cohort of all Danish residents tested for SARS-CoV-2 in Denmark is established.Data Structure: All Danish residents tested by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reactions (RT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 in Denmark are included. The cohort is identified using the Danish Microbiology Database. Individual-level record linkage between administrative and health-care registries is facilitated by the Danish Civil Registration System. Information on outcomes related to SARS-CoV-2 infection includes hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and death and is retrieved from the five administrative Danish regions, the Danish National Patient Registry, and the Danish Register of Causes of Death. The Patient Registry further provides a complete hospital contact history of somatic and psychiatric conditions and procedures. Data on all prescriptions filled at community pharmacies are available from the Danish National Prescription Registry. Health-care authorization status is obtained from the Danish Register of Healthcare Professionals. Finally, selected laboratory values are obtained from the Register of Laboratory Results for Research. The cohort is governed by a steering committee with representatives from the Danish Medicines Agency, Statens Serum Institut, the Danish Health Authority, the Danish Health Data Authority, Danish Patients, the Faculties of Health Sciences at the Danish universities, and Danish regions. The steering committee welcomes suggestions for research studies and collaborations. Research proposals will be prioritized based on timeliness and potential clinical and public health implications. All research protocols assessing specific hypotheses for medicines will be made publicly available using the European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorisation Studies.Conclusion: The Danish COVID-19 cohort includes all Danish residents with an RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. Through individual-level linkage with existing Danish health and administrative registries, this is a valuable data source for epidemiological research on SARS-CoV-2.Keywords: Covid-19, SARS-CoV-2, epidemiology, follow-up, database, prognosis, prospective cohort