Abstract
Background The progress of the COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacts the health of communities around the world, with unique impacts on colleges and universities. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by asymptomatic people is thought to be the underlying cause of a large proportion of new infections. However, the local prevalence of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2 is influenced by local public health restrictions and the community setting.
Objectives This study has three main objectives. First, we looked to establish the prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection on a university campus in California. Second, we sought to assess the changes in viral prevalence associated with the shifting community conditions related to non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). Third, we aimed to compare the performance of CRISPR- and PCR-based assays for large-scale virus surveillance sampling in COVID-19 asymptomatic persons.
Methods We enrolled 1,808 asymptomatic persons for self-collection of oropharyngeal (OP) samples to undergo SARS-CoV-2 testing. We compared viral prevalence in samples obtained in two time periods: May 28th-June 11th; June 23rd-July 2nd. We detected viral genomes in these samples using two assays: CREST, a CRISPR-based method recently developed at UCSB, and the RT-qPCR test recommended by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Results Of the 1,808 participants, 1,805 were affiliates of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and 1,306 were students. None of the tests performed on the 732 samples collected between late May to early June were positive. In contrast, tests performed on the 1076 samples collected between late June to early July, revealed nine positive cases. This change in prevalence met statistical significance, p = 0.013. One sample was positive by RT-qPCR at the threshold of detection, but negative by both CREST and CLIA-confirmation testing. With this single exception, there was perfect concordance in both positive and negative results obtained by RT-qPCR and CREST. The estimated prevalence of the virus, calculated using the confirmed cases, was 0.74%. The average age of our sample population was 28.33 (18-75) years, and the average age of the positive cases was 21.7 years (19-30).
Conclusions Our study revealed that there were no COVID-19 cases in our study population in May/June. Using the same methods, we demonstrated a substantial shift in prevalence approximately one month later, which coincided with changes in community restrictions and public interactions. This increase in prevalence, in a young and asymptomatic population which would not have otherwise accessed COVID-19 testing, indicated the leading wave of a local outbreak, and coincided with rising case counts in the surrounding county and the state of California. Our results substantiate that large, population-level asymptomatic screening using self-collection may be a feasible and instructive aspect of the public health approach within large campus communities, and the almost perfect concordance between CRISPR- and PCR-based assays indicate expanded options for surveillance testing
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This project was funded by the UCSB Office of Research
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Cottage Health IRB, Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital Protocol 20-38ux
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data referred to in the manuscript, will be made available upon request
