Submit a comment
Abstract
BACKGROUND SARS-CoV-2 has evolved subvariants since the emergence of the Omicron variant in 2021. Whether these changes impact viral shedding and transmissibility is not known.METHODS POSITIVES is a prospective longitudinal cohort of individuals with mild SARS-CoV-2 infection. Ambulatory, immunocompetent participants who did not receive antivirals self-administered 6 anterior nasal swabs over 15 days. Samples were analyzed by qPCR to quantify viral RNA, semiquantitative viral culture to detect shedding of replication-competent virus, and whole-genome sequencing to classify subvariants. Our predictor of interest was Omicron subvariants: BA.1x, BA.2x, BA.4/5x, XBB.x, and JN.x. Outcomes included RNA levels and duration of shedding replication-competent virus. We additionally explored whether symptoms are a valid marker for ending isolation.RESULTS The median peak nasal SARS-CoV-2 RNA (6.0–6.3 log10 RNA copies/mL), median days to peak RNA (4–5 days), median days to undetectable viral RNA (12–14 days), and median days to negative viral culture (4–8 days) were similar across Omicron subvariants. Number and duration of symptoms were also similar. For all subvariants, a sizeable percentage (range 27.5%–56.0%) shed replication-competent virus after fever resolution and improvement of symptoms.CONCLUSION Despite ongoing viral evolution, key aspects of viral dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including the duration of shedding replication-competent virus, have not substantially changed across Omicron subvariants. Replication-competent shedding of these subvariants is detected for a large proportion of people who meet criteria for ending isolation.FUNDING NIH (U19 AI110818, R01 AI176287, K24 HL166024), the Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness, and the Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Medicine.
Authors
Julie Boucau, Owen T. Glover, Caitlin Marino, Gregory E. Edelstein, Manish C. Choudhary, Yijia Li, Brooke M. Leeman, Zahra Reynolds, Karry Su, Dessie Tien, Chase B. Mandell, Eliza Passell, Andrew Alexandrescu, Emory Abar, Mamadou Barry, Dibya Ghimire, Tammy D. Vyas, Jatin M. Vyas, Jacob E. Lemieux, Jonathan Z. Li, Mark J. Siedner, Amy K. Barczak
Guidelines
The Editorial Board will only consider comments that are deemed relevant and of interest to readers. The Journal will not post data that have not been subjected to peer review; or a comment that is essentially a reiteration of another comment.
- Comments appear on the Journal’s website and are linked from the original article’s web page.
- Authors are notified by email if their comments are posted.
- The Journal reserves the right to edit comments for length and clarity.
- No appeals will be considered.
- Comments are not indexed in PubMed.
Specific requirements
- Maximum length, 400 words
- Entered as plain text or HTML
- Author’s name and email address, to be posted with the comment
- Declaration of all potential conflicts of interest (even if these are not ultimately posted); see the Journal’s conflict-of-interest policy
- Comments may not include figures
