PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Juan Luis Gomez Marti AU - Jamie Gribschaw AU - Melissa McCullough AU - Abbie Mallon AU - Jamie Acero AU - Amy Kinzler AU - Jamie Godesky AU - Kelly Heidenrich AU - Jennifer Iagnemma AU - Marian Vanek AU - A William Pasculle AU - Tung Phan AU - Alejandro Hoberman AU - John V Williams AU - Stephanie Mitchell AU - Alan Wells TI - Differences in detected viral loads guide use of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection assays towards symptomatic college students and children AID - 10.1101/2021.01.28.21250365 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.01.28.21250365 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/01/2021.01.28.21250365.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/01/2021.01.28.21250365.full AB - Limitations in timely testing for SARS-CoV-2 drive the need for new approaches in suspected COVID-19 disease. We queried whether viral load (VL) in the upper airways at presentation could improve the management and diagnosis of patients. This study was conducted in a 9 hospital system in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania between March 1-August 31 2020. Viral load was determined by PCR assays for patients presenting to the Emergency Departments (ED), community pediatrics practices and college health service. We found that for the ED patients, VL did not vary substantially between those admitted and not. VL was relatively equivalent across ages, except for the under 25 age groups that tended to present with higher loads. To determine if rapid antigen testing (RAT) could aid diagnosis in certain populations, we compared BD Veritor and Quidel Sofia to SOC PCR-based tests. The antigen assay provided a disease-detection sensitivity of >90% in a selection of 32 positive students and was modeled to have an 80% sensitivity in all positive students. In the outpatient pediatric population, the antigen assay detected 70% of PCR-positives. Extrapolating these findings to viral loads in older hospitalized patients, a minority would be detected by RAT (40%). Higher loads did correlate with death, though the prognostic value was marginal (ROC AUC of only 0.66). VL did not distinguish between those needing mechanical ventilation and routine inpatients. We conclude that VL in upper airways, while not prognostic for disease management, may aid in selecting proper testing methodologies for certain patient populations.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was enabled by internal funding provided by UPMC Hospital System and the University of Pittsburgh; the funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:All testing was performed as apart of routine clinical care and performed according to CLIA 88 regulations by appropriate personnel; all the assays were used under test-specific FDA EUA. The entire study was deemed to be a Quality Improvement initiative by the UPMC IRB and approved by the UPMC QI Review Board; the nucleic acid amplification assays were performed as part of routine medical care, and the antigen testing was added as a quality initiative to determine clinical utilization and interpretation parameters. All patient data were extracted under HIPAA-compliant procedures and de-identified for aggregation.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data are available as aggregated de-identified data from the corresponding author. All relevant data are included in the manuscript.