PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Cosimi, Lisa A.
AU  - Kelly, Christina
AU  - Esposito, Samantha
AU  - Seitz, Scott
AU  - Sher-Jan, Cole
AU  - Turcinovic, Jacquelyn
AU  - Friedman, Kelley
AU  - Nashed, Michael
AU  - Souweine, Jesse
AU  - Fitzgerald, Nicholas
AU  - Gabriel, Stacey
AU  - Connor, John H.
AU  - Hung, Deborah
TI  - Evaluation of the role of home rapid antigen testing to determine isolation period after infection with SARS-CoV-2
AID  - 10.1101/2022.03.03.22271766
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.03.03.22271766
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/06/2022.03.03.22271766.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/06/2022.03.03.22271766.full
AB  - Importance Recent CDC COVID-19 isolation guidance for non-immunocompromised individuals with asymptomatic or mild infection allows ending isolation after 5 days if asymptomatic or afebrile with improving symptoms. The role of rapid antigen testing in further characterizing the risk of viral transmission to others is unclear.Objective Understand rates of rapid antigen test (RAT) positivity after day 5 from a positive COVID-19 test and the relationship of this result to symptoms and viral culture.Design In this single center, observational cohort study, ambulatory individuals newly testing SARS-CoV-2 positive completed daily symptom logs, and RAT self-testing starting day 6 until negative. Anterior nasal and oral swabs were collected on a subset for viral culture.Main Outcomes and Measures Day 6 SARS-CoV-2 RAT result, symptoms and viral culture.Results 40 individuals enrolled between January 5 and February 11, 2022 with a mean age of 32 years (range 22 to 57). 23 (58%) were women and 17 (42%) men. All were vaccinated. 33 (83%) were symptomatic. Ten (25%) tested RAT negative on day 6. 61 of 90 (68%) RATs performed on asymptomatic individuals after day 5 were positive. Day 6 viral cultures were positive in 6 (35%) of 17 individuals. A negative RAT or being asymptomatic on day 6 were 100% and 78% predictive respectively for negative culture, while improving symptoms was 69% predictive. A positive RAT was 50% predictive of positive culture.Conclusion and Relevance RATs are suboptimal in predicting viral culture results on day 6. Use of routine RATs to guide end of COVID-19 isolation could result in significant numbers of culture negative, potentially non-infectious individuals undergoing prolonged isolation. However, a negative RAT was highly predictive of being culture negative. Complete absence of symptoms was inferior to a negative RAT in predicting a negative culture result, but performed better than improving symptoms. If a positive viral culture is a proxy for infectiousness, these data may help further refine a safer strategy for ending isolation.Competing Interest StatementD.T.H. is a founder, consultant to, equity holder in, and inventor of technology licensed to Sherlock Biosciences and serves on the Scientific Advisory Board for Proof Diagnostics, both infectious disease diagnostic companies. Neither technologies were used in this work.Funding StatementCosts were covered by operating funds of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard.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:The IRB of Mass General Brigham gave ethical approval for this workI 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.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors