Dataset Information

Evaluation of potential COVID-19 recurrence in patients with late repeat positive SARS-CoV-2 testing.

ABSTRACT:

Background

SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and reactivation has mostly been described in case reports. We therefore investigated the epidemiology of recurrent COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2.

Methods

Among patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March 11 and July 31, 2020 within an integrated healthcare system, we identified patients with a recurrent positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay ≥60 days after an initial positive test. To assign an overall likelihood of COVID-19 recurrence, we combined quantitative data from initial and recurrent positive RT-PCR cycle thresholds-a value inversely correlated with viral RNA burden- with a clinical recurrence likelihood assigned based on independent, standardized case review by two physicians. "Probable" or "possible" recurrence by clinical assessment was confirmed as the final recurrence likelihood only if a cycle threshold value obtained ≥60 days after initial testing was lower than its preceding cycle threshold or if the patient had an interval negative RT-PCR.

Results

Among 23,176 patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, 1,301 (5.6%) had at least one additional SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCRs assay ≥60 days later. Of 122 testing positive, 114 had sufficient data for evaluation. The median interval to the recurrent positive RT-PCR was 85.5 (IQR 74-107) days. After combining clinical and RT-PCR cycle threshold data, four patients (3.5%) met criteria for probable COVID-19 recurrence. All four exhibited symptoms at recurrence and three required a higher level of medical care compared to their initial diagnosis. After including six additional patients (5.3%) with possible recurrence, recurrence incidence was 4.3 (95% CI 2.1-7.9) cases per 10,000 COVID-19 patients.

Conclusions

Only 0.04% of all COVID-19 patients in our health system experienced probable or possible recurrence; 90% of repeat positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCRs were not consistent with true recurrence. Our pragmatic approach combining clinical and quantitative RT-PCR data could aid assessment of COVID-19 reinfection or reactivation by clinicians and public health personnel.

SUBMITTER: Peltan ID

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8096096 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNursing homes are high-risk COVID-19 settings with residents who are typically older and have multiple comorbidities. SARS-CoV-2 testing occurs frequently in nursing homes, with public health guidance suggesting that repeat testing is generally not warranted in the 90 days following initial positive test results. Interpretation of repeat positive tests beyond 90 days is challenging and the consequences of decisions following these tests are significant.MethodsWe utilized a surveillance system for COVID-19 to identify Connecticut nursing home residents who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RNA-based testing ≥ 90 days after initial positive results. We analyzed statewide nursing home testing data over a 9-month period, from the first Connecticut nursing home case identified on March 15 through December 15, 2020, when nursing home COVID-19 vaccinations began in Connecticut.FindingsWe identified 156 residents (median age 75 years) with positive RNA-based PCR tests occurring ≥90 days after an initial positive test. Residents with repeat positives tests represented approximately 2.6% (156/6,079) of nursing home residents surviving beyond 90 days of their initial SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis statewide since the start of the pandemic, with a median time to repeat positivity of 135 days (range 90-245 days). Deaths were reported in 12.8% (20/156) of residents following the repeat positive test, with 80% (16/20) having one or more intervening negative RT-PCR tests prior to the repeat positive test.InterpretationOur analysis suggests that repeat positive testing in nursing home populations may exceed those reported in younger age groups. Repeat positive tests beyond 90 days may accompany severe outcomes, and should be prospectively investigated with genomic, virologic and additional data, when feasible. Data shed light on the duration of protective immunity following natural infection in this subset of largely elderly and medically frail individuals.FundingThis work was conducted in the context of the Connecticut DPH COVID-19 response and not supported by specific funding.