key: cord-0756039-o7lk3m41 authors: Robie, Emily R.; Abdelgadir, Anfal; Binder, Raquel A.; Gray, Gregory C. title: Live SARS‐CoV‐2 is difficult to detect in patient aerosols date: 2021-05-03 journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses DOI: 10.1111/irv.12860 sha: a1151173d18fd15c704f7d9283ab8130a4a5b528 doc_id: 756039 cord_uid: o7lk3m41 nan As the COVID-19 pandemic rages, there has been much debate regarding the importance of bioaerosols in SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Circumstantial evidence indicates that aerosol transmission is a likely contributor to the current pandemic, 1-3 yet research teams have had difficulty isolating live virus when using traditional aerosol sampling techniques. [4] [5] [6] To our knowledge, thus far only two research teams have successfully cultured airborne SARS-CoV-2 outside of laboratory simulations, 7 with one team finding evidence of viral replication in the absence of cytopathic effect. 8, 9 Despite the demonstrated challenges in capturing suspended live virus, respiratory transmission is now thought of as the primary mode of SARS-CoV-2 infection. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 has been readily cultured from nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs, saliva, blood, stool, and semen. 4, [10] [11] [12] Mounting evidence indicates that patients are most infectious within the first eight days following symptom onset, 4, 12, 13 with some outliers shedding live virus for up to 18 days. 13, 14 Increased viral load is associated with better odds of culturing virus, with cut-off values reported at 24 and 34 RT-PCR cycle thresholds. 4, 13 Building on previous work carried out by our team, 15 we sought to enroll home isolated SARS-CoV-2 positive patients early in their disease progression to estimate the viability of the virus in biological, environmental, and bioaerosol samples and assess aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2. From October 2020 to January 2021, we visited eight patients in their homes in and around Durham, North Carolina soon after they were confirmed by molecular assay to be infected with SARS-CoV-2. After informed consent was obtained, we asked patients to complete a brief questionnaire, and to permit the collection of a NP swab, passive saliva sample, fomite swabs, and bioaerosol samples. Patients were also asked to self-collect a rectal swab sample. All study procedures were approved by the Duke University Institutional Review Board (Pro00105055). Bioaerosol sampling was carried out using National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) BC 251 aerosol samplers, placed ~1.5 meters off the ground at distances of ~1 meter, 1.4 meters, 2.2 meters, and 3.2 meters from the participant's head. The participants were asked to remain stationary in their room and the samplers were run for approximately two hours at a calibrated flow-rate of 3.5 L air /min. 15 SKC 20-ml BioSamplers (SKC, Inc., Pennsylvania, USA), prepared with 16 mL phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and 0.5% bovine serum albumen (BSA), were placed beneath the NIOSH samplers on one side of the room and run simultaneously at the recommended flow rate of 12.5 L air /min. These samplers are designed to capture viral matter in liquid media to enhance viability. It is important to note that we have previously used both types of samplers to capture live influenza A virus. [16] [17] [18] [19] Biological samples and fomite swabs were collected and processed as previously described, 15 Cells and supernatant were harvested 7 days post-inoculation. RNA extracts were then screened for SARS-CoV-2 with the real-time RT-PCR assay and considered positive when the CT value was at least 2 points below the original result and CPE was present. 15 All participants presented with mild to moderate illness. The majority of the participants were females (n = 7, 87.5%). The predominantly represented race was white (n = 5, 62.5%), with two Black participants (25.0%), and one Asian (12.5%). One participant identified as Hispanic, and a second as Indian. The mean age was 41.4 years, with a range of 29 to 53 years. Among all participants, five lived in a private house, one in an apartment complex, and two in a residential shelter. Participants were typically enrolled within three days of symptom onset (one patient was enrolled on day 8), and reported experiencing between zero and seven common COVID-19 symptoms at time of enrollment, with cough, fatigue, and body ache the most frequently listed (Table S1) All study procedures were approved by the Duke University Institutional Review Board (Pro00105055). We thank Andrew Pekosz, PhD, Professor and Vice Chair of the The peer review history for this article is available at https://publo ns.com/publo n/10.1111/irv.12860. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Fu n ding info r mat io n This study was supported by Professor Gray's discretionary funding and grants from Duke University's Clinical Translational Science Institute and Duke Medicine and Engineering (MEDx). The peer review history for this article is available at https://publo ns.com/publo n/10.1111/irv.12860. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by inhalation of respiratory aerosol in the skagit valley chorale superspreading event COVID-19 outbreak associated with Aair conditioning in restaurant, guangzhou, china, 2020. Emerging Infectious Diseases High COVID-19 attack rate among attendees at events at a church -arkansas Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A review of viral, host, and environmental factors Lack of viable severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among PCR-positive air samples from hospital rooms and community isolation facilities Collection of SARS-CoV-2 virus from the air of a clinic within a university student health care center and analyses of the viral genomic sequence. Aerosol and Air Quality Research Viable SARS-CoV-2 in the air of a hospital room with COVID-19 patients The Infectious Nature of Patient-Generated SARS-CoV-2 Aerosol Aerosol and surface contamination of SARS-CoV-2 observed in quarantine and isolation care Saliva as a possible tool for the SARS-CoV-2 detection: A review Excretion of SARS-CoV-2 through faecal specimens SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV viral load dynamics, duration of viral shedding, and infectiousness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Microbe Viral dynamics in the upper respiratory tract (URT) of SARS-CoV-2 Investigation of SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in six care homes in London Environmental and aerosolized severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 among hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients Bioaerosol sampling at a live animal market in kunshan, china: A noninvasive approach for detecting emergent viruses. Open Forum Infectious Diseases Bioaerosol sampling to detect avian influenza virus in hanoi's largest live poultry market The use of bioaerosol sampling for airborne virus surveillance in swine production facilities: A mini review. Frontiers in Veterinary Science Aerosolized avian influenza A (H5N6) virus isolated from a live poultry market Enhanced isolation of SARS-CoV-2 by TMPRSS2-expressing cells