Literature DB >> 35508273

Diagnostic strategy of SARS-CoV-2 for containment under China's zero-COVID-19 policy.

Zhenzhou Wan1, Renfei Lu2, Yongjuan Zhao3, Chiyu Zhang4.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  Omicron variant; RT-qPCR; Rapid antigen test; SARS-CoV-2; Zero-COVID-19 policy

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35508273      PMCID: PMC9056992          DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2022.04.044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Infect        ISSN: 0163-4453            Impact factor:   38.637


× No keyword cloud information.
Dear Editor, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents a serious global public health emergency. Since late 2021, a new variant Omicron of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spread rapidly around the world, and raised a new global health concern. The Omicron variant was characterized by substantially higher transmissibility, lower pathogenicity than the Delta variant, and resistance to vaccine-induced immunity and antiviral drugs. , The elderly are still the highest risk group for the Omicron variant, and COVID-19-associated deaths. The Omicron variant had caused large outbreak in several cities/regions (e.g. Hong Kong, Shenzhen and Jilin) of China in early 2022, forming a huge challenge to the “zero-COVID-19 policy” of China. Currently, the Omicron variant is actively circulating in Shanghai, the largest city of China. To eliminate the pandemic, Shanghai implemented community closed-off management in late March 2022. “zero-COVID-19 policy” is an effective route to reduce health damage in the mid- and long-term, and a cheaper path towards economic recovery. The current national situation, including a very large population size, many big cities (91 with over 5 million people, including 18 with over 10 million people) with high population density, aging society (age over 60 year-old: 18.7% of total population), and imbalanced medical resources, determines that China has to implement the “dynamic zero-COVID-19 policy”. If China allows the “living with COVID-19 policy”, outbreak of the Omicron variant in one or more cities will inevitably lead to not only the overwhelming of medical and public health resources, but also the shortage of quarantine facilities and daily necessities, thereby causing a humanitarian disaster. SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing plays a crucial role in the containment of COVID-19. , Reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) is widely used as the gold standard for detection and confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection due to its high sensitivity (>500–1000 copies/mL), specificity, and multiplex detection feature. However, RT-qPCR is time-consuming and costly, and requires sophisticated equipment and highly trained personnel. A city-wide broad RT-qPCR screening in a short timeframe will inevitably occupy substantial public health and medical resources, including a large numbers of specialists and volunteers, and a lot of PCR Labs. Frequent and/or daily population-based broad RT-qPCR screenings not only largely aggravate public health burden (e.g. cost, personnel and resources), but also increase the risk of exposure and infection due to large-scale concentrated sampling. The number of infected persons is high in COVID-19 affected areas at the early stage of closed-off management, and early and rapid finding of infected individuals with high infectivity are of particular importance to control the spreading of COVID-19. However, concentrated sampling, sample transport, and large sample size will result in one or more days delay of the RT-qPCR results. As a cheap and easy process point-of-care testing (POCT) method, rapid antigen test (RAT) can well capture infected individuals with high viral load and infectivity in spite of relatively low detection sensitivity (10e4–5 copies/mL). When a city faces an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, especially Omicron variant, which diagnostic strategies work best and should be implemented under community closed-off management should be carefully considered. Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection showed that the virus in nose and throat can be detected by RT-qPCR assay on the second day after infection, and then viral load rises steeply and reaches a peak at the level of 10e7–8 copies/mL about on the 5th-6th days (Fig. 1 ). Infected individuals remain high level of viral load (>10e4–5 copies/mL), and are ready to spread the virus to other people during 3–9 days of infection, , which is called transmission window (Fig. 1). Since day 10, most cases develop neutralizing antibodies to clear virus and become less or not contagious.
Fig. 1

Diagnostic schedule of SARS-CoV-2 under zero-COVID-19 policy. Colored lines shows the viral load dynamics of individuals infected by SARS-CoV-2 at different time-points. The curves were drawn based on the data from ref 8. The detection lines of both RAT and RT-qPCR assays are shown by colored thick lines. C1-n show currently infected cases, and N1-n show newly infected cases since community closed-off management. RAT: rapid antigen test.

Diagnostic schedule of SARS-CoV-2 under zero-COVID-19 policy. Colored lines shows the viral load dynamics of individuals infected by SARS-CoV-2 at different time-points. The curves were drawn based on the data from ref 8. The detection lines of both RAT and RT-qPCR assays are shown by colored thick lines. C1-n show currently infected cases, and N1-n show newly infected cases since community closed-off management. RAT: rapid antigen test. According to the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 shedding, here we take the advantages of both RAT and RT-qPCR assays, and propose a high-efficacy and cost-effective diagnostic strategy that combines high-frequency self-RAT and low-frequency RT-qPCR assays to eliminate community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 under closed-off management (Fig. 1). The strategy suggests all persons to perform once self-RAT at home on the first day of implementing community closed-off management, followed by 3–4 times of population-based broad RT-qPCR screenings with intervals of 6 days (i.e. the 2nd, 8th, 14th and 20th day) since the second day, and at least two times of self-RAT at home within each 6-day interval (Fig. 1). The result of each self-RAT should be timely returned to community managers or volunteers, or uploaded to an online disease prevention and control platform (if available). With this strategy, most currently infected individuals (e.g. C1-C8) during transmission window can be captured by the first self-RAT at home, and timely quarantined, which avoids the potential risk of them to spread the virus to other people during concentrated sampling for RT-qPCR screening. Current cases (C-2-C10) on days 3–14 after infection will be identified by the first RT-qPCR screening (Fig. 1). Although the earlier cases with infection over 14 days might be missed by both the first self-RAT and RT-qPCR screenings, they either have very low viral load, or have returned to be negative, and are unable to or very less likely spread the virus. The cases C11 and newly infected individuals N1-N5, as well as any cases during transmission window (high viral load > 10e4–5 copies/mL) but missed by both the first self-RAT and RT-qPCR screenings, can be found by subsequent self-RAT and RT-qPCR screenings. In theory, under strict community closed-off management, the vast majority of infected cases can be effectively found and quarantined after three rounds (about two weeks) of broad RT-qPCR and multiplex times of self-RAT screenings. Since then, new infections may occur sporadically, but can be picked up by further self-RAT and/or RT-qPCR screenings. The pooling sample strategy with 5, 10 or even 20 samples in a pool is very effective in RT-qPCR screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection under low infection rate. To ensure the sensitivity of RT-qPCR test, multiple swabs pooling in a single tube, rather than media pooling, was widely used in China. Given the transmission feature of SARS-CoV-2, the pooling strategy can be optimized in a family unit, and a pool of 2–5 families can be used for population-based broad RT-qPCR screenings. Importantly, any pooling strategy should not be subjected to special groups including public health and healthcare workers, volunteers, drivers, deliveryman, and shop assistants. Nucleic acid POCT methods have comparable sensitivity to RT-qPCR. Recently, RNA extraction-free probe-based RT-LAMP assays were developed for rapid, sensitive, and specific detection of SARS-CoV-2. , The features of nucleic acid POCT assays, including easier operation, shorter sample-to-result time (about 30 min) and less dependence on sophisticated devices, enable their application at home. The use of nucleic acid POCT assays together with or as an alternative to RAT will further improve the efficiency of population-based broad SARS-CoV-2 screenings.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that, they have no conflict of interests.
  10 in total

1.  Rethinking Covid-19 Test Sensitivity - A Strategy for Containment.

Authors:  Michael J Mina; Roy Parker; Daniel B Larremore
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Safety, tolerability and viral kinetics during SARS-CoV-2 human challenge in young adults.

Authors:  Ben Killingley; Alex J Mann; Mariya Kalinova; Alison Boyers; Niluka Goonawardane; Jie Zhou; Kate Lindsell; Samanjit S Hare; Jonathan Brown; Rebecca Frise; Emma Smith; Claire Hopkins; Nicolas Noulin; Brandon Löndt; Tom Wilkinson; Stephen Harden; Helen McShane; Mark Baillet; Anthony Gilbert; Michael Jacobs; Christine Charman; Priya Mande; Jonathan S Nguyen-Van-Tam; Malcolm G Semple; Robert C Read; Neil M Ferguson; Peter J Openshaw; Garth Rapeport; Wendy S Barclay; Andrew P Catchpole; Christopher Chiu
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 87.241

3.  Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA using RT-LAMP and molecular beacons.

Authors:  Scott Sherrill-Mix; Young Hwang; Aoife M Roche; Abigail Glascock; Susan R Weiss; Yize Li; Leila Haddad; Peter Deraska; Caitlin Monahan; Andrew Kromer; Jevon Graham-Wooten; Louis J Taylor; Benjamin S Abella; Arupa Ganguly; Ronald G Collman; Gregory D Van Duyne; Frederic D Bushman
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 13.583

4.  SARS-CoV-2 detection, viral load and infectivity over the course of an infection.

Authors:  Kieran A Walsh; Karen Jordan; Barbara Clyne; Daniela Rohde; Linda Drummond; Paula Byrne; Susan Ahern; Paul G Carty; Kirsty K O'Brien; Eamon O'Murchu; Michelle O'Neill; Susan M Smith; Máirín Ryan; Patricia Harrington
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 6.072

5.  Antigen-Based Testing but Not Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Correlates With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Viral Culture.

Authors:  Andrew Pekosz; Valentin Parvu; Maggie Li; Jeffrey C Andrews; Yukari C Manabe; Salma Kodsi; Devin S Gary; Celine Roger-Dalbert; Jeffry Leitch; Charles K Cooper
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2021-01-20       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  Multiplex, Real-Time, Point-of-care RT-LAMP for SARS-CoV-2 Detection Using the HFman Probe.

Authors:  Yajuan Dong; Yongjuan Zhao; Shenwei Li; Zhenzhou Wan; Renfei Lu; Xianguang Yang; Guoying Yu; Julien Reboud; Jonathan M Cooper; Zhengan Tian; Chiyu Zhang
Journal:  ACS Sens       Date:  2022-02-22       Impact factor: 7.711

Review 7.  Current epidemiological and clinical features of COVID-19; a global perspective from China.

Authors:  Huilan Tu; Sheng Tu; Shiqi Gao; Anwen Shao; Jifang Sheng
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2020-04-18       Impact factor: 38.637

8.  Rapid antigen detection alone may not be sufficient for early diagnosis and/or mass screening of COVID-19.

Authors:  Zhenzhou Wan; Yongjuan Zhao; Renfei Lu; Yajuan Dong; Chiyu Zhang
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2021-07-27       Impact factor: 2.327

9.  Attenuated fusogenicity and pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.

Authors:  Rigel Suzuki; Daichi Yamasoba; Izumi Kimura; Lei Wang; Mai Kishimoto; Jumpei Ito; Yuhei Morioka; Naganori Nao; Hesham Nasser; Keiya Uriu; Yusuke Kosugi; Masumi Tsuda; Yasuko Orba; Michihito Sasaki; Ryo Shimizu; Ryoko Kawabata; Kumiko Yoshimatsu; Hiroyuki Asakura; Mami Nagashima; Kenji Sadamasu; Kazuhisa Yoshimura; Hirofumi Sawa; Terumasa Ikeda; Takashi Irie; Keita Matsuno; Shinya Tanaka; Takasuke Fukuhara; Kei Sato
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 10.  The emergence and epidemic characteristics of the highly mutated SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.

Authors:  Dandan Tian; Yanhong Sun; Huihong Xu; Qing Ye
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 20.693

  10 in total
  2 in total

Review 1.  The Advantages of the Zero-COVID-19 Strategy.

Authors:  Zhaohui Su; Ali Cheshmehzangi; Dean McDonnell; Junaid Ahmad; Sabina Šegalo; Yu-Tao Xiang; Claudimar Pereira da Veiga
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 4.614

2.  Age and Sex Differences Among Mildly Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Patients with Omicron Infection in 2022 in Shanghai, China.

Authors:  Can Feng; Shihui Hong; Rong Fan; Xinjie Shi; Zhao Ma; Changgui Li; Chenghao Liu; Cong He; Min Fan; Ruiping Wang
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2022-08-31
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.