British Medical Journal: PCR tests alone should not be used for surveillance or detec

1,404 Views | 2 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by kyledr04
Keegan99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3699

Quote:

The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) swab test is useful (but not perfect) for detecting SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA in symptomatic patients.1 However, problems arise using the test for purposes that disregard symptoms or time of infectionnamely, case finding, mass screening, and disease surveillance.

This is because PCR is not a test of infectiousness. Rather, the test detects trace amounts of viral genome sequence, which may be either live transmissible virus or irrelevant RNA fragments from previous infection.2 When people with symptoms or who have been recently exposed receive a positive PCR result they will probably be infectious. But a positive result in someone without symptoms or known recent exposure may be from live or dead virus, and so does not determine whether the person is infectious and able to transmit the virus to others.



Quote:

If PCR is used to identify cases through mass testing of healthy people, it will deliver positive results in individuals with previous resolved infections, new infections, and potential re-infections, as well as false positives in people genuinely not harbouring the virus (around 0.8% of all tests performed8). Identifying the truly infectiouswho must isolateis not straightforward, even with a clinical history. For example, between 4% and 41% of cases are asymptomatic, with a risk of transmission roughly half that of symptomatic cases,9 but a positive test in those with no history of symptoms could indicate either current infection or previously resolved asymptomatic infection.

Real concern exists that many people who are not infectious (and not likely to become infectious) will receive positive test results, and together with their contacts, will be forced to isolate unnecessarily. In the context of mass surveillance, this could be a majority of those who test positive. Using PCR for population screening - even with a lower maximum Ct value cut off - is not epidemiologically sound. The balance of costs and harms against the potential benefits has not been evaluated.

BadMoonRisin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Absolutely none of this is epidemiologically sound.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!
bigtruckguy3500
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What's the proposed solution to surveillance?

Because I don't know if there's a better alternative than PCR. I think the question should be more so what to do with the data than how we get the data. At least until a better testing solution is available.
kyledr04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Don't test people that aren't sick or have high likelihood of exposure. Healthy, low risk people don't get tested for other infectious diseases just because.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.