Abstract
Introduction The impact of COVID-19 vaccination on disease in the community has been limited, as a result of both SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern that partially escape vaccine-induced immunity. We sought to characterise symptoms and viral loads over the course of COVID-19 infection in otherwise-healthy vaccinated adults, representative of the general population, to assess whether current self-isolation guidance remains justified.
Methods In a prospective, observational cohort study, healthy vaccinated UK adults who reported a positive PCR or lateral flow test, self-swabbed on alternate days until day 10. We compared symptoms and viral kinetics between infections caused by VOCs Delta and Omicron (sub-variants BA.1 and BA.2) and investigated applicability of UK NHS isolation guidelines to these newer VOCs.
Results 373 infection episodes were reported among 349 participants. Across VOCs, symptom duration was similar, however symptom profiles differed significantly among infections caused by Delta, Omicron BA.1 and BA.2. Anosmia was reported in <10% of participants with BA.1 and BA.2, compared to 42% with Delta infection, coryza fatigue and myalgia predominated. Most notably, viral load trajectories and peaks did not differ between Delta, BA.1 and BA.2, irrespective of symptom severity, VOC or vaccination status.
Conclusion COVID-19 isolation guidance should not differ based on symptom severity or febrile illness and must remain under review as new SARS-CoV-2 VOCs emerge and population immunity changes. Our study emphasises the ongoing transmission risk of Omicron sub-variants in vaccinated adults with mild symptoms that may extend beyond current isolation periods.
summary We provide prospective characterisation of COVID-19 caused by Delta and Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 in healthy, vaccinated adults. A minority of adults report symptoms that would mandate self-isolation, despite having equally high viral shedding across VOCs that persisted beyond ten days.
Competing Interest Statement
CSw reports interests unrelated to this Correspondence: grants from BMS, Ono-Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Roche-Ventana, Pfizer and Archer Dx, unrelated to this Correspondence; personal fees from Genentech, Sarah Canon Research Institute, Medicxi, Bicycle Therapeutics, GRAIL, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Illumina, GlaxoSmithKline, MSD, and Roche-Ventana, unrelated to this Correspondence; and stock options from Apogen Biotech, Epic Biosciences, GRAIL, and Achilles Therapeutics, unrelated to this Correspondence. DLVB reports grants from AstraZeneca unrelated to this Correspondence. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by UCLH/UCL who received a proportion of funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals Department of Health NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). EW VL and BW are supported by the Centre funding scheme. This work was supported jointly by the BRC and core funding from the Francis Crick Institute which receives its funding from Cancer Research UK the UK Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust. This research was funded in whole or in part by the Wellcome Trust. For the purpose of Open Access the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission. DLVB is additionally supported by the Genotype to Phenotype National Virology Consortium via UK Research and Innovation and the UK Medical Research Council and TWR and AJK are additionally supported by the Wellcome Trust.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Legacy study was approved by London Camden and Kings Cross Health Research Authority Research and Ethics committee (IRAS number 286469)
I 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.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I 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.
Yes
Footnotes
Senior authors: Sonia Gandhi, Adam J Kucharski, Charles Swanton, Emma C Wall, David LV Bauer
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript and will be made openly available online after peer review
