[ad_1]
The first known case of coronavirus was detected in Wuhan, China in December 2019. In the United States, the first infection was reported in mid-January. Two other patients in the United States had disease onset dates of Jan. 14, 2020, according to the study, which was published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases.
Boston, meanwhile, was one of the first cities in the country to report that a person had been infected with the virus: a student at the University of Massachusetts in Boston who had traveled from Wuhan.
But the new study suggests the virus may have been present earlier than that.
“Some reports suggest the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 into the [United States] may have occurred earlier than initially recognized, although widespread community transmission was not likely until late February, ”the scientists wrote.
To determine if antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 – the virus responsible for COVID-19 – were present before the first case identified in the United States, researchers tested archived samples from 7,389 routine blood donations collected by the Cross -American red.
“Serological testing has previously been used to estimate the introduction of viral infections into populations, including for HIV,” scientists wrote.
The analyzed samples were collected by the organization between December 13, 2019 and January 17, 2020, from donors living in nine different states: California, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington and Wisconsin.
Of the more than 7,000 samples tested by scientists at the CDC, 106 – or 1.4% – had evidence of infection, according to the study.
“These results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may have been introduced to the United States before January 19, 2020,” scientists wrote.
But the study also found “detection of reactive antibodies” in the samples tested, indicating that the virus may have surfaced even earlier.
For example, there was potential cross-reactivity with a human coronavirus infection other than SARS-CoV-2, according to the study.
Based on the data collected, however, the scientists wrote: “at least some of the reactive sera from blood donors could be due” to a previous infection with the virus.
Scientists also addressed other limitations of the study, including the fact that none of the sera can be considered “true positives.” Additionally, the donations included in the report “may not be representative of all blood donors or donations in these states and the results may not be generalizable to all blood donors during the donation dates shown here”, wrote the scientists.
As a result, population-based estimates or inferences about the magnitude of infections at “national or state level” cannot be made, the study said.
Further studies involving analyzes of human samples are needed to “further corroborate the current findings”, which detected the presence of specific antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 as early as mid-December 2019, scientists wrote.
CDC continues to partner with federal and non-government partners “to conduct ongoing surveillance using donated blood and clinical laboratory specimens for SARS-CoV-2 infection at multiple sites.” , across the country, according to the study.
Shannon Larson can be contacted at [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @ shannonlarson98.
[ad_2]
Source link