RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Interactions among 17 respiratory pathogens: a cross-sectional study using clinical and community surveillance data
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.02.04.22270474
DO 10.1101/2022.02.04.22270474
A1 Roy Burstein
A1 Benjamin M. Althouse
A1 Amanda Adler
A1 Adam Akullian
A1 Elizabeth Brandstetter
A1 Shari Cho
A1 Anne Emanuels
A1 Kairsten Fay
A1 Luis Gamboa
A1 Peter Han
A1 Kristen Huden
A1 Misja Ilcisin
A1 Mandy Izzo
A1 Michael L. Jackson
A1 Ashley E. Kim
A1 Louise Kimball
A1 Kirsten Lacombe
A1 Jover Lee
A1 Jennifer K. Logue
A1 Julia Rogers
A1 Erin Chung
A1 Thomas R. Sibley
A1 Katrina Van Raay
A1 Edward Wenger
A1 Caitlin R. Wolf
A1 Michael Boeckh
A1 Helen Chu
A1 Jeff Duchin
A1 Mark Rieder
A1 Jay Shendure
A1 Lea M. Starita
A1 Cecile Viboud
A1 Trevor Bedford
A1 Janet A. Englund
A1 Michael Famulare
A1 the Seattle Flu Study and SCAN Investigators
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/02/06/2022.02.04.22270474.abstract
AB Background Co-circulating respiratory pathogens can interfere with or promote each other, leading to important effects on disease epidemiology. Estimating the magnitude of pathogen-pathogen interactions from clinical specimens is challenging because sampling from symptomatic individuals can create biased estimates.Methods We conducted an observational, cross-sectional study using samples collected by the Seattle Flu Study between 11 November 2018 and 20 August 2021. Samples that tested positive via RT-qPCR for at least one of 17 potential respiratory pathogens were included in this study. Semi-quantitative cycle threshold (Ct) values were used to measure pathogen load. Differences in pathogen load between monoinfected and coinfected samples were assessed using linear regression adjusting for age, season, and recruitment channel.Results 21,686 samples were positive for at least one potential pathogen. Most prevalent were rhinovirus (33·5%), Streptococcus pneumoniae (SPn, 29·0%), SARS-CoV-2 (13.8%) and influenza A/H1N1 (9·6%). 140 potential pathogen pairs were included for analysis, and 56 (40%) pairs yielded significant Ct differences (p < 0.01) between monoinfected and co-infected samples. We observed no virus-virus pairs showing evidence of significant facilitating interactions, and found significant viral load decrease among 37 of 108 (34%) assessed pairs. Samples positive with SPn and a virus were consistently associated with increased SPn load.Conclusions Viral load data can be used to overcome sampling bias in studies of pathogen-pathogen interactions. When applied to respiratory pathogens, we found evidence of viral-SPn facilitation and several examples of viral-viral interference. Multipathogen surveillance is a cost-efficient data collection approach, with added clinical and epidemiological informational value over single-pathogen testing, but requires careful analysis to mitigate selection bias.Competing Interest StatementJAE receives research support from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Pfizer, and is a consultant for SanofiPasteur, Meissa Vaccines, and Teva Pharmaceuticals.MLJ has received research support from Sanofi Pasteur. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest.Funding StatementThe Seattle Flu Study and SCAN are administered by the Brotman Baty Institute for Precision Medicine and funded by Gates Ventures, the private office of Bill Gates. JS is an Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. RB and MF are employees of the Institute for Disease Modeling, a research group within, and solely funded by, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. T.B. is supported by NIH R35 GM119774.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:Ethics Approval: The Seattle Flu Study received approval by the University of Washington's Institutional Review Board at the (UW IRB STUDY00006181) and informed consent was obtained prior to study enrollment. Participants participated in SCAN as part of public healthI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.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.YesData used for this study are are in the process of being prepared for open publication (as of 04-FEB-2022)