Variation in False-Negative Rate of Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction-Based SARS-CoV-2 Tests by Time Since Exposure

Lauren M Kucirka, Stephen A Lauer, Oliver Laeyendecker, Denali Boon, Justin Lessler, Lauren M Kucirka, Stephen A Lauer, Oliver Laeyendecker, Denali Boon, Justin Lessler

Abstract

Background: Tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) based on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) are being used to rule out infection among high-risk persons, such as exposed inpatients and health care workers. It is critical to understand how the predictive value of the test varies with time from exposure and symptom onset to avoid being falsely reassured by negative test results.

Objective: To estimate the false-negative rate by day since infection.

Design: Literature review and pooled analysis.

Setting: 7 previously published studies providing data on RT-PCR performance by time since symptom onset or SARS-CoV-2 exposure using samples from the upper respiratory tract (n = 1330).

Patients: A mix of inpatients and outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Measurements: A Bayesian hierarchical model was fitted to estimate the false-negative rate by day since exposure and symptom onset.

Results: Over the 4 days of infection before the typical time of symptom onset (day 5), the probability of a false-negative result in an infected person decreases from 100% (95% CI, 100% to 100%) on day 1 to 67% (CI, 27% to 94%) on day 4. On the day of symptom onset, the median false-negative rate was 38% (CI, 18% to 65%). This decreased to 20% (CI, 12% to 30%) on day 8 (3 days after symptom onset) then began to increase again, from 21% (CI, 13% to 31%) on day 9 to 66% (CI, 54% to 77%) on day 21.

Limitation: Imprecise estimates due to heterogeneity in the design of studies on which results were based.

Conclusion: Care must be taken in interpreting RT-PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection-particularly early in the course of infection-when using these results as a basis for removing precautions intended to prevent onward transmission. If clinical suspicion is high, infection should not be ruled out on the basis of RT-PCR alone, and the clinical and epidemiologic situation should be carefully considered.

Primary funding source: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins Health System, and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Sensitivity of RT-PCR tests, by study and days since symptom onset, for nasopharyngeal samples (left), oropharyngeal samples (middle), and unspecified upper respiratory tract (right). RT-PCR = reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Probability of having a negative RT-PCR test result given SARS-CoV-2 infection (top) and of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 after a negative RT-PCR test result (bottom), by days since exposure. RT-PCR = reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction; SARS-CoV-2 = severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Posttest probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection after a negative RT-PCR result, by pretest probability of infection. RT-PCR = reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction; SARS-CoV-2 = severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7240870/bin/aim-olf-M201495-M201495mm1.jpg

References

    1. The Lancet. COVID-19: protecting health-care workers [Editorial]. Lancet. 2020;395:922. [PMID: 32199474] doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30644-9.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). 2020. Accessed at . on 31 March 2020.
    1. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. 2019 Novel Coronavirus Research Compendium (NCRC). 2020. Accessed at . on 8 May 2020.
    1. Wölfel R, Corman VM, Guggemos W, et al. Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019. Nature. 2020. [PMID: 32235945] doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2196-x.
    1. Guo L, Ren L, Yang S, et al. Profiling early humoral response to diagnose novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Clin Infect Dis. 2020. [PMID: 32198501] doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa310.
    1. Danis K, Epaulard O, Bénet T, et al; Investigation Team. Cluster of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) in the French Alps, 2020. Clin Infect Dis. 2020. [PMID: 32277759] doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa424.
    1. Kim ES, Chin BS, Kang CK, et al; Korea National Committee for Clinical Management of COVID-19. Clinical course and outcomes of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection: a preliminary report of the first 28 patients from the Korean cohort study on COVID-19. J Korean Med Sci. 2020;35:e142. [PMID: 32242348] doi:10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e142.
    1. Zhao J, Yuan Q, Wang H, et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019. Clin Infect Dis. 2020. [PMID: 32221519] doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa344.
    1. Liu L, Liu W, Wang S, et al. A preliminary study on serological assay for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 238 admitted hospital patients. Preprint. Posted online 8 March 2020. medRxiv. doi:10.1101/2020.03.06.20031856.
    1. Kujawski SA, Wong KK, Collins JP, et al. First 12 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States. Preprint. Posted online 12 March 2020. medRxiv. doi:10.1101/2020.03.09.20032896.
    1. Leisenring W, Pepe MS, Longton G. A marginal regression modelling framework for evaluating medical diagnostic tests. Stat Med. 1997;16:1263-81. [PMID: 9194271]
    1. Azman AS, Lauer S, Bhuiyan MTR, et al. Vibrio cholerae O1 transmission in Bangladesh: insights from a nationally-representative serosurvey. Preprint. Posted online 16 March 2020. medRxiv. doi:10.1101/2020.03.13.20035352.
    1. Lauer SA, Grantz KH, Bi Q, et al. The incubation period of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from publicly reported confirmed cases: estimation and application. Ann Intern Med. 2020. [PMID: 32150748] doi:10.7326/M20-0504.
    1. Bi Q, Wu Y, Mei S, et al. Epidemiology and transmission of COVID-19 in Shenzhen China: analysis of 391 cases and 1,286 of their close contacts. Preprint. Posted online 27 March 2020. medRxiv. doi:10.1101/2020.03.03.20028423.
    1. Quest Diagnostics. SARS-CoV-2 RNA, qualitative real-time RT-PCR (test code 39433): package insert. Accessed at . on 20 April 2020.
    1. Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, et al. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill. 2020;25. [PMID: 31992387] doi:10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045.
    1. Kucirka LM, Lauer SA, Laeyendecker O, et al. Analysis of RT-PCR sensitivity by day since exposure or symptom onset. 2020. Accessed at . on 26 April 2020.
    1. Krumholz HM. If you have coronavirus symptoms, assume you have the illness, even if you test negative. The New York Times. 1 April 2020. Accessed at . on 20 April 2020.
    1. Ai T, Yang Z, Hou H, et al. Correlation of chest CT and RT-PCR testing in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: a report of 1014 cases. Radiology. 2020:200642. [PMID: 32101510] doi:10.1148/radiol.2020200642.
    1. Konrad BP, Taylor D, Conway JM, et al. On the duration of the period between exposure to HIV and detectable infection. Epidemics. 2017;20:73-83. [PMID: 28365331] doi:10.1016/j.epidem.2017.03.002.
    1. Glynn SA, Wright DJ, Kleinman SH, et al. Dynamics of viremia in early hepatitis C virus infection. Transfusion. 2005;45:994-1002. [PMID: 15934999]

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit