Wastewater surveillance (WWS), the systematic detection of infectious agents in wastewater, provided a valuable tool for monitoring SARS-CoV-2 circulation during the COVID-19 pandemic; surveillance has expanded from 20 to 53 jurisdictions across the United States, with increasing capacity to test for more respiratory pathogens (1,2). This report highlights the use of wastewater data by the four National Wastewater Surveillance System’s (NWSS) Centers of Excellence (California; Colorado; Houston, Texas; and Wisconsin) to guide public health action during the 2022–23 respiratory disease season. This activity was reviewed by CDC, deemed not research, and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy.*

Wastewater surveillance has been used to assist public health authorities in tracking local transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The usefulness of wastewater surveillance to track community spread of other respiratory pathogens, including influenza virus and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), is less clear. During the 2022-23 respiratory diseases season, concentrations of influenza A virus and RSV in wastewater samples in three major Wisconsin cities were compared with emergency department (ED) visits associated with these pathogens. In all three cities, higher concentrations of influenza A virus and RSV in wastewater were associated with higher numbers of associated ED visits (Kendall's tau range = 0.50-0.63 for influenza-associated illness and 0.30-0.49 for RSV-associated illness). Detections of both influenza A virus and RSV in wastewater often preceded a rise in associated ED visits for each pathogen, and virus material remained detectable in wastewater for up to 3 months after pathogen-specific ED visits declined. These results demonstrate that wastewater surveillance has the potential to complement conventional methods of influenza and RSV surveillance, detecting viral signals earlier and for a longer duration than do clinical data. Continued use of wastewater surveillance as a supplement to established surveillance systems such as ED visits might improve local understanding and response to seasonal respiratory virus outbreaks.

University settings have demonstrated potential for COVID-19 outbreaks, as they can combine congregate living, substantial social activity, and a young population predisposed to mild illness. Using genomic and epidemiologic data, we describe a COVID-19 outbreak at the University of Wisconsin (UW)–Madison. During August – October 2020, 3,485 students tested positive, including 856/6,162 students living in residence halls. Case counts began rising during move-in week for on-campus students (August 25-31, 2020), then rose rapidly during September 1-11, 2020. UW-Madison initiated multiple prevention efforts, including quarantining two residence halls; a subsequent decline in cases was observed. Genomic surveillance of cases from Dane County, where UW-Madison is located, did not find evidence of transmission from a large cluster of cases in the two residence halls quarantined during the outbreak. Coordinated implementation of prevention measures can effectively reduce SARS-CoV-2 spread in university settings and may limit spillover to the community surrounding the university.Competing Interest StatementThe findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Clinical TrialN/A.Funding StatementG.K.M. is supported by an NLM training grant to the Computation and Informatics in Biology and Medicine Training Program (NLM 5T15LM007359). This work was funded in part by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Contract #75D30120C09870: Defining the Role of College Students in SARS-CoV-2 Spread in the Upper Midwest.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:A waiver of HIPAA Authorization was obtained by the Western Institutional Review Board (WIRB #1-1290953-1) to obtain the clinical specimens for whole genome sequencing. This analysis was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy. These activities were determined to be non-research public health surveillance by the Institutional Review Board at UW-Madison.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 sequencing data is available on www.gisaid.org. Scripts for sequence data analysis is available at https://github.com/gagekmoreno/SARS-CoV-2-at-UW_Madison. https://github.com/gagekmoreno/SARS-CoV-2-at-UW_Madison

Olfactory and taste dysfunctions have emerged as symptoms of COVID-19. Among individuals with COVID-19 enrolled in a household study, loss of taste and/or smell was the fourth most commonly reported symptom (26/42; 62%), and among household contacts, it had the highest positive predictive value (83%; 95% CI: 55–95%) for COVID-19. These findings support consideration of loss of taste and/or smell in possible case identification and testing prioritization for COVID-19.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding was received.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll 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.YesData presented in the current study may be available from the corresponding author on request.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the respiratory disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first identified in Wuhan, China and has since become pandemic. As part of initial response activities in the United States, enhanced contact investigations were conducted to enable early identification and isolation of additional cases and to learn more about risk factors for transmission.Methods Close contacts of nine early travel-related cases in the United States were identified. Close contacts meeting criteria for active monitoring were followed, and selected individuals were targeted for collection of additional exposure details and respiratory samples. Respiratory samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Results There were 404 close contacts who underwent active monitoring in the response jurisdictions; 338 had at least basic exposure data, of whom 159 had ≥1 set of respiratory samples collected and tested. Across all known close contacts under monitoring, two additional cases were identified; both secondary cases were in spouses of travel-associated case patients. The secondary attack rate among household members, all of whom had ≥1 respiratory sample tested, was 13% (95% CI: 4 – 38%).Conclusions The enhanced contact tracing investigations undertaken around nine early travel-related cases of COVID-19 in the United States identified two cases of secondary transmission, both spouses. Rapid detection and isolation of the travel-associated case patients, enabled by public awareness of COVID-19 among travelers from China, may have mitigated transmission risk among close contacts of these cases.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding was sought or received.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll 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.YesData may be available upon reasonable request.

Background: The origin of divergent SARS-CoV-2 spike sequences found in wastewater, but not in clinical surveillance, remains unclear. These "cryptic" wastewater sequences have harbored many of the same mutations that later emerged in Omicron lineages. We first detected a cryptic lineage in municipal wastewater in Wisconsin in January 2022. Named the "Wisconsin Lineage", we sought to determine this virus's geographic origin and characterize its persistence and evolution over time. Method(s): We systematically sampled maintenance holes to trace the Wisconsin Lineage's origin. We sequenced spike RBD domains, and where possible, whole viral genomes, to characterize the evolution of this lineage over the 13 consecutive months that it was detectable. Finding(s): The persistence of the Wisconsin Lineage signal allowed us to trace it from a central wastewater plant to a single facility, with a high concentration of viral RNA. The viral sequences contained a combination of fixed nucleotide substitutions characteristic of Pango lineage B.1.234, which circulated in Wisconsin at low levels from October 2020 to February 2021, while mutations in the spike gene resembled those subsequently found in Omicron variants. Interpretation(s): We propose that prolonged detection of the Wisconsin Lineage in wastewater represents persistent shedding of SARS-CoV-2 from an infected individual, with ongoing within-host viral evolution leading to an ancestral B.1.234 virus accumulating "Omicron-like" mutations. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license.

BACKGROUND: High frequency, rapid turnaround SARS-CoV-2 testing continues to be proposed as a way of efficiently identifying and mitigating transmission in congregate settings. However, two SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks occurred among intercollegiate university athletic programs during the fall 2020 semester despite mandatory directly observed daily antigen testing. METHODS: During the fall 2020 semester, athletes and staff in both programs were tested daily using Quidel's Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA), with positive antigen results requiring confirmatory testing with real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). We used genomic sequencing to investigate transmission dynamics in these two outbreaks. RESULTS: In Outbreak 1, 32 confirmed cases occurred within a university athletics program after the index patient attended a meeting while infectious despite a negative antigen test on the day of the meeting. Among isolates sequenced from Outbreak 1, 24 (92%) of 26 were closely related, suggesting sustained transmission following an initial introduction event. In Outbreak 2, 12 confirmed cases occurred among athletes from two university programs that faced each other in an athletic competition despite receiving negative antigen test results on the day of the competition. Sequences from both teams were closely related and unique from strains circulating in the community, suggesting transmission during intercollegiate competition. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that antigen testing alone, even when mandated and directly observed, may not be sufficient as an intervention to prevent SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in congregate settings, and highlights the importance of supplementing serial antigen testing with appropriate mitigation strategies to prevent SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in congregate settings. SUMMARY: High frequency, rapid turnaround SARS-CoV-2 testing continues to be proposed as a way of efficiently identifying and mitigating transmission in congregate settings. However, here we describe two SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks occurred among intercollegiate university athletic programs during the fall 2020 semester.

Annually, ≈30,000 Hasidic and Orthodox Jews travel to Uman, Ukraine, during the Jewish New Year to pray at the burial place of the founder of the Breslov Hasidic movement. Many pilgrims come from the northeastern United States. The global health implications of this event were seen in 2019 when measles outbreaks in the United States and Israel were linked to the pilgrimage. The 2020 pilgrimage was cancelled as part of the COVID-19 travel restrictions imposed by the government of Ukraine. To prepare for the 2021 event, the National Public Health Institute, the Public Health Center of Ukraine, organized mitigation measures for pilgrims arriving in Uman, and the CDC COVID-19 International Task Force assisted with mitigation measures for pilgrims coming from the United States. We describe efforts to support COVID-19 mitigation measures before, during, and after this mass gathering and lessons learned for future mass gatherings during pandemics.

BACKGROUND: Early in the pandemic, cruise travel exacerbated the global spread of SARS-CoV-2. We report epidemiologic and molecular findings from an investigation of a cluster of travelers with confirmed COVID-19 returning to the U.S. from Nile River cruises in Egypt. METHODS: State health departments reported data on real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 cases with a history of Nile River cruise travel during February-March 2020 to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Demographic and epidemiologic data were collected through routine surveillance channels. Sequences were obtained from either state health departments or from the Global Initiative on Sharing Avian Flu Data (GISAID). We conducted descriptive analyses of epidemiologic data and explored phylogenetic relationships between sequences. RESULTS: We identified 149 Nile River cruise travelers with confirmed COVID-19 who returned to 67 different U.S. counties in 27 states: among those with complete data, 4.7% (6/128) died and 28.1% (38/135) were hospitalized. These individuals traveled on 20 different Nile River cruise voyages (12 unique vessels). Fifteen community transmission events were identified in four states, with 73.3% (11/15) of these occurring in Wisconsin (as the result of a more detailed contact investigation in that state). Phylogenetic analyses supported the hypothesis that travelers were most likely infected in Egypt, with most sequences in Nextstrain clade 20A 93% (87/94). We observed genetic clustering by Nile River cruise voyage and vessel. CONCLUSIONS: Nile River cruise travelers with COVID-19 introduced SARS-CoV-2 over a very large geographic range, facilitating transmission across the United States early in the pandemic. Travelers who participate in cruises, even on small river vessels as investigated in this study, are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Therefore, history of river cruise travel should be considered in contact tracing and outbreak investigations.

Objectives. To assess the rate of COVID-19 among in-person K-12 educators and the rate's association with various COVID-19 prevention policies in school districts. Methods. We linked actively working, in-person K-12 educators in Wisconsin to COVID-19 cases with onset from September 2 to November 24, 2021. A mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards model, adjusted for pertinent person- and community-level confounders, compared the hazard rate of COVID-19 among educators working in districts with and without specific COVID-19 prevention policies. Results. In-person educators working in school districts that required masking for students and staff experienced 19% lower hazards of COVID-19 than did those in districts without any masking policy (hazard ratio = 0.81; 95% confidence interval = 0.72, 0.92). Reduced COVID-19 hazards were consistent and remained statistically significant when educators were stratified by elementary, middle, and high school environments. Conclusions. In Wisconsin's K-12 school districts, during the fall 2021 academic semester, a policy that required both students and staff to mask was associated with significantly reduced risk of COVID-19 among in-person educators across all grade levels. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(12):1791-1799. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307095).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic introduced a new compensable infectious disease to workplaces. METHODS: This was a descriptive analysis of Wisconsin COVID workers' compensation (WC) claims between March 12 and December 31, 2020. The impact of the presumption law (March 12 to June 10, 2020) was also evaluated. RESULTS: Less than 1% of working-age residents with COVID-19 filed a claim. COVID-19 WC claim rates (per 100,000 FTE) were notably low for frontline industry sectors such as Retail Trade (n = 115), Manufacturing (n = 88), and Wholesale Trade (n = 31). Healthcare workers (764 claims per 100,000 FTE) comprised 73.2% of COVID-19 claims. Most claims (52.8%) were denied and the proportion of denied claims increased significantly after the presumption period for both first responders and other occupations. CONCLUSION: The presumption law made benefits accessible primarily to first responders. Further changes to WC systems are needed to offset the individual and collective costs of infectious diseases.

BACKGROUND: Work-related exposures play an important role in SARS-CoV-2 transmission, yet few studies have measured the risk of COVID-19 across occupations and industries. METHODS: During September 2020 - May 2021, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services collected occupation and industry data as part of routine COVID-19 case investigations. Adults aged 18-64 years with confirmed or probable COVID-19 in Wisconsin were assigned standardized occupation and industry codes. Cumulative incidence rates were weighted for non-response and calculated using full-time equivalent (FTE) workforce denominators from the 2020 American Community Survey. RESULTS: An estimated 11.6% of workers (347,013 of 2.98 million) in Wisconsin, ages 18-64 years, had COVID-19 from September 2020 to May 2021. The highest incidence by occupation (per 100 full-time equivalents) occurred among personal care and services workers (22.4), healthcare practitioners and support staff (20.7), and protective services workers (20.7). High risk sub-groups included nursing assistants and personal care aides (28.8), childcare workers (25.8), food and beverage service workers (25.3), personal appearance workers (24.4), and law enforcement workers (24.1). By industry, incidence was highest in healthcare (18.6); the highest risk sub-sectors were nursing care facilities (30.5) and warehousing (28.5). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis represents one of the most complete examinations to date of COVID-19 incidence by occupation and industry. Our approach demonstrates the value of standardized occupational data collection by public health, and may be a model for improved occupational surveillance elsewhere. Workers at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure may benefit from targeted workplace COVID-19 vaccination and mitigation efforts.

On August 29, 2021, the United States government oversaw the emergent establishment of Operation Allies Welcome (OAW), led by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and implemented by the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and U.S. Department of State (DoS), to safely resettle U.S. citizens and Afghan nationals from Afghanistan to the United States. Evacuees were temporarily housed at several overseas locations in Europe and Asia* before being transported via military and charter flights through two U.S. international airports, and onward to eight U.S. military bases,(†) with hotel A used for isolation and quarantine of persons with or exposed to certain infectious diseases.(§) On August 30, CDC issued an Epi-X notice encouraging public health officials to maintain vigilance for measles among Afghan evacuees because of an ongoing measles outbreak in Afghanistan (25,988 clinical cases reported nationwide during January-November 2021) (1) and low routine measles vaccination coverage (66% and 43% for the first and second doses, respectively, in 2020) (2).

During November 19-21, 2021, an indoor convention (event) in New York City (NYC), was attended by approximately 53,000 persons from 52 U.S. jurisdictions and 30 foreign countries. In-person registration for the event began on November 18, 2021. The venue was equipped with high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration, and attendees were required to wear a mask indoors and have documented receipt of at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.* On December 2, 2021, the Minnesota Department of Health reported the first case of community-acquired COVID-19 in the United States caused by the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant in a person who had attended the event (1). CDC collaborated with state and local health departments to assess event-associated COVID-19 cases and potential exposures among U.S.-based attendees using data from COVID-19 surveillance systems and an anonymous online attendee survey. Among 34,541 attendees with available contact information, surveillance data identified test results for 4,560, including 119 (2.6%) persons from 16 jurisdictions with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Most (4,041 [95.2%]), survey respondents reported always wearing a mask while indoors at the event. Compared with test-negative respondents, test-positive respondents were more likely to report attending bars, karaoke, or nightclubs, and eating or drinking indoors near others for at least 15 minutes. Among 4,560 attendees who received testing, evidence of widespread transmission during the event was not identified. Genomic sequencing of 20 specimens identified the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant (AY.25 and AY.103 sublineages) in 15 (75%) cases, and the Omicron variant (BA.1 sublineage) in five (25%) cases. These findings reinforce the importance of implementing multiple, simultaneous prevention measures, such as ensuring up-to-date vaccination, mask use, physical distancing, and improved ventilation in limiting SARS-CoV-2 transmission, during large, indoor events.(†).

University settings have demonstrated potential for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreaks; they combine congregate living, substantial social activity, and a young population predisposed to mild illness. Using genomic and epidemiologic data, we describe a COVID-19 outbreak at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. During August-October 2020, a total of 3,485 students, including 856/6,162 students living in dormitories, tested positive. Case counts began rising during move-in week, August 25-31, 2020, then rose rapidly during September 1-11, 2020. The university initiated multiple prevention efforts, including quarantining 2 dormitories; a subsequent decline in cases was observed. Genomic surveillance of cases from Dane County, in which the university is located, did not find evidence of transmission from a large cluster of cases in the 2 quarantined dorms during the outbreak. Coordinated implementation of prevention measures can reduce COVID-19 spread in university settings and may limit spillover to the surrounding community.

BACKGROUND: Serial severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing has been implemented at institutions of higher education (IHEs) and other settings. Testing strategies can include algorithms specifying confirmatory reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing after an antigen test. It is unknown how testing strategies perform detecting SARS-CoV-2, including individual adherence to serial testing requirements. METHODS: Student serial testing adherence was defined as completing ≥80% of weekly tests from October 5, 2020 to November 14, 2020 and evaluated using logistic regression. Medical records were reviewed for all positive antigen test encounters and 10% of daily negative antigen test encounters during October 19-November 30, 2020. Results were used to estimate the proportion of individuals requiring only antigen tests, requiring and completing RT-PCR testing, and associated costs of tests. RESULTS: Two thirds (66.5%; 1166 of 1754) of eligible on-campus students adhered to weekly testing; female students were more adherent (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-2.59) than male students. Of all antigen test encounters, 11.5% (1409 of 12 305) reported >1 COVID-19 symptoms. Of non-COVID-19-exposed antigen test encounters, 88% (10 386 of 11 769) did not require confirmatory RT-PCR testing. Only 28% (390 of 1387) of testing encounters had an associated recommended confirmatory RT-PCR test performed. We estimated the testing strategy captured 61% (235 of 389) of predicted RT-PCR-positive specimens. CONCLUSIONS: At this IHE, most students voluntarily adhered to serial testing. The majority of antigen test results did not require confirmatory RT-PCR testing, but when required, most students did not obtain it. Including strategies to increase the proportion of individuals obtaining indicated confirmatory testing might improve the testing program's performance.

BACKGROUND: High-frequency, rapid-turnaround SARS-CoV-2 testing continues to be proposed as a way of efficiently identifying and mitigating transmission in congregate settings. However, two SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks occurred among intercollegiate university athletic programs during the fall 2020 semester despite mandatory directly observed daily antigen testing. METHODS: During the fall 2020 semester, athletes and staff in both programs were tested daily using Quidel's Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA), with positive antigen results requiring confirmatory testing with real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). We used genomic sequencing to investigate transmission dynamics in these two outbreaks. RESULTS: In Outbreak 1, 32 confirmed cases occurred within a university athletics program after the index patient attended a meeting while infectious despite a negative antigen test on the day of the meeting. Among isolates sequenced from Outbreak 1, 24 (92%) of 26 were closely related, suggesting sustained transmission following an initial introduction event. In Outbreak 2, 12 confirmed cases occurred among athletes from two university programs that faced each other in an athletic competition despite receiving negative antigen test results on the day of the competition. Sequences from both teams were closely related and distinct from viruses circulating in Team 1's community, suggesting transmission during intercollegiate competition in Team 2's community. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that antigen testing alone, even when mandated and directly observed, may not be sufficient as an intervention to prevent SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in congregate settings, and highlight the importance of supplementing serial antigen testing with appropriate mitigation strategies to prevent SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in congregate settings.

BACKGROUND: Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and antigen tests are important diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2. Sensitivity of antigen tests has been shown to be lower than that of rRT-PCR; however, data to evaluate epidemiologic characteristics that affect test performance are limited. METHODS: Paired mid-turbinate nasal swabs were collected from university students and staff and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using both Quidel Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA) and rRT-PCR assay. Specimens positive by either rRT-PCR or antigen FIA were placed in viral culture and tested for subgenomic RNA (sgRNA). Logistic regression models were used to evaluate characteristics associated with antigen results, rRT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values, sgRNA, and viral culture. RESULTS: Antigen FIA sensitivity was 78.9% and 43.8% among symptomatic and asymptomatic participants respectively. Among rRT-PCR positive participants, negative antigen results were more likely among asymptomatic participants (OR 4.6, CI:1.3-15.4) and less likely among participants reporting nasal congestion (OR 0.1, CI:0.03-0.8). rRT-PCR-positive specimens with higher Ct values (OR 0.5, CI:0.4-0.8) were less likely, and specimens positive for sgRNA (OR 10.2, CI:1.6-65.0) more likely, to yield positive virus isolation. Antigen testing was >90% positive in specimens with Ct values <29. Positive predictive value of antigen test for positive viral culture (57.7%) was similar to that of rRT-PCR (59.3%). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 antigen test advantages include low cost, wide availability and rapid turnaround time, making them important screening tests. The performance of antigen tests may vary with patient characteristics, so performance characteristics should be accounted for when designing testing strategies and interpreting results.

BACKGROUND: To better understand SARS-CoV-2 shedding duration and infectivity, we estimated SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding duration, described characteristics associated with viral RNA shedding resolution1, and determined if replication-competent viruses could be recovered ≥10 days after symptom onset among individuals with mild to moderate COVID-19. METHODS: We collected serial nasopharyngeal specimens at various time points from 109 individuals with rRT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 in Utah and Wisconsin. We calculated probability of viral RNA shedding resolution using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and evaluated characteristics associated with shedding resolution using Cox proportional hazards regression. We attempted viral culture for 35 rRT-PCR-positive nasopharyngeal specimens collected ≥10 days after symptom onset. RESULTS: The likelihood of viral RNA shedding resolution at 10 days after symptom onset was approximately 3%. Time to shedding resolution was shorter among participants aged <18 years (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR]: 3.01; 95% CI: 1.6-5.6) and longer among those aged ≥50 years (aHR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.3-0.9) compared to participants aged 18-49 years. No replication-competent viruses were recovered. CONCLUSIONS: Although most patients were positive for SARS-CoV-2 for ≥10 days after symptom onset, our findings suggest that individuals with mild to moderate COVID-19 are unlikely to be infectious ≥10 days after symptom onset.

During September 3-November 16, 2020, daily confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (WDHS) increased at a rate of 24% per week, from a 7-day average of 674 (August 28-September 3) to 6,426 (November 10-16) (1). The growth rate during this interval was the highest to date in Wisconsin and among the highest in the United States during that time (1). To characterize potential sources of this increase, the investigation examined reported outbreaks in Wisconsin that occurred during March 4-November 16, 2020, with respect to their setting and number of associated COVID-19 cases.

Antigen-based tests for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), are inexpensive and can return results within 15 minutes (1). Antigen tests have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for use in asymptomatic and symptomatic persons within the first 5-12 days after symptom onset (2). These tests have been used at U.S. colleges and universities and other congregate settings (e.g., nursing homes and correctional and detention facilities), where serial testing of asymptomatic persons might facilitate early case identification (3-5). However, test performance data from symptomatic and asymptomatic persons are limited. This investigation evaluated performance of the Sofia SARS Antigen Fluorescent Immunoassay (FIA) (Quidel Corporation) compared with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 detection among asymptomatic and symptomatic persons at two universities in Wisconsin. During September 28-October 9, a total of 1,098 paired nasal swabs were tested using the Sofia SARS Antigen FIA and real-time RT-PCR. Virus culture was attempted on all antigen-positive or real-time RT-PCR-positive specimens. Among 871 (79%) paired swabs from asymptomatic participants, the antigen test sensitivity was 41.2%, specificity was 98.4%, and in this population the estimated positive predictive value (PPV) was 33.3%, and negative predictive value (NPV) was 98.8%. Antigen test performance was improved among 227 (21%) paired swabs from participants who reported one or more symptoms at specimen collection (sensitivity = 80.0%; specificity = 98.9%; PPV = 94.1%; NPV = 95.9%). Virus was isolated from 34 (46.6%) of 73 antigen-positive or real-time RT-PCR-positive nasal swab specimens, including two of 18 that were antigen-negative and real-time RT-PCR-positive (false-negatives). The advantages of antigen tests such as low cost and rapid turnaround might allow for rapid identification of infectious persons. However, these advantages need to be balanced against lower sensitivity and lower PPV, especially among asymptomatic persons. Confirmatory testing with an FDA-authorized nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), such as RT-PCR, should be considered after negative antigen test results in symptomatic persons, and after positive antigen test results in asymptomatic persons (1).

BACKGROUND: Although many viral respiratory illnesses are transmitted within households, the evidence base for SARS-CoV-2 is nascent. We sought to characterize SARS-CoV-2 transmission within US households and estimate the household secondary infection rate (SIR) to inform strategies to reduce transmission. METHODS: We recruited laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients and their household contacts in Utah and Wisconsin during March 22-April 25, 2020. We interviewed patients and all household contacts to obtain demographics and medical histories. At the initial household visit, 14 days later, and when a household contact became newly symptomatic, we collected respiratory swabs from patients and household contacts for testing by SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR and sera for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We estimated SIR and odds ratios (OR) to assess risk factors for secondary infection, defined by a positive rRT-PCR or ELISA test. RESULTS: Thirty-two (55%) of 58 households had evidence of secondary infection among household contacts. The SIR was 29% (n = 55/188; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 23-36%) overall, 42% among children (<18 years) of the COVID-19 patient and 33% among spouses/partners. Household contacts to COVID-19 patients with immunocompromised conditions had increased odds of infection (OR: 15.9, 95% CI: 2.4-106.9). Household contacts who themselves had diabetes mellitus had increased odds of infection (OR: 7.1, 95% CI: 1.2-42.5). CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial evidence of secondary infections among household contacts. People with COVID-19, particularly those with immunocompromising conditions or those with household contacts with diabetes, should take care to promptly self-isolate to prevent household transmission.

We describe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among US food manufacturing and agriculture workers and provide updated information on meat and poultry processing workers. Among 742 food and agriculture workplaces in 30 states, 8,978 workers had confirmed COVID-19; 55 workers died. Racial and ethnic minority workers could be disproportionately affected by COVID-19.

During July 2-August 11, 2020, an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) occurred at a boys' overnight summer school retreat in Wisconsin. The retreat included 152 high school-aged boys, counselors, and staff members from 21 states and territories and two foreign countries. All attendees were required to provide documentation of either a positive serologic test result* within the past 3 months or a negative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests result for SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) ≤7 days before travel, to self-quarantine within their households for 7 days before travel, and to wear masks during travel. On July 15, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (WDHS) began an investigation after being notified that two students at the retreat had received positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test results. WDHS offered RT-PCR testing to attendees on July 28 and serologic testing on August 5 and 6. Seventy-eight (51%) attendees received positive RT-PCR results (confirmed cases), and 38 (25%) met clinical criteria for COVID-19 without a positive RT-PCR result (probable cases). By the end of the retreat, 118 (78%) persons had received a positive serologic test result. Among 24 attendees with a documented positive serologic test result before the retreat, all received negative RT-PCR results. After RT-PCR testing on July 28, WDHS recommended that remaining susceptible persons (asymptomatic and with negative RT-PCR test results) quarantine from other students and staff members at the retreat. Recommended end dates for isolation or quarantine were based on established guidance (1,2) and determined in coordination with CDC. All attendees were cleared for interstate and commercial air travel to return home on August 11. This outbreak investigation documented rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2, likely from a single student, among adolescents and young adults in a congregate setting. Mitigation plans that include prearrival quarantine and testing, cohorting, symptom monitoring, early identification and isolation of cases, mask use, enhanced hygiene and disinfection practices, and maximal outdoor programming are necessary to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks in these settings (3,4).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Limited data exist on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in children. We described infection rates and symptom profiles among pediatric household contacts of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: We enrolled individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 and their household contacts, assessed daily symptoms prospectively for 14 days, and obtained specimens for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and serology testing. Among pediatric contacts (<18 years), we described transmission, assessed the risk factors for infection, and calculated symptom positive and negative predictive values. We compared secondary infection rates and symptoms between pediatric and adult contacts using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 58 households, 188 contacts were enrolled (120 adults; 68 children). Secondary infection rates for adults (30%) and children (28%) were similar. Among households with potential for transmission from children, child-to-adult transmission may have occurred in 2 of 10 (20%), and child-to-child transmission may have occurred in 1 of 6 (17%). Pediatric case patients most commonly reported headache (79%), sore throat (68%), and rhinorrhea (68%); symptoms had low positive predictive values, except measured fever (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 44% to 100%). Compared with symptomatic adults, children were less likely to report cough (odds ratio [OR]: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.57), loss of taste (OR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.74), and loss of smell (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.96) and more likely to report sore throat (OR: 3.4; 95% CI: 1.04 to 11.18). CONCLUSIONS: Children and adults had similar secondary infection rates, but children generally had less frequent and severe symptoms. In two states early in the pandemic, we observed possible transmission from children in approximately one-fifth of households with potential to observe such transmission patterns.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first identified in Wuhan, China and has since become pandemic. In response to the first cases identified in the United States, close contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases were investigated to enable early identification and isolation of additional cases and to learn more about risk factors for transmission. Close contacts of nine early travel-related cases in the United States were identified and monitored daily for development of symptoms (active monitoring). Selected close contacts (including those with exposures categorized as higher risk) were targeted for collection of additional exposure information and respiratory samples. Respiratory samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Four hundred four close contacts were actively monitored in the jurisdictions that managed the travel-related cases. Three hundred thirty-eight of the 404 close contacts provided at least basic exposure information, of whom 159 close contacts had ≥1 set of respiratory samples collected and tested. Across all actively monitored close contacts, two additional symptomatic COVID-19 cases (i.e., secondary cases) were identified; both secondary cases were in spouses of travel-associated case patients. When considering only household members, all of whom had ≥1 respiratory sample tested for SARS-CoV-2, the secondary attack rate (i.e., the number of secondary cases as a proportion of total close contacts) was 13% (95% CI: 4-38%). The results from these contact tracing investigations suggest that household members, especially significant others, of COVID-19 cases are at highest risk of becoming infected. The importance of personal protective equipment for healthcare workers is also underlined. Isolation of persons with COVID-19, in combination with quarantine of exposed close contacts and practice of everyday preventive behaviors, is important to mitigate spread of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Improved understanding of SARS-CoV-2 spectrum of disease is essential for clinical and public health interventions. There are limited data on mild or asymptomatic infections, but recognition of these individuals is key as they contribute to viral transmission. We describe the symptom profiles from individuals with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: From March 22 to April 22, 2020 in Wisconsin and Utah, we enrolled and prospectively observed 198 household contacts exposed to SARS-CoV-2. We collected and tested nasopharyngeal (NP) specimens by RT-PCR two or more times during a 14-day period. Contacts completed daily symptom diaries. We characterized symptom profiles on the date of first positive RT-PCR test and described progression of symptoms over time. RESULTS: We identified 47 contacts, median age 24 (3-75) years, with detectable SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. The most commonly reported symptoms on the day of first positive RT-PCR test were upper respiratory (n=32, 68%) and neurologic (n=30, 64%); fever was not commonly reported (n=9, 19%). Eight (17%) individuals were asymptomatic at the date of first positive RT-PCR collection; two (4%) had preceding symptoms that resolved and six (13%) subsequently developed symptoms. Children less frequently reported lower respiratory symptoms (age <18: 21%, age 18-49: 60%, age 50+ years: 69%; p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Household contacts with lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported mild symptoms. When assessed at a single time-point, several contacts appeared to have asymptomatic infection; however, over time all developed symptoms. These findings are important to inform infection control, contact tracing, and community mitigation strategies.

Meat and poultry processing facilities face distinctive challenges in the control of infectious diseases, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). COVID-19 outbreaks among meat and poultry processing facility workers can rapidly affect large numbers of persons. Assessment of COVID-19 cases among workers in 115 meat and poultry processing facilities through April 27, 2020, documented 4,913 cases and 20 deaths reported by 19 states (1). This report provides updated aggregate data from states regarding the number of meat and poultry processing facilities affected by COVID-19, the number and demographic characteristics of affected workers, and the number of COVID-19-associated deaths among workers, as well as descriptions of interventions and prevention efforts at these facilities. Aggregate data on confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths among workers identified and reported through May 31, 2020, were obtained from 239 affected facilities (those with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 case in one or more workers) in 23 states.* COVID-19 was confirmed in 16,233 workers, including 86 COVID-19-related deaths. Among 14 states reporting the total number of workers in affected meat and poultry processing facilities (112,616), COVID-19 was diagnosed in 9.1% of workers. Among 9,919 (61%) cases in 21 states with reported race/ethnicity, 87% occurred among racial and ethnic minority workers. Commonly reported interventions and prevention efforts at facilities included implementing worker temperature or symptom screening and COVID-19 education, mandating face coverings, adding hand hygiene stations, and adding physical barriers between workers. Targeted workplace interventions and prevention efforts that are appropriately tailored to the groups most affected by COVID-19 are critical to reducing both COVID-19-associated occupational risk and health disparities among vulnerable populations. Implementation of these interventions and prevention efforts(dagger) across meat and poultry processing facilities nationally could help protect workers in this critical infrastructure industry.

In a household study, loss of taste and/or smell was the fourth most reported symptom (26/42; 62%) among COVID-19 case-patients and had the highest positive predictive value (83%; 95% CI: 55-95%) among household contacts. Olfactory and taste dysfunctions should be considered for COVID-19 case identification and testing prioritization.

Data on the detailed clinical progression of COVID-19 in conjunction with epidemiological and virological characteristics are limited. In this case series, we describe the first 12 US patients confirmed to have COVID-19 from 20 January to 5 February 2020, including 4 patients described previously(1-3). Respiratory, stool, serum and urine specimens were submitted for SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) testing, viral culture and whole genome sequencing. Median age was 53 years (range: 21-68); 8 patients were male. Common symptoms at illness onset were cough (n = 8) and fever (n = 7). Patients had mild to moderately severe illness; seven were hospitalized and demonstrated clinical or laboratory signs of worsening during the second week of illness. No patients required mechanical ventilation and all recovered. All had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected in respiratory specimens, typically for 2-3 weeks after illness onset. Lowest real-time PCR with reverse transcription cycle threshold values in the upper respiratory tract were often detected in the first week and SARS-CoV-2 was cultured from early respiratory specimens. These data provide insight into the natural history of SARS-CoV-2. Although infectiousness is unclear, highest viral RNA levels were identified in the first week of illness. Clinicians should anticipate that some patients may worsen in the second week of illness.