Infectious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Exhaled Aerosols and Efficacy of Masks During Early Mild Infection

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) epidemiology implicates airborne transmission; aerosol infectiousness and impacts of masks and variants on aerosol shedding are not well understood.

Methods

We recruited coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases to give blood, saliva, mid-turbinate and fomite (phone) swabs, and 30-minute breath samples while vocalizing into a Gesundheit-II, with and without masks at up to 2 visits 2 days apart. We quantified and sequenced viral RNA, cultured virus, and assayed serum samples for anti-spike and anti-receptor binding domain antibodies.

Results

We enrolled 49 seronegative cases (mean days post onset 3.8 ± 2.1), May 2020 through April 2021. We detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 36% of fine (≤5 µm), 26% of coarse (>5 µm) aerosols, and 52% of fomite samples overall and in all samples from 4 alpha variant cases. Masks reduced viral RNA by 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3 to 72%) in fine and by 77% (95% CI, 51 to 89%) in coarse aerosols; cloth and surgical masks were not significantly different. The alpha variant was associated with a 43-fold (95% CI, 6.6- to 280-fold) increase in fine aerosol viral RNA, compared with earlier viruses, that remained a significant 18-fold (95% CI, 3.4- to 92-fold) increase adjusting for viral RNA in saliva, swabs, and other potential confounders. Two fine aerosol samples, collected while participants wore masks, were culture-positive.

Conclusions

SARS-CoV-2 is evolving toward more efficient aerosol generation and loose-fitting masks provide significant but only modest source control. Therefore, until vaccination rates are very high, continued layered controls and tight-fitting masks and respirators will be necessary.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.08.13.21261989: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: This study was approved by the University of Maryland Institutional Review Board and the Human Research Protection Office of the Department of the Navy.
    Consent: Electronically signed informed consent was obtained and questionnaire data were collected and stored with REDCap[12].
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    RandomizationWe tested the mask brought by the participant and a surgical mask that we provided, and randomized which was tested at the first and second visit to avoid a systematic order bias.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Infected A549-ACE2 cells were quantified using immunofluorescence staining with anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody (Sino Biological 40143-R004) and Hoechst 33342 (Invitrogen H3570), and imaging with a Celigo Imaging Cytometer (Nexcelom) (Figures S1, S2).
    anti-SARS-CoV-2
    suggested: None
    Plasma was analyzed for IgG, IgM, and IgA antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 using a modified protocol described by Stadlbauer et al., 2020[15].
    IgA
    suggested: None
    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    Viral infectivity was measured by first propagating virus on Vero E6 cells stably expressing TMPRSS2 then transferring the media to A549 cells stably expressing human ACE2 (A549-ACE2).
    Vero E6
    suggested: None
    A549
    suggested: None
    Infected A549-ACE2 cells were quantified using immunofluorescence staining with anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody (Sino Biological 40143-R004) and Hoechst 33342 (Invitrogen H3570), and imaging with a Celigo Imaging Cytometer (Nexcelom) (Figures S1, S2).
    A549-ACE2
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data curation, cleaning, analysis, and visualization were performed using R Studio and R (version 4.1.0)[18], with R packages lme4, lmec, and ggplot2[19].
    ggplot2
    suggested: (ggplot2, RRID:SCR_014601)

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study had several limitations. Although we attempted to identify and test cases early through weekly testing of a cohort and intensive follow-up of close contacts, most cases were still studied several days after onset of symptoms or first positive test. This likely resulted in missing the most contagious period[29,30]. Furthermore, all cases were mild at the time of testing and only two went on to have moderate severity and require hospitalization. As a result, our data may not represent the full spectrum of shedding. The types of face masks worn by participants changed over the course of the study, as did the quality of surgical masks that we could purchase. Therefore, we cannot report on the efficacy of specific loose-fitting masks. This work does, however, provide information on the average amount of source control provided by community masking. Finally, logistical considerations required that we freeze samples between collection and culture, with potential loss of infectiousness, especially for dilute aerosol specimens. Overall, our results demonstrate that people with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections released infectious aerosols in their exhaled breath. Face masks provided significant source control suggesting that community-wide masking even with loose-fitting masks can reduce viral aerosols in indoor air by half, making a significant contribution to reducing the spread of COVID-19. Our data also suggest that the virus is evolving toward more effective di...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.